The Mc Carthy NON challenge

[RandyM]

To me, that was a catch and first down to Andrew Quarless....Yet, McCarthy doesn't throw the challenge flag....Big swing in Momentum....

Thoughts?

 

[Forget Favre]

Should have used it.
Even if he lost there would have been two timeouts left and they were not crucial ones.

 

[bravesman18]

Yeah, I agree that it was a catch. I felt entirely positive that it would have been overturned if challenged.

He did initially bobble the ball, but by pausing the play at the moment he does secure it, you can then observe whether his feet are in(which they are), and that his knee has not yet touched the ground out of bounds. Then, continue the play to see that the ball doesn't move in his hands throughout completion of the catch. That's all irrefutably evident by going over that play two times: the first from behind, where you had the best look at his feet, knee, and when he first secured it; the second being from the front where you can confirm that the ball didn't move throughout the rest of the catch.

edit: Sorry if it seems like I repeated myself there, but I'm just trying to make it crystal clear why it should have been challenged.

 

[Circa1919]

I agree they should've challenged. But considering how Wallace and the D was playing I don't know if it was overturned if it would've made a difference. I guess the score was close enough to make a case for both.

 

[melvin dangerr]

To me, that was a catch and first down to Andrew Quarless....Yet, McCarthy doesn't throw the challenge flag....Big swing in Momentum....

Thoughts?

MM shows a lack of Go -Nads with the challenge flag I wish he would give it to some one else to throw….

 

[Oshkoshpackfan]

MM has always lacked the Ballz in those types of situations. IMO: better to toss the red flag and be called wrong by the refs, than to never toss it out and be called a P*ssy by millions.

 

[Crazy Packers Fan]

Wouldn't have mattered, with Seneca Wallace at QB. Best case scenario would have been that they run twice, throw an incompletion and make a long field goal. I personally think it wouldn't have been overturned, given how close the call was. Should he have thrown the red flag? Yes. But it wouldn't have saved the team.

 

[IluvGB]

I was screaming "Throw the flag Sparky!!!" I feel that it would of switched the momentum of the game, well that and a few 3rd down conversions, and more time of possession, and a few more sacks,...a better back up QB...need I go on??

 

[rodell330]

Just being his usual stubborn self. Who knows what could've happened if the drive stayed alive...i mean you can't take the freakin timeouts home.

 

[ls1bob]

Just being his usual stubborn self. Who knows what could've happened if the drive stayed alive...i mean you can't take the freakin timeouts home.

Maybe he was saving them so we could run our 2 minute offense when we got the ball back at the end of the half.

 

[rodell330]

Maybe he was saving them so we could run our 2 minute offense when we got the ball back at the end of the half.

You mean the 2 minute offense they tried to run at the end of the game?? yea genius ideal on his part.

 

[Ceodore]

It made me very angry because i've seen McCarthy make so many STUPID challenges in the past. Ones that weren't close at all. And he doesn't challenge the iffy one. Also it was about the only time the whole game i felt like Wallace was doing a little bit of driving and MM just killed it.

 

[BorderRivals.com]

I was most frustrated by the non-challenge b/c that was the first drive that Wallace looked competent and was moving the chains while throwing the ball. It proved to be a crucial juncture in the game too since they marched down the field to score before half. If we challenge and get it overturned, we have first down in FG range and continue a good drive. I know Wallace didn't look good all game, but there was clearly some momentum on that drive that likely would have resulted in points.

And what's most ridiculous about not challenging is that we didn't burn a TO that half. So, what's the harm in trying at that point? You lose, you burn a TO and a challenge. Considering I can't recall a game where MM has used both challenges, losing a challenge isn't really a loss.

 

[PackFanNChiTown]

I would have to imagine the booth guys were telling him not to challenge.

 

[Oshkoshpackfan]

I would have to imagine the booth guys were telling him not to challenge.

Nope, you could clearly see he was watching the jumbotron and then turned away and the game resumed. Typical **** move.

 

[DarkHelmet]

I don't think it would have been overturned. You need 'indisputable visual evidence' and it was not there. If the original call had gone our way it might have been upheld on challenge by the Bears, but overturning the call on the field has a higher burden of evidence. That said, it would probably have been worth it to challenge anyway. Even if the odds were, say one in four, the first down would have been four times more valuable than the time out.

 

[TJV]

There are assistant coaches in the booth that advise McCarthy on challenges and they probably saw what I saw: By the time Quarless had possession of the ball, his knee was out of bounds. No way that would have been overturned IMO.

 

[Trapped In Vikingville]

It wouldn't have been overturned and the people up in the box knew that.

 

[PackFanNChiTown]

Nope, you could clearly see he was watching the jumbotron and then turned away and the game resumed. Typical **** move.

I saw that but haven't seen a replay yet. To me it also looked like he was talking to someone on the headset so believe he was doing both.

 

[melvin dangerr]

I would have to imagine the booth guys were telling him not to challenge.

somehow I think we posters should be replay coaches for the packers