1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Officials tried and failed to give game to Cowboys

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by GoPGo, Dec 15, 2013.

  1. GoPGo

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    1,862
    Ratings:
    +845
    Between numerous uncalled holds in the first half, particularly against Daniels, the encroachment that was an obvious false start, the Tramon INT that was overturned on very shaky visual evidence and the OBVIOUS Tramon INT that was called incomplete, this crew undoubtedly favored Dallas in the most blatant ways. Without that timeout they probably would have ignored the buzz from upstairs and said it was too late to review the play.

    Absolutely disgusting officiating.
     
    • Agree Agree x 7
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. yooperpackfan

    yooperpackfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    835
    Ratings:
    +372
    I ordinarily don't have a thing about officiating deciding games but in this case I do believe they tried to give it to Dallas.
     
  3. PackwillBEback

    PackwillBEback Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    461
    Ratings:
    +38
    That was not an INT by Tramon. Ball moved and was touching ground too.
    And there is nothing the officials on the field can do about the late buzzing. They cannot hold up the game to wait for a non-automatic review. It wasn't called a turnover or a score on the field.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Zartan

    Zartan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    362
    Ratings:
    +222
    Also dont forget the No Calls that went our way also.
     
  5. GoPGo

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    1,862
    Ratings:
    +845
    Such as?
     
  6. GeeDogWarrior

    GeeDogWarrior 0 - 0

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2011
    Messages:
    386
    Ratings:
    +139
    I think Brad's hold on Witten - but aside from that ... the BS Call Teeter-Tatter was in favor of the 'Boys today.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. GoPGo

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    1,862
    Ratings:
    +845
    The standard is "indisputable visual evidence," not "maybe," not "probably". Indisputable. And it wasn't. I've seen calls like that upheld almost every week.

    The officials hurried the ball to the line. The clock wasn't running. Often on close calls like that they will take their time on the spot if the clock isn't running. But they hurried it. They tried to beat the buzz and forced us to call a timeout. And the INT was clear. The damn side judge knew it too and inexplicably called it incomplete.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Fazeman

    Fazeman Setting The Pace

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    166
    Ratings:
    +20
    Also, the NFL needs to implement booth reviews for officials during the two minute warning.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,982
    Ratings:
    +1,501
    They could try not calling a ball incomplete that, you know, never hit the ground. Especially when the side judge was staring right at it 10 feet away with a great angle on it. Then the buzz would be a moot point if they actually called it correctly on the field.

    Are you actually a Packer fan? That's two occasions you've defended the officials today. I mean I get that you don't like people complaining about officiating but today was about as blatant as you'll ever see. It was more than just the two plays.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,982
    Ratings:
    +1,501
    I agree with you on both points, and I've called you out in the past for complaining about officials.

    There was not one single replay on Tramon's first INT that actually showed the ball contacting the ground, which is sort of necessary to call an incomplete pass. I'm sick of replay officials taking the game and putting it in their hands. If you can't tell for sure, 100%, it stands. Period. You don't get to make a decision, if it doesn't show something 100%, you leave it alone.

    And the side judge most certainly, and inexplicably, blew the call. It was not a difficult call. He was nearby and staring right at it. He never actually saw the ball hit the ground because again, it obviously never did.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Jordyruns

    Jordyruns Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    436
    Ratings:
    +175
    The only problem I had with the Tramon INT being overturned was that they called it an INT on the field and I did not think there was enough to overturn it. Just the same if they had called it incomplete I would have said there was not enough to overturn it and make it an INT.

    Oh well no use in crying over spilled milk after a victory.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  12. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,982
    Ratings:
    +1,501
    Yeah, if they had called incomplete on the field I would have no problem with it standing.

    Its supposed to be "indisputable evidence.". That was not there. I've DVRed it and looked at it plenty. You never actually see the ball contact the ground.

    Too many officials ignore the "indisputable evidence" and just go with "whatever I think."
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Bensalama21

    Bensalama21 Ben

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,571
    Ratings:
    +607
    Exactly why we are accusing them of it... with the new replay rules, they should always call every touchdown or turnover good if it's too close to call because they will review it anyways.
     
  14. Bensalama21

    Bensalama21 Ben

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,571
    Ratings:
    +607
    You may be joking (or maybe not) but the NFL would be better off if they did this.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Fazeman

    Fazeman Setting The Pace

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    166
    Ratings:
    +20
    I don't understand some of these rules, but a potential turnover should be automatically reviewed by the booth replay assistant who is part of the officiating team. Sometimes, this assistant doesn't see everything and has to make a quick judgment call before the next play. In this case, the onus is on the Packers to prove their argument by calling a timeout. What a waste!
     
  16. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,776
    Ratings:
    +2,994
    1st int it hit the ground.

    The nfl is going look into having people in a central location reviewing plays
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. Fazeman

    Fazeman Setting The Pace

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    166
    Ratings:
    +20
    Glass bottom football field?:)
     
    • Creative Creative x 1
  18. 7thFloorRA

    7thFloorRA Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,924
    Ratings:
    +842
    It probably did but from the angles we saw you have to assume it hit the ground. I don't think there was concrete evidence to overturn but they just connected the dots from what they could see. It could have been called either way probably.
     
  19. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,982
    Ratings:
    +1,501
    Exactly. Please show me a picture or video, any, of the ball actually coming in contact with the ground and I'll change my opinion and say it was indisputable.
     
  20. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,776
    Ratings:
    +2,994
    I see the nose on the ground...Not sure how the rule states this..but I would say he didnt catch because the nose is clearly on the ground and no hands under it..

    In chat I too said that it can go either way..

    If this was Nelson it would be ruled an incomplete pass too
    Capture.JPG
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  21. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,776
    Ratings:
    +2,994

    LOL just posted a pic from my replay
     
  22. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,982
    Ratings:
    +1,501
    Thanks, that is the first picture I've seen that clearly shows the football touch the ground. I didn't see that on any of the replays, but I feel better about the call now. Still not really sure it was "indisputable", but that helps clear it up.
     
  23. Raptorman

    Raptorman Vikings fan since 1966.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,251
    Ratings:
    +858
    Disagree. They hurried up because the Cowboys were in a hurry up offense and it was under 2 minutes. The side judge probably thought it hit the ground.

    As to the poor officiating overall, I have to agree.
     
  24. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,838
    Ratings:
    +1,069
    I have no idea how the official standing right next to Tramon on last pick thought it was incomplete. It wasn't even close. Looking at the game high highlights and the reaction of the Dallas sideline right next to the official, they knew it was pick.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  25. Bensalama21

    Bensalama21 Ben

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,571
    Ratings:
    +607
    What makes me feel bad about the failed interception was that tramon didn't have to fall down on the ball. It was definitely an easier play to make than the interception he actually got.
     

Share This Page