Two Horrible Calls Within 2 Minutes?!

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
If they didn't see the punch I am confused on why they threw the flag, also in replays it seems somewhat clear to me that aj hawks leg hit the back of darren sproles making him in an awkward crouched position well before the ball got there. I am a packers fan, we won, blah blah blah.
They threw the flag because they saw a push and some roughing going on, but that alone doesn't lead to ejection. Not saying it's what happened, just what could've happened.

As for Hawk, I didn't see any replay that showed that, but if that indeed happened, then yeah, it would be PI. But, again, all replays that I saw showed Hawk just making a great play at the ball. Either way, we'll know by the way he plays next. If he's flying all over the field, it'll mean coaches praised him, and he's playing with "swagger". If he's timid as always...
 
OP
OP
G0PackG0

G0PackG0

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 19, 2010
Messages
565
Reaction score
76
Location
Central Ohio
If woody woulda been ejected the Saint should have gone off too. Woodson was just fighting back did you not see his jersey at the end of the game? That poly is tough to stretch out.
 
OP
OP
G0PackG0

G0PackG0

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 19, 2010
Messages
565
Reaction score
76
Location
Central Ohio
downing the ball: It is my understanding that the player must not 'continue' into the endzone until the whistle stops the play. The call was correct and Bush made a poor play. Players are supposed to just stop the ball and not dive on it in that situation.

On the Hawk 'interference'. Hawk was going for the ball and the contact with the WR was incidental. I don't think that should have been a penalty. The announcers on NFL radio said it was a blatant penalty because you need to let the WR have an opportunity to make the catch. What? If that was the case there would be PI on every pass play. Great play by Hawk.
Bush made a poor play.... lmao He took a knee on the 1. The ball never broke the plane and thats what matters.
 

okcpackerfan

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
743
Reaction score
133
PackerRS I am sure the coaching staff is going to praise him even if it was a penalty, they like the aggression and sometimes it will be called and sometimes it won't. I am not sure if it was a penalty or not. To the person who said that if woodson was ejected the saints guy should have been too, thats a dumb argument. Woodson threw a punch, which is deserving of an ejection. The other guy did nothing that in my eyes would have constituted an ejection. You are basically saying since its one of your guys you want one of their guys gone also because "there is no way woodson could have just snapped for no reason" but according to everything my eyes saw, he did. What if we play the NY Jets and one of our offensive linemen gets into darrelle revis' head enough that he punches one of our players, would you want him ejected?
 

TheGiftedApe

TheGiftedApe
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
573
Reaction score
68
Location
MADTOWN
I can understand both calls from the point of view of the refs on the field and everything that happens so fast. What I can't understand is why the guys in the booth didn't at least take a longer look at the replays of those two calls.

exactly my thoughts
 

cupacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
103
Reaction score
15
Location
Greenville, SC
On the Hawk 'interference'. Hawk was going for the ball and the contact with the WR was incidental. I don't think that should have been a penalty. The announcers on NFL radio said it was a blatant penalty because you need to let the WR have an opportunity to make the catch. What? If that was the case there would be PI on every pass play. Great play by Hawk.

yeah, that's pretty much the whole reason for pass interference: the WR has to have opportunity to make the catch. I don't know what everyone else saw, but I saw Hawk's knees going into the receivers back and pushing him over before the ball got there. I only saw the replay once though, maybe I looked at it wrong.
 

Poppa San

* Team Owner *
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
12,821
Reaction score
2,736
Location
20 miles from Lambeau
Bush made a poor play.... lmao He took a knee on the 1. The ball never broke the plane and thats what matters.
That would be the college interpretation. There it is if the ball breaks the plane, not the player. I saw his foot touch over the goal line before the play was over. Touchback. Bush knew it hence the fetal position. McCarthy knew it hence no argument. The replay officials knew it. Just a bunch of fans misinterpreting what they saw and understand about the game making a fuss.
With the Hawk PI, Sproles was being curled over before Hawk touched the ball. Good play, still a foul. Stopped a sure TD. I have no problem with the call.
 

Powarun

Big Bay Blues fan
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
2,047
Reaction score
355
Location
Madison
Eh, Woodson should of gotten ejected (we all hate to admit but it helps the argument if you admit it). What Hawk is gray area, and Bush being Bush are all things we can agree on right?

Heck Bush can be the definition of a double edged sword.
 

Murgen

MechaPackzilla
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
3,287
Reaction score
565
Location
Dallas
"Bush being Bush...." Only a Packer fan would understand that comment. lol
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
That would be the college interpretation. There it is if the ball breaks the plane, not the player. I saw his foot touch over the goal line before the play was over. Touchback. Bush knew it hence the fetal position. McCarthy knew it hence no argument. The replay officials knew it. Just a bunch of fans misinterpreting what they saw and understand about the game making a fuss.
With the Hawk PI, Sproles was being curled over before Hawk touched the ball. Good play, still a foul. Stopped a sure TD. I have no problem with the call.

Posters on a forum actually know the rules dontcha know
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,279
Reaction score
2,395
Location
PENDING
That would be the college interpretation. There it is if the ball breaks the plane, not the player. I saw his foot touch over the goal line before the play was over. Touchback. Bush knew it hence the fetal position. McCarthy knew it hence no argument. The replay officials knew it. Just a bunch of fans misinterpreting what they saw and understand about the game making a fuss.
With the Hawk PI, Sproles was being curled over before Hawk touched the ball. Good play, still a foul. Stopped a sure TD. I have no problem with the call.
Rewatched the play with Hawk, and you are right. Good call by the officials. But still a good play by Hawk. Stopping the reception at all cost saved potentially overtime.
 

DevilDon

Inclement Weather Fan
Joined
Jan 10, 2010
Messages
1,393
Reaction score
268
That would be the college interpretation. There it is if the ball breaks the plane, not the player. I saw his foot touch over the goal line before the play was over. Touchback. Bush knew it hence the fetal position. McCarthy knew it hence no argument. The replay officials knew it. Just a bunch of fans misinterpreting what they saw and understand about the game making a fuss.
With the Hawk PI, Sproles was being curled over before Hawk touched the ball. Good play, still a foul. Stopped a sure TD. I have no problem with the call.
Thanks for the explanation on Bush's play, I did some searching and couldn't come up with the rule. I rewatched the PI on Hawk over and over. It seems certain that his leg hits Sproles in the back causing Sproles to twist somewhat before he gets airborne and makes a play on the ball. I think it was a perfectly legitimate call and probably a good one since they didn't score on that play.
Okcpackerfan's comment on Woodson is spot on. I DO believe the ref didn't see the punch and that's why he didn't get ejected. But you have to draw a line somewhere and if the ref did see the punch and didn't eject Woodson it was a bad call.
My biggest concern was GreenandGold's observation on spotting the ball. Saints got several good spots, at least twice it went for a first down and those extra plays even if the Saints converted them would have taken time off the clock. Enough time that they probably never have that last drive. And they were big spots a yard to a yard and a half.
If you're going to look over video of the game to look at the penalties, take the time to review the last play of the game. The Packers LBs dove over the line and smashed down in front of the runner. That poor guy never had a chance, he was running into a half ton of Green and Gold.
 

Forget Favre

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
9,115
Reaction score
1,807
The Packers won.
So why are we arguing/discussing calls?

This is the type of thread I'd more likely expect if the Packers lose based on bad calls.
Not when they win!
 

Latest posts

Top