Two plays that effected the outcome of the game.

[Pack93z]

And I say that is totally and 100% wrong.

Why then in every game you see the fade in the endzone where the DB's back is to the ball playing the receiver and he's called EVERY SINGLE TIME.

You are telling me a DB in the NFL can have his back to the QB with his hands in the air and not have a clue where the ball is and defend the receiver without getting a flag?

If the DB doesn't get his head turned back towards the ball he IS going to get the flag.

Warhawk, I thought the same thing and went to look upon it... I swear that it gets flagged everytime. But the rule books doesn't deem it as pass interference... something is amiss.

 

[packfan43084]

3rd & 19. Enough Said. We get a stop, who knows what happens...

 

[porky88]

The first play was a non-call. The Packers first series. Favre throws deep. The Cowboy defender does not turn his head. He face guards. Driver just misses a big catch. I would dare to say that the play is called pass interference more often than not. If the Packers get that call and score early we may be talking about an entirely different outcome right now.

The pass intereference they called against the Packers in the 4th quarter was incidental contact. That was a terrible call and allowed the Cowboys to go back up by 10.

I agree. Both are bad calls BUT again Romo shredded the Packers secondary. If the Packers defense could've stopped Romo, they probably find away to win. So penalties suck to see especially when they are questionable like these were but it's not the deciding factor.

Might give a nice bump in the right direction though.

 

[Romosexual]

The first play was a non-call. The Packers first series. Favre throws deep. The Cowboy defender does not turn his head. He face guards. Driver just misses a big catch. I would dare to say that the play is called pass interference more often than not. If the Packers get that call and score early we may be talking about an entirely different outcome right now.

The pass intereference they called against the Packers in the 4th quarter was incidental contact. That was a terrible call and allowed the Cowboys to go back up by 10.

Face-guarding isn't illegal if he doesn't make illegal contact with the receiver. And what proof do you have to say that the game would've been different if that were called a PI?

The PI in the fourth quarter was called the way it was called. I think it could've went either way, but he was beat and pulling jersey from behind.

 

[warhawk]

The first play was a non-call. The Packers first series. Favre throws deep. The Cowboy defender does not turn his head. He face guards. Driver just misses a big catch. I would dare to say that the play is called pass interference more often than not. If the Packers get that call and score early we may be talking about an entirely different outcome right now.

The pass intereference they called against the Packers in the 4th quarter was incidental contact. That was a terrible call and allowed the Cowboys to go back up by 10.

Face-guarding isn't illegal if he doesn't make illegal contact with the receiver. And what proof do you have to say that the game would've been different if that were called a PI?

The PI in the fourth quarter was called the way it was called. I think it could've went either way, but he was beat and pulling jersey from behind.

Then why did Mike Pereira come on the NFL channel Saturday and say that the interference call on Williams was ruled only because he did not have his head turned?

He, in fact, specifically said that the tangled feet WAS NOT a foul but that because one player had his head turned back looking for the ball and the defender DID NOT was the reason the second official threw the flag.

Pereira said that the rule says this. IF two players get tangled up and both players are looking back or neither is looking back there is no foul. If one player is looking back and the other is not than it's interference.

The problem I have with this rule is that if, in fact, the defender were to have his head turned back but the receiver doesn't and they happen to get tangled you will NEVER see an official call that interference on the receiver.

He also said the interception by Harris should have been ruled an interception. He covered his boys by saying that because the forward progress call was made FIRST the right call was then made overruling the interception. BUT, he clearly stated that the official that called the interception hand made the "better" call.