IF Rod Hood interfered with Curtis...

[1DS]

Then Demps definitely interfered with Fitzgerald. It is the exact same thing, the DB lunges at the feet of the WR in an attempt to prevent the WR from making a catch (Fitz still catches it).


I heart Fitz!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XZgckAwHAY

 

[TJ]

good no call IMO.....I did not see enough contact to merit a flag on the play. Hood fell and his arm kind of dragged along Curtis' backside. Not enough to distract the play.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

The only person that thought it should be called was Troy Aikman *shocker*

And the Aikman/Buck combo are LONG time Cardinal haters.

The right call was made. The Eagles had multiple oppourtunities on offense, defense, got good bounces of the ball, and a couple gimmie calls of their own to win that game.

Didn't happen. Cardinals win.
:number1:

 

[CaptTurbo]

We should have had the ball on the kickoff so it evened out 1 bad call a piece.

 

[az jam]

Curtis still should have made the catch. It was in his hands and he dropped it.

 

[BCEagle]

I thought that the mauling of Avant in the second quarter (the drive that resulted in the Eagles second FG) should have been called PI, but other than that, I had no problems with the officiating.

 

[BCEagle]

Curtis still should have made the catch. It was in his hands and he dropped it.

That is the unwritten rule in the playoffs -- if it's in your hands, you should catch it. That is why PI wasn't called on Hood.

 

[BCEagle]

good no call IMO.....I did not see enough contact to merit a flag on the play. Hood fell and his arm kind of dragged along Curtis' backside. Not enough to distract the play.

Hood tripped him, which I believed at the the time was a good play on his part. If you look at the replay, that trip probably prevented a TD as Curtis had beaten him and had space to make YAC. Curtis still had a play, though.

 

[PDR]

good no call IMO as well. not enough to really sway me, it wouldnt really have mattered, as i believe kurtis himself dived to get the ball.

 

[BCEagle]

“I had my hands on the ball, so I have to catch it. You can’t put it in the ref’s hands.”

--Kevin Curtis


That pretty much sums it up.

 

[BCEagle]

We should have had the ball on the kickoff so it evened out 1 bad call a piece.

Actually, it was the Cardinals who may have caught a break on the kickoff.

Official Walt Anderson, after a lengthy conversation with his crew and later with both coaches, announced that the ball was ruled out of bounds after touching Abiamiri and that, by rule the ball belonged to the Eagles at that mark. He also said that such a ruling was non-challengable, after Wisenhunt tried to challenge. If Anderson’s announced version of the events is correct, his ruling is correct. Here is an independent news source that confirms this fact: http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/01/18/the-refs-got-it-right-on-the-kickoff-call/comment-page-2/

Looking at the replays, however, I think that the officials got it wrong. It appears that the ball does not touch Abiamiri (if in fact it did touch him) until he establishes himself out of bounds. At the point of contact, the ball is then ruled out of bounds and the ball is dead. Additionally, by rule, the kick has gone out of bounds and a flag should be thrown for illegal procedure on the kick-off. The ball is then marked 30 yards from the point of the kickoff, or, in this case, the Eagles 40 yard line. Indeed, a flag was thrown on the field, indicating that the ball had carried out of bounds. For some reason, Anderson never addressed this. If Abiamiri did indeed touch the ball, it should have been Eagles ball at the 40 yard line.

Since the ball was spotted at the Eagles 26, the ruling resulted in a break for the Cardinals.

 

[stewdog1]

“I had my hands on the ball, so I have to catch it. You can’t put it in the ref’s hands.”

--Kevin Curtis


That pretty much sums it up.

Yep, and besides, I thought he did his best punter impression as he was touched by Hood.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

“I had my hands on the ball, so I have to catch it. You can’t put it in the ref’s hands.”

--Kevin Curtis


That pretty much sums it up.

I always liked Curtis. That is a VERY proffessional and honorable response.

He had a HELL of a game too. That that big catch and run was amazing.

 

[Russ Smith]

We should have had the ball on the kickoff so it evened out 1 bad call a piece.

You know I've watched that thing like 50 times now I watched the NFL replay last night. I still don't know if the ball touched the Eagle player or not. The angle looking down the sideline towards the endzone looks like it touches his forearm. Then the reverse angle from the middle of the field towards the sideline looks like it didn't touch the arm at all, in fact it looks like there's very clear separation and the ball is just tumbling because that's how a football acts when it bounces off the ground.

So in the end even if they were allowed to replay it, we would not have got the ball. I think it should have been our ball but the replay wasn't conclusive.

I still don't get the refs call, they threw a flag and initially spotted it at the 40 so they thought the KO landed out of bounds. In the end they said it was touched by a player out of bounds so it's dead and can't be challenged. They then moved it to the 26. So in essence they are saying ignore the flag even though it was the flag(and that whistle) that made the play dead because the initial call on the field was KO out of bounds.

FYI if we want to play what if look at the replay of the overthrow to DeSean Jackson on 2nd down. http://www.nfl.com/videos?categoryId=highlights

Watch Dockett on the play, he has a line to McNabb when the guy blocking him essentially just hooks his arm and spins him, in wrestling I think they call that an arm bar, in football I think we call that holding. If you watch it's just about the 7 minute mark in that video and it's really obvious because Dockett is going right at McNabb and suddenly his direction changes. So if we're playing what if, that should have been holding replay the down 2nd and 20 which changes the rest of the plays too.

And if McNabb didn't throw the ball behind his WR on the 3rd down play maybe they don't need the 4th down call.

 

[Russ Smith]

I thought that the mauling of Avant in the second quarter (the drive that resulted in the Eagles second FG) should have been called PI, but other than that, I had no problems with the officiating.

If you mean Ralph Brown, watch it again. The problem on that play that the announcers missed is it was all within 5 yards of the LOS. So the only question was with the ball in the air was there contact and if you watch, Brown is playing the ball. THere's contact, I've certainly seen it called before, but I've seen it not called quite a bit too, the reason that was even mentioned was because the announcers didn't realize the initial contact was within 5 yards. It was a 3rd and 6 play IIRC and the ball was thrown short of the first down line.

 

[az jam]

Been watching football for over 50 years. When my team's receiver misses the ball I almost always feel its pass interference. However when the other team receiver doesn't make the catch it never is pass interference.

Truthfully, IMO it's the toughest call to make either way.

 

[Mulli]

Been watching football for over 50 years. When my team's receiver misses the ball I almost always feel its pass interference. However when the other team receiver doesn't make the catch it never is pass interference.

Truthfully, IMO it's the toughest call to make either way.

I will admit to that.

 

[BCEagle]

If you mean Ralph Brown, watch it again. The problem on that play that the announcers missed is it was all within 5 yards of the LOS. So the only question was with the ball in the air was there contact and if you watch, Brown is playing the ball. THere's contact, I've certainly seen it called before, but I've seen it not called quite a bit too, the reason that was even mentioned was because the announcers didn't realize the initial contact was within 5 yards. It was a 3rd and 6 play IIRC and the ball was thrown short of the first down line.

I don't want to make a big deal about it, lest I sound like I am whining, but once the ball is in the air, you cannot make contact with the receiver, regardless of where on the field you are. Brown was hanging on Avant while the ball was in the air. It greatly affected the outcome of the play. In my mind, it was a bad call (or non-call), but one bad call does not poor officiating make.

 

[perivolaki]

Actually, it was the Cardinals who may have caught a break on the kickoff.

Official Walt Anderson, after a lengthy conversation with his crew and later with both coaches, announced that the ball was ruled out of bounds after touching Abiamiri and that, by rule the ball belonged to the Eagles at that mark. He also said that such a ruling was non-challengable, after Wisenhunt tried to challenge. If Anderson’s announced version of the events is correct, his ruling is correct. Here is an independent news source that confirms this fact: http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/01/18/the-refs-got-it-right-on-the-kickoff-call/comment-page-2/

Looking at the replays, however, I think that the officials got it wrong. It appears that the ball does not touch Abiamiri (if in fact it did touch him) until he establishes himself out of bounds. At the point of contact, the ball is then ruled out of bounds and the ball is dead. Additionally, by rule, the kick has gone out of bounds and a flag should be thrown for illegal procedure on the kick-off. The ball is then marked 30 yards from the point of the kickoff, or, in this case, the Eagles 40 yard line. Indeed, a flag was thrown on the field, indicating that the ball had carried out of bounds. For some reason, Anderson never addressed this. If Abiamiri did indeed touch the ball, it should have been Eagles ball at the 40 yard line.

Since the ball was spotted at the Eagles 26, the ruling resulted in a break for the Cardinals.

If what you say is true why wouldn't every returner put one foot out of bounds on any kick close to the sidelines and then touch the ball? If what you say is true the ball would be spotted at the 40. I've never seen a player try this so I think you may be wrong on how that would be ruled. If you're right teams are missing out on an easy spot on a ball close to the sidelines that otherwise wouldn't go out.

 

[Russ Smith]

I don't want to make a big deal about it, lest I sound like I am whining, but once the ball is in the air, you cannot make contact with the receiver, regardless of where on the field you are. Brown was hanging on Avant while the ball was in the air. It greatly affected the outcome of the play. In my mind, it was a bad call (or non-call), but one bad call does not poor officiating make.

We're not talking about the same call then because I watched it on NFL replay last night and Brown's left hand is on Avant's shoulder as his right hand breaks the pass up. If thats "hanging on" to you we're just not going to agree.

The reason the play drew any attention at all is the contact prior to the ball being thrown, which again was legal because it's within 5 yards of the LOS. Fox never pointed that out but even Fox on replay said that's a good play by Brown, Avant was using his hands to try and get open, Brown was using his to make contact(within 5 yards).

When the ball is in the air the contact is mutual, Avant with his hands, Brown with his left hand. As I said I've certainly seen it called before, and seen it not called before. The key to that play is understanding that everything is within 5 yards so it's only a penalty when the ball is in the air and they decided that part of the play was mutual and not PI.

 

[Russ Smith]

If what you say is true why wouldn't every returner put one foot out of bounds on any kick close to the sidelines and then touch the ball? If what you say is true the ball would be spotted at the 40. I've never seen a player try this so I think you may be wrong on how that would be ruled. If you're right teams are missing out on an easy spot on a ball close to the sidelines that otherwise wouldn't go out.

Exactlym if the rule really states a ball inbounds can be touched by an out of bounds player resulting in the ball at the 40, teams should be doing that intentionally on any kick near the sideline.

They threw the flag because they thought it went out. On replay they saw it didn't, so they ignored the flag but just said it was blown dead. Whiz correctly argued the ball never went out so you can't just give them the ball at the 40. It was a compromise, they knew the play was called incorrectly, it was unchallengeable, so they just said Eagles keep the ball, but at the 26.

According to that thread on profootballtalk, Leon Washington of the Jets did exactly what is being discussed, stood out of bounds, reached in and touched the ball and the Jets got the ball at the 40. If so, the NFL will almost certainly change the rule so that the ball has to touch out of bounds not be touched by a player who is out of bounds.

I still say if the play was allowed to be reviewed, we still wouldn't have got it because the replays arent' conclusive.

 

[JeffGollin]

I'm pretty sure Perreria admitted after the game that the refs blew the kickoff/out-of-bounds call.

 

[BCEagle]

If what you say is true why wouldn't every returner put one foot out of bounds on any kick close to the sidelines and then touch the ball? If what you say is true the ball would be spotted at the 40. I've never seen a player try this so I think you may be wrong on how that would be ruled. If you're right teams are missing out on an easy spot on a ball close to the sidelines that otherwise wouldn't go out.

On most occasions, the player would simply let the ball roll out of bounds. There was an almost exactly similar play Ravens versus Panthers a couple years ago when Steve Smith fielded a Matt Stover kickoff as he stepped out of bounds, and the ball was spotted at the 40. youtube once had a montage of NFL plays where something similar happened, but it is gone.

 

[cardsfanmd]

If a PI was going to be called, then it would have had to be called on both of them as Curtis initiated contact. Why has nobody else brought this up? He slapped Hood's hand who then responded.

The bottom line was that it isn't a playoff rule, it is an all the time rule. My father made that clear to me when I was 5. If you can touch it, you can catch it. Chris Carter said the same thing after the game.

 

[Mulli]

that sig pic is too big, my man.