Misc comments

[Russ Smith]

Arrington showed pretty good speed on the KO return, wasn't pulling away from guys mind you but he really burst through some traffic to get into the clear. Best blocked KO return all year and JJ did what you're supposed to do.

Wilson just shot out of a cannon on the fumble return, I realize he outran Brad Johnson on the angle but he looked like Carl Lewis, pretty much anybody on the field with speed was involved in the pileup on the run so there was no speed guy to chase him down. Very alert play by AW and a big hit to cause the fumble.

This is probably a "whine" but watch the last play again where Leinart throws the hail mary for the pick and tell me if that's not roughing the passer? The ball is clearly out and Leinart just gets decked.

 

[JeffGollin]

Arrington showed pretty good speed on the KO return...Wilson just shot out of a cannon on the fumble return...watch the last play again where Leinart throws the hail mary for the pick and tell me if that's not roughing the passer?.

Even after that KO return, JJ looked like a lightbulb had gone on, and he reeled off a couple of other good KO returns.

On the Wilson return, the camera missed the fumble, so all you saw was A-Dub racing toward something invisible outside the TV screen and the next thing you saw was him streaking down the sideline. You almost had the feeling that that 21 players were unaware that the ball was laying on the ground over there. (Fortunately, Adrian was Player #22).

I was more disturbed by the non-call (and non-challenge) on Fitz's sideline catch on the preceding play that was ruled out of bounds. It would have been a lot easier to punch it in from the 3 or 4 than to rely on still another Hail Mary on that final play.

 

[Pariah]

I was more disturbed by the non-call (and non-challenge) on Fitz's sideline catch

I don't think a force-out call (or lackthereof) can be challenged.

I agree, though. As slight as the contact may have been, it made fitz land out of bounds. He leapt straight up, and came down at an angle. Without contact it would have been a tough call to make--in or out?

 

[Pariah]

Wilson just shot out of a cannon on the fumble return... he looked like Carl Lewis,

Wilson looks lighter to me in the last couple of weeks. I wonder what his weight is these days. I'll bet it's lighter than listed.

 

[Billy Flynt]

The phantom block in the back (which made no difference since Walters fumbled) and the phantom crackback block are just a few more examples of how cruddy the NFL officiating has gotten. Even the best crew in the league blew the PI call in the NE-Chi game (I call them the best since they choose the good crews for the highlight games).

 

[Russ Smith]

The worst call of the day yesterday that i saw was on the Oakland/ San Diego game. Vince Jackson caught a ball for a first down, diving catch, went down untouched. Popped up, flipped the ball forward(with spin) and gave like hey first down. But Fabian Washington correctly figured out Jackson wasn't touched, so he wasn't down, and jumped on the ball. Initially they ruled Raider ball. Then they called illegal forward pass, but said it was still Raiders ball because after marching off the 5 yard penalty, (4th down play) San Diego was short. THat was obviously wrong so the remeasured and said first down San Diego. It wasn't remotely a pass, it was and underhanded flip, if Leinart were about to get sacked and did that, it would be a fumble, not an incomplete forward pass.

Back to our game, am I the only one who thinks they could have called roughing the passer on that last play? I realize at that stage in a game it's very unusual to make such a call and it wasn't like the guy tried to kill Matt, but in the middle of the game if that takes place IMHO it's roughing more often than not. Would have given us one more play.

 

[Billy Flynt]

Back to our game, am I the only one who thinks they could have called roughing the passer on that last play? I realize at that stage in a game it's very unusual to make such a call and it wasn't like the guy tried to kill Matt, but in the middle of the game if that takes place IMHO it's roughing more often than not. Would have given us one more play.

I watched at a sports bar so I don't have the luxury of video tape; however, I respect your opinion and figure you are probably right.

I didn't get the chance to see the Oak/SD play yet.

With all things being considered, you have to figure the NYG meltdown against Tennessee has to be worse than our MNF loss to Chicago - hell, we were supposed to lose that game by 2 TDs.

 

[Folster]

More on the NE/Chicago game. Anybody see Junior Seau's broken arm. By watching the replay it's hard to tell how it broke. It looked like it broke when he wrapped up the runner. When he got up it was snapped in two and just hanging there. Quite disturbing but surprisingly watchable unlike similar breaks with the legs. For some reason I have no stomach for watching leg and knee injuries. Ankle injuries get me the worst because of my experience with them.

 

[jmt]

I was more disturbed by the non-call (and non-challenge) on Fitz's sideline catch on the preceding play that was ruled out of bounds. It would have been a lot easier to punch it in from the 3 or 4 than to rely on still another Hail Mary on that final play.

I don't see how we could have challenged - if we were the Cardinals perhaps we get that call. As far as this team punching the ball in from anywhere - well, we have not seen much of that.

 

[jmt]

The worst call of the day yesterday that i saw was on the Oakland/ San Diego game. Vince Jackson caught a ball for a first down, diving catch, went down untouched. Popped up, flipped the ball forward(with spin) and gave like hey first down. But Fabian Washington correctly figured out Jackson wasn't touched, so he wasn't down, and jumped on the ball. Initially they ruled Raider ball. Then they called illegal forward pass, but said it was still Raiders ball because after marching off the 5 yard penalty, (4th down play) San Diego was short. THat was obviously wrong so the remeasured and said first down San Diego. It wasn't remotely a pass, it was and underhanded flip, if Leinart were about to get sacked and did that, it would be a fumble, not an incomplete forward pass.

I thought there was a similar play in our gameat the end of the first half where Brad Johnson appeared to fumbled the snap and then spiked the ball but no one jumped on it or challenged. Or did he just bobble it?

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I don't think a force-out call (or lackthereof) can be challenged.

I agree, though. As slight as the contact may have been, it made fitz land out of bounds. He leapt straight up, and came down at an angle. Without contact it would have been a tough call to make--in or out?

I believe reviews in the last two minutes are at the booth's discretion.

 

[Pariah]

I believe reviews in the last two minutes are at the booth's discretion.

But it still has to be reviewable. That's not a call that can be made in the replay booth.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

But it still has to be reviewable. That's not a call that can be made in the replay booth.

So, do you KNOW if it can or can't be reviewed?

 

[Pariah]

I can't say with 100% certainty, but I'm fairly sure it can't. It's a judgement call by the official on the field.

EDIT: This is the first thing that comes up when you google "NFL force-out reviewable."

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20061029_NYJ@CLE

About half way down, the paragra that starts with "they huddled for several seconds" states it's a judgement call and can't be reviewed.

EDIT #2: Rule 15, Section 9 of the 2006 Official Playing Rules of the National Football League confirms that forceouts are not reviewable.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I can't say with 100% certainty, but I'm fairly sure it can't. It's a judgement call by the official on the field.

EDIT: This is the first thing that comes up when you google "NFL force-out reviewable."

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20061029_NYJ@CLE

About half way down, the paragra that starts with "they huddled for several seconds" states it's a judgement call and can't be reviewed.

EDIT #2: Rule 15, Section 9 of the 2006 Official Playing Rules of the National Football League confirms that forceouts are not reviewable.

I am a bit confused: What was the ruling on the field?

If it was ruled a "force out" by extension it would have been a completed pass, right?

If so... the ruling must have been that he caught it out of bounds or did not have control, and, to the best of my knowledge, these are points that could have been reviewed by the booth in the last two minutes.

 

[Pariah]

I am a bit confused: What was the ruling on the field?

If it was ruled a "force out" by extension it would have been a completed pass, right?

If so... the ruling must have been that he caught it out of bounds or did not have control, and, to the best of my knowledge, these are points that could have been reviewed by the booth in the last two minutes.

It was ruled that he was out of bounds, therefore, an incomplete pass. It was NOT ruled a forceout despite some contact after the catch.

Some here at ASFN are wondering if he wasn't forced out. Jeff implied it should have been challenged/reviewed--that it should have been a force-out.

I replied by saying I didn't hink it could be reviewed.

You asked me if I KNEW it couldn't be reviewed.

I wasn't sure. So I looked it up.

 

[football karma]

My misc thoughts:

It makes me crazy when the team has to burn 2nd half timeouts needlessly -- the Cards did it again early in the half -- wouldnt it have been nice to have had one time out left at the end there?

Officiating:

The Bergen call was horrific. My issue with it was that it was nothing close to a 'crackback' -- It makes you wonder what the ref was looking at. Lost is that Minnesota was offsides on the play, and it would have given the Cards a first down inside the twenty.

On the Fitz play towards the end of the game -- of the three possible calls, the Cards got the one that didnt work for them:

1. It was a catch with a push out. Replays clearly showed Fitz goes straight up about a yard inbounds, Cedric Griffin hits him and he lands about 12 inches out of bounds. For what its worth -- Fitz has shown, and even showed that day that he is the master of the catch and getting the feet in from ridiculous places. No respect for a pro bowler. BTW -- the "push out" (or lack of a "push out" call) is a judgement call and not subject to review.

2. Pass interference. The replay also clearly showed that Griffin gets there early and hits Fitz while making no attempt to play the ball. Understand thats a tough call with the game on the line, but I have seen a lot less called pass interference.

3. Incompletion. Of course what was called.


Cest la vie

 

[az1965]

Wilson just shot out of a cannon on the fumble return, I realize he outran Brad Johnson on the angle but he looked like Carl Lewis, pretty much anybody on the field with speed was involved in the pileup on the run so there was no speed guy to chase him down. Very alert play by AW and a big hit to cause the fumble.

It was interesting to see everyone kind of just standing around and Wilson comes, scoopes the ball, and starts to run...

 

[RedViper]

It was ruled that he was out of bounds, therefore, an incomplete pass. It was NOT ruled a forceout despite some contact after the catch.

Some here at ASFN are wondering if he wasn't forced out. Jeff implied it should have been challenged/reviewed--that it should have been a force-out.

I replied by saying I didn't hink it could be reviewed.

You asked me if I KNEW it couldn't be reviewed.

I wasn't sure. So I looked it up.

You were right on all counts. It is true that they could have reviewed whether he was out of bounds, but clearly he was. Even Fitz was arguing, it should have been a catch through the force out rule. So really the only issue is whether or not it was a force out, which only the guy in the stripes gets to declare it is or isnt. It was also in the last two minutes so only the booth can review. But there was nothing to review because the only way it was a catch (per Fitz) is the force out rule. Which isn't reviewable.

Ironically, in my avatar is an example of the forceout rule being declared and not reviewed. More than a few Vikes were wishing the forceout rule was reviewable that day. But its not. So the Vikings can go to hell and I guess we were the ones that got to go to hell yesterday.

 

[kerouac9]

You were right on all counts. It is true that they could have reviewed whether he was out of bounds, but clearly he was. Even Fitz was arguing, it should have been a catch through the force out rule. So really the only issue is whether or not it was a force out, which only the guy in the stripes gets to declare it is or isnt. It was also in the last two minutes so only the booth can review. But there was nothing to review because the only way it was a catch (per Fitz) is the force out rule. Which isn't reviewable.

Ironically, in my avatar is an example of the forceout rule being declared and not reviewed. More than a few Vikes were wishing the forceout rule was reviewable that day. But its not. So the Vikings can go to hell and I guess we were the ones that got to go to hell yesterday.

But I thought they did review that call (McCown's pass to Poole). Didn't they? I thought I remembered some agonizing moments under the hood at that game. I wonder if that's a thing that you can only check in the case of a completion, not an incompletion.

 

[RedViper]

But I thought they did review that call (McCown's pass to Poole). Didn't they? I thought I remembered some agonizing moments under the hood at that game. I wonder if that's a thing that you can only check in the case of a completion, not an incompletion.

You might be right. My memory of it though, is that it was a force out after the one foot comes down in bounds. Which, my understanding is they can review that the one foot comes down in bounds before the contact gets made, but they can't review the force-out part after Poole gets pushed out because that part is a judgment call. I know for certain Poole did not get two feet in. He gets the one with a couple millimeters to spare before the chalk, then gets pushed out before anyone would ever know whether he could have got that other foot down. That's how I understood it but I could be wrong. It seems to me that I've heard Minnesota people claim that he would not have gotten that other foot down. Which maybe he wouldn't but the Vikes made the decision to try to push him out of bounds and thats the chance you take.

 

[RedViper]

I googled Nate Poole and push out and got this blurb from an interview Nate did somewhere:

MB: "Before the play when time was running out-there were 4 seconds left
when it was called-what was going on? How did you get the play off?"
NP: "We got the play late. [QB] Josh [McCown] was directing traffic, like,
'You go over here, you, over there, Nate, you go to the far side.' If you
would have been in that huddle, you would have been like, 'Man, I don't
know if this is going to work. I don't know if we're going to get this ball
off.'"

MB: "What were you thinking as the play was being reviewed? Was there
any doubt in your mind?"
NP: "No, I knew once they were calling the push out-I had one foot in, but
once they said that I was pushed out, I knew it was good, that they
weren't going to overturn the play."

Which tells me, they did review the play, and also maybe Ive interpreted the play wrong. Nate seems to be saying the one foot down part is irrelevant because the call of the push out, trumps everything. I'm not sure. Maybe someone else knows. Does the one foot down thing matter if they call it a pushout?

 

[Pariah]

If that play was being reviewed for a forceout, it shouldn't have been. Unfortunately, that's not out of the realm of possibility.

 

[SuperSpck]

Wilson just shot out of a cannon on the fumble return, I realize he outran Brad Johnson on the angle but he looked like Carl Lewis, pretty much anybody on the field with speed was involved in the pileup on the run so there was no speed guy to chase him down. Very alert play by AW and a big hit to cause the fumble.

In real time, it went like this:

Pile.

Movement.

Wilson grabs the ball a zips like a lightning bug.

Slows near the 40 (Vikings), looks backward to check the call, sees ref following, resumes sprint, reslows at about the Cardinal 20, sees a couple of Vikings giving half-hearted chase, resumes sprint, 10 yards from paydirft starts to trot.

Seemed to take forever to me because I wonder if even Wilson knew for sure it was a fumble.

The Vikings figured it wasn't a real fumble as few of them gave any effort.

Wilson finished the play like he was supposed too and it paid off.

 

[Duckjake]

Slows near the 40 (Vikings), looks backward to check the call

That's what comes from 5+ years of playing for Arizona. He's just like me. I have a built in 10 second delay on excitement over a great Cardinal play.