txskins Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Obviously I was excited that Romo sits to pee dropped the ball and lost the game for the Cowgirls but did anyone else think it was really odd that they didn't measure the spot to see if he got a first down. It was 4th down and a half yard to go at the 2 1/2 yard line. On the replay it looked like he was tackled down around the 1 1/2! It wasn't 4th and goal! How could they not even look at the play in the replay booth w/ the game being under 2 minutes? I know if that was the skins I would have lost my mind if they didn't replay it. I live in Texas and have not heard any Cowgirls fans complaining about it. Are they ignorant or am I missing something on the play. Please tell me what I'm missing because I havn't heard anyone bringing this up? :eaglesuck GO SAINTS!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdswll Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 That a good point, but didn't he fumble the ball or was he tackled before the ball came loose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airborneskins Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 1) he was definately short. 2) This belongs in the ATNFL 3) Aren't you a SKins fan? Why worry about something that could have helped the Cowboys? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingGibbs Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 1) he was definately short. 2) This belongs in the ATNFL 3) Aren't you a SKins fan? Why worry about something that could have helped the Cowboys? :doh: He must have dropped some serious coin on that game and lost. :laugh: BTW. He needed to get to the one for the first and was a 1/2 yard short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txskins Posted January 10, 2007 Author Share Posted January 10, 2007 I don't know how you can say he was definitely short! I just think this is an interesting topic. I watch a lot of football games and this was one of the oddest things I've seen in awhile. The media dissects everything and this hasn't been mentioned, I just don't understand. I posted this so maybe some of our smart fans could let me know what they thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txskins Posted January 10, 2007 Author Share Posted January 10, 2007 I would never bet on the Cowboys! It was the 2 yard line because they measured to see if the previous play got to the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txskins Posted January 10, 2007 Author Share Posted January 10, 2007 That a good point, but didn't he fumble the ball or was he tackled before the ball came loose? They said he was down before the ball came out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I think it was pretty clear he was short. He was out in space, so the refs had a clear view of where to spot the ball. Wild play though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooley4President Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I thought it was pretty definitely short, and that's the reason why nobody has been making a big deal out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurd Cudins Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I would never bet on the Cowboys! It was the 2 yard line because they measured to see if the previous play got to the two.Actually, he needed to get to the 1. It was the one NOT the two. he was a half yard short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidenreich Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I would never bet on the Cowboys! It was the 2 yard line because they measured to see if the previous play got to the two. It wasn't the 2, it was the one. He would have had a first down had he stretched the ball while he was being tackled, but he didnt...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superozman Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 well short Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txskins Posted January 10, 2007 Author Share Posted January 10, 2007 I thought it was pretty definitely short, and that's the reason why nobody has been making a big deal out of it.e It must have been but I watch NFL network pretty much all the time and I've seen that play probably about 25 times and everytime he looks like he was down around the one. I'm just trying to figure out what I'm not seeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDane Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I honestly thought he had a first down, and I was about to soil myself in anger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txskins Posted January 10, 2007 Author Share Posted January 10, 2007 Well everyone is saying the first down was at the one yard line then that makes sense. For some reason I was thinking 2 yard line. I thought I heard the announcer say 2 yard line but he was probably wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txskins Posted January 10, 2007 Author Share Posted January 10, 2007 I honestly thought he had a first down, and I was about to soil myself in anger. lol me too! It would have sucked because then they could have ran the clock down and kicked again. It would have helped them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdswll Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 They said he was down before the ball came out. I missed that, thanks for clearing that up for me. I think I was so excited that they botched the kick, that I did not hear the commentator say he was down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I wondered this too. However, after seeing the replay, he was down around the 1.5 yard line. That was the original line of scrimmage (if you remember, the replay on the Witten catch moved the ball back to the 1.5). I think they got the call right, but I was shocked they didn't measure too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark The Homer Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 That was a helluva tackle. I about had a heart attack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallntfox Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 As others have stated he needed to get to the 1 as Witten was stopped at the 1 1/2 on the previous play...the same place that Romo sits to pee went down. If you watch the replay you can see the referee pointing to the ground to motion that the runner was down prior to the Seahawks picking up the ball and advancing the "fumble". Also, the Seahawks took the ball over at the 1 1/2 so that is where Romo sits to pee was down. A more interesting point that I haven't heard anyone talk about... The Witten play occurred with 1:53 on the clock and the refs signaled first down. Had the Seahawks thought that they had stopped them on 3rd down they surely would have called time out and made Dallas kick the field goal giving themselves almost 2 minutes left to get a winning score. The clock continued to run until the booth signaled down to review the play. This ate over 30 seconds off the clock before the play was ultimately reversed...30 seconds that the Seahawks would have been screwed out of had the refs made the proper call when spotting the ball initially. The botched field goal attmept was at 1:19. All in all it was the best thing that happened to the Seahawks because after using their timeouts Dallas got the ball back at midfield after the punt with only 7 seconds. Seattle would have had a much harder time keeping them out of field goal range with those 30 additional seconds on the clock. Note: I did hear that Perreira said that it was handled properly...those are the breaks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txskins Posted January 10, 2007 Author Share Posted January 10, 2007 As others have stated he needed to get to the 1 as Witten was stopped at the 1 1/2 on the previous play...the same place that Romo sits to pee went down. If you watch the replay you can see the referee pointing to the ground to motion that the runner was down prior to the Seahawks picking up the ball and advancing the "fumble". Also, the Seahawks took the ball over at the 1 1/2 so that is where Romo sits to pee was down.A more interesting point that I haven't heard anyone talk about... The Witten play occurred with 1:53 on the clock and the refs signaled first down. Had the Seahawks thought that they had stopped them on 3rd down they surely would have called time out and made Dallas kick the field goal giving themselves almost 2 minutes left to get a winning score. The clock continued to run until the booth signaled down to review the play. This ate over 30 seconds off the clock before the play was ultimately reversed...30 seconds that the Seahawks would have been screwed out of had the refs made the proper call when spotting the ball initially. The botched field goal attmept was at 1:19. All in all it was the best thing that happened to the Seahawks because after using their timeouts Dallas got the ball back at midfield after the punt with only 7 seconds. Seattle would have had a much harder time keeping them out of field goal range with those 30 additional seconds on the clock. Note: I did hear that Perreira said that it was handled properly...those are the breaks! I was wondering why Seattle didn't call I time out as well. It ended up working in their favor though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallntfox Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I was wondering why Seattle didn't call I time out as well. It ended up working in their favor though. They only had one timeout left and were probably saving it to try to ice the kicker...or holder :laugh: If it was a first down it would have been pointless to stop the clock because Parcells had planned to take a knee a few times to run the clock down and then take the kick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txskins Posted January 10, 2007 Author Share Posted January 10, 2007 They only had one timeout left and were probably saving it to try to ice the kicker...or holder :laugh: If it was a first down it would have been pointless to stop the clock because Parcells had planned to take a knee a few times to run the clock down to about six seconds and then take the kick. You're right. I forgot the call on the field was a first down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I live in Texas and have not heard any Cowgirls fans complaining about it. Are they ignorant or am I missing something on the play. Please tell me what I'm missing because I havn't heard anyone bringing this up? Those idiots are too busy saying the commissioner sent in a rigged slick ball cause the fix was on. :insane: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
909997 Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 he bobbled it and fumbled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.