Couple of points on the Ref calls in the game

[Burgold]

Still, don't agree. What makes him defenseless? The fact that he's not paying attention?

It was a very bad call and a good hit. And as people have pointed out Cousins can apparently be hit on a dead play, wrapped up and driven into the ground with no penalty.

Double standard.

[nemocystem]

Nope...Baker call was horrible. ..any excuses are incorrect. Period. I could care less about any ****amamey hypothesis that posits how modern rules have moved in this direction. It's a bad call...plain & simple. He was within 8 yards of the end of the play, the player with the ball wasn't down yet, & the hit was in front of the player. If you want to get rid of that, then make the QB's wear flashing lights & force them to get out of the way on a turnover & call penalties on them for not evading the play. Your fail excuse is fail.

As for the rest of the officiating...yes...a couple of the perceived bad calls are being incorrectly argued. Still...The refs got about a dozen other ones wrong, & we're not even going to get into the holding no-calls.

& people incessantly drone on about losers & bad calls, & how holding can be called every play. No...excuse me...but no. They had blatantly obvious, egregious holding no-calls at least 5 times & 3 of them would have effectively ended scoring drives. So before we even start to claim "this loss is on the defense" I want you to seriously consider 3 non-scoring drives, & how calling just 2 or 3 of them would have affected our pass rush or their protection schemes for the remainder of the game.

If you can't see any of that, or you're too much of a schill for the refs to see how those plays impacted the game then I'm sorry...you don't do football right bro.

[grego]

Still, don't agree. What makes him defenseless? The fact that he's not paying attention?

It was a very bad call and a good hit. And as people have pointed out Cousins can apparently be hit on a dead play, wrapped up and driven into the ground with no penalty.

Double standard.

 

 

agreed. 

 

i'm more pissed looking at the message boards overwhelmingly calling baker a dirty player and talking about how foles was "20 yards from the play"

 

neither of which are remotely true. foles was 5 yards from the play (possibly less)

 

heres what the nfl needs to do- once an INT is thrown, the QB needs to lay down or run in the opposite direction of the play. he CANNOT attempt to tackle the defender.

 

you cannot tell the defense they need to leave a player alone to tackle your player. 

 

ludicrous.

[ncsuFB27]

Blaming the refs for a loss is a futile exercise, it does no good, no matter what side of the argument you are on.

It's what losers do.

Thanks for taking time out from polishing up all those Eagles Super Bowl trophies and rings to weigh in here. Actually you should have plenty of time to spend here....matter of fact grab a towel we got 3 you can shine up, son.

[grego]

Blaming the refs for a loss is a futile exercise, it does no good, no matter what side of the argument you are on.

It's what losers do.

 

you would know this how?

 

oh, the irony. 

 

...........btw, i dont blame the refs for the loss. 

[Havenless]

Thanks for taking time out from polishing up all those Eagles Super Bowl trophies and rings to weigh in here. Actually you should have plenty of time to spend here....matter of fact grab a towel we got 3 you can shine up, son.

Nobody knows how long ago the 80's were like a Washington Redskins fan.

[grego]

Nobody knows how long ago the 80's were like a Washington Redskins fan.

 

or, NEVER, like an eagle fan

[TheGloryDays]

Says someone with a Captain America avatar. Go home.

[PeterMP]

I don't blame the officials for the loss, I blame our special teams and also our secondary which was pretty horrible.

 

The 2 questions I do have though are on 2 plays.

 

1) The Baker hit on Foles.  I still haven't heard anyone say that the hit is illegal.  I know it is considered "dirty" and I don't disagree with that or disagree that it should be made illegal, but as of right now, today, IS THAT HIT ILLEGAL?  I know Aikman said during the game that the refs "frown upon those kinds of hits" but "frowns upon" does not mean illegal. If technically the hit was legal, why was it flagged? I'm sorry, but in a close hard fought game, you can't throw flags that swing games like that for a hit that is legal. If the hit is indeed illegal though, then nevermind.

 

It is illegal.

 

And you'd be penalized again, Baker. Under Rule 12 in Section 2 of the NFL rulebook, "a quarterback at any time after a change of possession" is considered to be in a "defenseless posture."

 

http://www.nj.com/eagles/index.ssf/2014/09/redskins_chris_baker_on_nick_foles_hit_if_i_could_do_it_again_i_would.html

 

The rule was changed several years ago.

 

The game was not perfectly reffed, but they never are.

 

We didn't lose this game because of the refs.

[Stadium-Armory]

Still, don't agree. What makes him defenseless? The fact that he's not paying attention?

It was a very bad call and a good hit. And as people have pointed out Cousins can apparently be hit on a dead play, wrapped up and driven into the ground with no penalty.

Double standard.

 

The NFL has decided that a QB is deemed defenseless by rule on change of possessions plays. It is a double standard designed to protect quarterbacks from injury. It might not seem fair when its your guy delivering the blow but its a business decision by the NFL.

 

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/15_2012_Player_Conduct.pdf

 

"It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is.....   A quarterback at any time after a change of possession  (Also see Article 8(f) for additional restrictions against a quarterback after a change of possession); 

 

 

[emor09]

The Keenan Robinson penalty was the game. That was a 3rd down and it led to a field goal. Guess how many points we lost by? Absolutely brutal. 

[Hersh]

Still, don't agree. What makes him defenseless? The fact that he's not paying attention?

It was a very bad call and a good hit. And as people have pointed out Cousins can apparently be hit on a dead play, wrapped up and driven into the ground with no penalty.

Double standard.

 

I'm not defending the refs for the hit on Cousins. That was extremely poor officiating.

 

While I would be happy to recite the rule book for you on what made the QB a defenseless player, let's not pretend that it would change your mind. Plus, I'd rather talk in another thread about how some fans are saying that a defense that gave up 30 points didn't play that bad. That blows my mind.

[PeterMP]

Still, don't agree. What makes him defenseless? The fact that he's not paying attention?

It was a very bad call and a good hit. And as people have pointed out Cousins can apparently be hit on a dead play, wrapped up and driven into the ground with no penalty.

Double standard.

 

He's defenseless by rule.

[emor09]

I always celebrate the point in a season when I realize this isn't the year the Eagles win a Super Bowl. 

 

I celebrated that day today. The Eagles won't get these calls against the Seahawks, 49ers or Saints.

[Burgold]

Plus, I'd rather talk in another thread about how some fans are saying that a defense that gave up 30 points didn't play that bad. That blows my mind.

A doesn't = B.  Refs robbed us and kept extending Eagles' drives over and over.  Our pass defense was terrible.  Our run defense was actually impressive, but since you don't get partial grades for defense... they were terrible.

 

Still, if the Redskins played wiht the same favor the Eagles got in terms of pass interference, qb protection, etc. and you just eliminated the horrible calls against both teams.. I suspect the outcome would have been differently.

He's defenseless by rule.

If that's the case, we should make it illegal to blitz from the left side.  No blind side hits of the QB.  I wouldn't mind being proven that the call was called correctly, but even if they did re-write the book so that the QB can never be touched when trying to make a play on an interception than I'd argue it's a rule that needs to be changed because on its surface and everywhere else... it's ridiculous.

 

Baker's hit was a clean legit football play.

[chipwhich]

 

Baker's hit was a clean legit football play.

 

If it's against the rules, it's not a legit football play.  You are being silly now, really.

 

Hopefully Baker knows the rule now.

[grego]

It is illegal.

 

And you'd be penalized again, Baker. Under Rule 12 in Section 2 of the NFL rulebook, "a quarterback at any time after a change of possession" is considered to be in a "defenseless posture."

 

http://www.nj.com/eagles/index.ssf/2014/09/redskins_chris_baker_on_nick_foles_hit_if_i_could_do_it_again_i_would.html

 

The rule was changed several years ago.

 

The game was not perfectly reffed, but they never are.

 

We didn't lose this game because of the refs.

 

 

still, like the tuck rule, its a bad rule. 

 

you cant both try to tackle the other teams player and be off limits. 

 

and, youre right- we didnt lose the game cuz of the refs

[Stadium-Armory]

If there is any point to argue about the Baker/Foles hit, it is that Foles was not camping out on the other side of the field waiting for the play to end, he was jogging towards the person with the ball and presumably he would have taken action to tackle the ball carrier if he were not blocked by Baker. The rule isn't specific enough to handle this scenario IMO.

 

But even if it were, I STILL think its a legit penalty. It was illegal because it was a blind side block:

 

(8) A player who receives a “blindside” block when the blocker is moving toward or parallel to his own end line and approaches the opponent from behind or from the side

 

Here's the video: http://deadspin.com/big-hit-on-nick-foles-sparks-brawl-between-eagles-and-w-1637420679. Foles was clearly "blindsided".

 

I'd like to see them add something to the rules that says a QB who stays out of the play post change of posession is protected under rule 12.7. But a QB who engages in the resulting play is fair game. In this case, Foles would have become a legitimate target HOWEVER he was still blindside blocked so it would be a foul either way.

 

Also add: The ball carrier's knees were down when Baker made the hit so it would be hard to argue that Baker needed to make that block. Minor point, especially considering the speed at which it all happened but there just isn't much football evidence in Baker's favor on this one. 

[Veretax]

People need to wake up.  The ref didn't call it right, but Baker and Peters both had to be ejected.

 

From qtr1 this game was chippy.  It got worse because the refs never really reigned it in.

 

Baker was not tossed for his 'perhaps cheap block' on Foles. Although that was a penalty.  He was upset for engaging Peters in a fight, who was retaliating for what Baker did to Foles. and grabbed his facemask.  

[knighthonor]

I don't blame the officials for the loss, I blame our special teams and also our secondary which was pretty horrible.

 

The 2 questions I do have though are on 2 plays.

 

1) The Baker hit on Foles.  I still haven't heard anyone say that the hit is illegal.  I know it is considered "dirty" and I don't disagree with that or disagree that it should be made illegal, but as of right now, today, IS THAT HIT ILLEGAL?  I know Aikman said during the game that the refs "frown upon those kinds of hits" but "frowns upon" does not mean illegal. If technically the hit was legal, why was it flagged? I'm sorry, but in a close hard fought game, you can't throw flags that swing games like that for a hit that is legal. If the hit is indeed illegal though, then nevermind.

 

2) On the Delay of Game call against the Redskins.  On a play like that where the whistle is blown and play is ruled dead before it is snapped, how in the holy hell is a defender not flagged for sacking the QB?  How is the QB in THAT situation where he is standing there unaware, not considered a defenseless player, especially considering the blockers have stood up and stopped playing.  I understand people are saying that some didn't hear the whistle. I am not saying it was dirty or on purpose, but intent doesn't matter in this case, Cousins was wrapped up and driven into the ground on a dead play.  Why was this not a flag?  It's very possible Cousins gets hurt on that play.

 I believe the QB gets the same treatment as the Kickers.

 

Remember last year, that Kicker that got clobered while trying to make a tackle. The person that blocked the kicker was fined for it somehow.

 

The NFL need to make better rules that are consistent for when QB/Kickers reenter a play for the defensive side of the play.

[hogger]

The hit on Foles was in retaliation for the cheap shot that the Eagles took on Cousins during the delay of game where the play was blown dead. I thought that was obvious. Yet the announcers never said it.

[Larry]

You have google just like me. It say BOTH feet and control of the ball. College football has always been  one foot in is a catch, not the NFL

The rule has been quoted for you, word for word, from the official NFL rule book.

Here it is, again: From the NFL Rulebook covering the forward pass. (pdf file.)

 

I've bolded part of it, for you. 

 

COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS

Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete

(by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:

(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

( touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

© maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and ( have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act

common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an

opponent, etc.).

 

 

 

(The smiley faces are because this version of the board software insists that the letter "b", (upper or lower case) followed by a close parenthesis, is a smiley face, and will not allow those characters next to each other to appear.) 

If you don't know what constitutes a completed forward pass, then maybe a thread attacking the officials for not knowing the rules isn't the right place, for you.

 

[NoCalMike]

Wait a second.  The QB is considered defenseless even in the case where he is running towards the ball carrier attempting to possibly tackle them?

 

I Understand if the QB is just standing there, removing himself from the play, but how does it make any sense that a defender can not block a QB who is trying to tackle the ball carrier?

 

Makes zero sense.

[mark327]

I don't believe it was retaliation. Baker made a clean hit on Foles . Baker had his head and shoulders on the front of Foles it wasn't a blindside hit.Any other player and there is no flag. Regardless of the rules for our tutu wearing multi millionaires . If they are attempting to make a tackle like Foles clearly was trying to do ( someone convince me he was just jogging to his sideline cause the play was over for him) your not going to.

Like I said earlier qb's throw an interception go the other way and stay where you threw the ball from and pray .

[Oregon Ducks Fan]

The rule specifies that BOTH feet must be inbounds whether or not the receiver has control of the ball. Only one foot was inbounds. Incorrect call.

No, the call was correct. From the official NFL Rules

 

COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS

Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass.

A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:

• (a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
• ( touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands;

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/11_2013_ForwardPass_BackPass_Fumble.pdf

 

I don't blame the officials for the loss, I blame our special teams and also our secondary which was pretty horrible.

 

The 2 questions I do have though are on 2 plays.

 

1) The Baker hit on Foles.  I still haven't heard anyone say that the hit is illegal.  I know it is considered "dirty" and I don't disagree with that or disagree that it should be made illegal, but as of right now, today, IS THAT HIT ILLEGAL?  I know Aikman said during the game that the refs "frown upon those kinds of hits" but "frowns upon" does not mean illegal. If technically the hit was legal, why was it flagged? I'm sorry, but in a close hard fought game, you can't throw flags that swing games like that for a hit that is legal. If the hit is indeed illegal though, then nevermind.

The rules against unnecessary roughness were changed in 2005 to outlaw blindside hits on unsuspecting players. It doesn't just protect quarterbacks, it protects all players.

 

2005

Unnecessary Roughness

Unnecessarily running, diving into, or throwing the body against a player who should not have reasonably anticipated such contact by an opponent is unnecessary roughness. Previously, the rule only protected a player who is out of the play.

 

http://www.nflevolution.com/nfl-timeline/index.html#unnecessaryRoughness2005

 

Again from the official rules

 

Article 6

:

Unnecessary Roughness

.

There shall be no unnecessary roughness. This shall include, but will not be limited

to:

• (a) Using the foot or any part of the leg to strike an opponent with a whipping motion;
• ( contacting a runner when he is out of bounds;

  Note: Defensive players must make an effort to avoid contact. Players on defense are responsible for knowing when a runner has crossed the boundary line, except in doubtful cases where he might step on a boundary line and continue parallel with it.

• © a player of the receiving team who has gone out of bounds contacting a kicking team player out of bounds during the kick.

  If this occurs on a kick from scrimmage, post-possession rules will apply if appropriate (9-5-1);

• (d) running, diving into, or throwing the body against or on a runner who has declared himself down by going to the ground untouched and has made no attempt to advance, or falling upon any prostrate player either before or after the ball is dead (see 7-2-1-d);
• (e) throwing the runner into the ground after the ball is dead;
• (f) unnecessarily running, diving into, cutting, or throwing the body against or on a player who (i) is out of the play or (ii) should not have reasonably anticipated such contact by an opponent, before or after the ball is dead;

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/15_2013_Player_Conduct.pdf