Couple of points on the Ref calls in the game

[MontanaSkins]

I think we are missing one important thing. No matter what the rules say the officials are being told if you are going to error, error on the side of saftey. Fair? No. But watch all over the league and even in college it is the direction the game is going.

[emor09]

It's so funny. All the Philadelphia fan base/media is making Jason Peters into a hero for starting a fight.

 

I guess they didn't realize Chris Baker's hit was a payback for the hit on Cousins. 

[Going Commando]

See, that I don't mind. The officials should use every tool at their disposal to get the call right and if Davis pulled the facemask I don't care if the refs missed it in real time. I'm glad they got it right.

 

Likewise, they should have looked up at the video and knocked their fellow ref who threw the flag on Robinson for PI and said, "What the heck were you thinking, idiot!"

 

Get it right.

I think it's certainly problematic that the Ref's call was blatantly influenced by the fans in the stadium and whoever was running that video board. The Refs do need to maintain at least a semblance of objectivity.

[Going Commando]

I think we are missing one important thing. No matter what the rules say the officials are being told if you are going to error, error on the side of saftey. Fair? No. But watch all over the league and even in college it is the direction the game is going.

Safety is good, regulating the way players hit each other can be good. But clean hard contacts should always be a part of the game. And all players should be able to make tackles when the ball is in the open field. And as such, all players should be able to get blocked if they involve themselves in the play. Making the rules more ambiguous and discretionary isn't serving player safety. Because then you get a Nick Foles cluelessly wandering into an INT return and getting leveled without realizing he's making himself a big target for the defense. He and every QB needs to know exactly when and how they're eligible to be blocked on returns.

It's plays like this where Rugby, with it's lack of ambiguity, has Football beat. There is no blocking. All players tackle. And legal tackles are well defined. Something like this play wouldn't happen and Rugby will not go through the kind of identity crisis that Football is currently having. Regardless, this play demonstrates the need for the rules to better define the blindside hit rule and define the QB in a defenseless position rule.

[Going Commando]

It's actually unfair for the team that throws the interception or fumbles if you disqualify any of their players from tackling or getting involved in the play. It forces them to play 10 on 11.

[Hersh]

Griffin was crushed like that in the Seattle Playoff game right after he tweaked his knee running to the sideline. Threw the TD and got leveled blindside, no call.

 

Do you have a video link? I don't doubt you, but I don't remember. I will say though that it's potentially a different situation so I can't really comment without seeing it.

[Havenless]

It's so funny. All the Philadelphia fan base/media is making Jason Peters into a hero for starting a fight.

 

I guess they didn't realize Chris Baker's hit was a payback for the hit on Cousins.

Oh don't worry, Cox is getting a statue erected for that Cousins hit too.

[Drastik]

jesus christ, Cox never heard the whistle.  neither did most of the Redskins.   That is just football, not a penalty.

This is the only thing I have a problem with in this thread.

 

It was a clear cheap shot, no one even tried to play during that sequence or attempt to block Cox, watch the replay. Cox then goes and launches into Cousins sending him to the ground with Cox's body weight on top.

 

Not only that, but Kirk Cousins was standing straight up, not even trying to throw or maneuver in the pocket. Clear cheap shot. 

 

I don't get how that isn't called a penalty, during a DEAD BALL... but Baker makes a LEGAL block on Foles and it's called a penalty? That makes absolutely no sense. With that said, I'll be the first to admit that Baker's block was a cheap shot, and was clearly retaliation... but it was a perfectly legal block. How does a flag get thrown and then an ejection? 

 

That's the only part of the game that I'm still puzzled on. The rest of the calls during the game were pretty standard, in my opinion.

[emor09]

Oh don't worry, Cox is getting a statue erected for that Cousins hit too.

 

It's seriously ridiculous. Everyone in Philly is looking at this as a franchise defining win. Because there was a fight in the game, I've been told by numerous friends that it's the greatest game they've ever seen. (Keep in mind I'm 23 and my friends all started following the Eagles around 2000)

[Enzo]

jesus christ, Cox never heard the whistle.  neither did most of the Redskins.   That is just football, not a penalty.

A late hit is any hit on an opposing player after the player had gone out of bounds or after the play has been blown dead.  Whether the player that makes the hit has time to stop or attempts to stop is a judgement call by the officials.  Cox had plenty of time to slow down after the play was blown dead & there is no "he didn't heard the whistle" excuse in the rules.  BTW, how do you know he didn't heard the whistle? How did the announcers know he didn't heard the whistle? Most importantly, how did the officials know he didn't hear the whistle? The answer it nobody does, except for the player himself & the officials shouldn't have made that assumption.

[Havenless]

It's seriously ridiculous. Everyone in Philly is looking at this as a franchise defining win. Because there was a fight in the game, I've been told by numerous friends that it's the greatest game they've ever seen. (Keep in mind I'm 23 and my friends all started following the Eagles around 2000)

It was exciting, no doubt about it. And when you win a game with so many injuries on both sides, and really both QBs answered a lot of questions. I think this game will be remembered for years, and not because of the Desean stuff.

But as far as the Cousins hit, that's what that guy does. Cox repeatedly penetrates the hole until he explodes all over the quarterback's face and chest. I'm surprised Cousins didn't walk funny after that pounding.

[Enzo]

Why wasn't there a defenseless receiver penalty on Garcon? He didn't even have time to get both feet down and was going out of bounds when the Philly safety hit him high.

 

This is the second game the refs have had a big hand in an Eagles win. I hope Lurie is getting his money's worth.

I have to agree if it isn't for the officials either calling bogus penalties against the Eagle's opponents or not calling obvious penalties against the Eagles, the Eagles would be 1-2 not 3-0.  I didn't see the first Eagles game against Jacksonville, but I wouldn't be surprised if the officials didn't help them in that game.

[Enzo]

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

1992 (the 1991 season) is the last year the Redskins won a championship.  Beside even if the 1980s were the last time the Redskins won a title.  It is still a hell of a lot more recent than 1960 the last time the Eagles won a title.

[NoCalMike]

On Jackson's very first catch the 2nd defender laid a hit on him after he was on the ground. No flag.....so when Eagles cry "dirty" remind them who set the tone from the get-go.

[Enzo]

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.

Isn't that sort of hypocritical coming from the fan of a team that has gotten 2 wins, at least, because of bad officiating.  Having said that the Redskins could have made the bad calls by the officials meaningless if they had played better defense in the first half & played better on special teams.  Also I don't know why the Redskins didn't run the ball more at the end of the 1st half.  Especially on their last drive of the half, when it was obvious to everyone watching, except the play callers for the Redskins, that the Eagles' defense was spent.

[grego]

But as far as th Cox repeatedly penetrates the hole until he explodes all over the quarterback's face and chest. 

 

 

wtf?

[Burgold]

I see the favorite argument is being trotted out now that if the Redskins defense did better than the officials couldn't have helped the Eagles so well.  There may be truth in that and lord knows the Redskins pass defense was sorry, but there's also truth in that the Eagles should have been off the field at least 4 times, but weren't because of flags that were at best dubious and were usually wrong.  If the refs keep giving teams free first downs then the defense can't stop them.

 

So, could the Redskins have beaten the refs/Eagles? I still contend that had we connected on any play that would have put us in scoring range or actually scored we would have seen that yellow hanky on the field with some hold called on a player who was on the sideline during that play.

[grego]

It's actually unfair for the team that throws the interception or fumbles if you disqualify any of their players from tackling or getting involved in the play. It forces them to play 10 on 11.

 

 

i get that, but i also agree with what you say here- 

And all players should be able to make tackles when the ball is in the open field. And as such, all players should be able to get blocked if they involve themselves in the play. Making the rules more ambiguous and discretionary isn't serving player safety. Because then you get a Nick Foles cluelessly wandering into an INT return and getting leveled without realizing he's making himself a big target for the defense. He and every QB needs to know exactly when and how they're eligible to be blocked on returns.

 

 

 

the NFL designates QBs as automatically defenseless on turnovers. thats not exactly fair to the other team, either. but like you are saying, the QB is often the only, or last line of defense on a turnover due to his natural positioning on the field. 

 

so, what do you do? i dont know. 

 

weve designated that you have to hit a certain way- from the front, not helmet to helmet, not leading with your helmet, not at the knees, not when hes away from the play.....we even say that someone was hit too hard- unnecessarily rough. 

 

what else can you do but just tell them to lay down and take themselves out of the play.

[Rodriggo]

They called a penalty off a video screen replay and let Cousins get powerbomb driven into the ground by a DT on a whistled dead ball. We got jobbed like always.

[Going Commando]

Not automatically designate them as defenseless on turnover returns. That's a dumb rule. And I'm not sure that's what the rule intended to do.

[Bcjbs123]

Not saying the Refs caused the outcome of the game because who knows what would have happened but the FACTS are in the second half, every point generated by the Eagles offense came on scoring drives where the Redskins defense was called for at least 30 yards in penalties per drives.

 

On Eagles drives where there were no penalties called against the Redskins defense, the Eagles went three and out each time, except for a field goal after an interception where they gained all of 2 yards and kicked a field goal.

 

This is why Eagles fans are always so shocked when they don't win the Super Bowl, because in the playoffs you don't typically get these kind of breaks, you don't typically get pass interference calls giving you the ball at the 1, officials helping you down the field and all sorts of other beneficial things. There will be playoff games where the Eagles' offense will actually have to drive the ball down the field 4 or 5 times to score without any help from the officials or other flukey things happening in their favor and that's when they'll lose.

 

Like I said before, the Eagles have the potential to go 16-0 and get outplayed in every game...that's just how they roll

[Rodriggo]

Not automatically designate them as defenseless on turnover returns. That's a dumb rule. And I'm not sure that's what the rule intended to do.

 

Agree. They already protect the head and tackles that lead with the head so what else is there?

 

How can they maintain the integrity of the game by having a player that can't be touched but can tackle and affect the play?

 

Skins are already down to a backup that is getting drilled on a dead ball AS BAD OR WORSE than Foles is on a live play!!!!!!!!

 

This league needs to eliminate these contradictions in the game. Have players sign waivers, stay safe but don't legislate the game into oblivion with this ticky tack BS.

 

Baker's hit made me happier than any play in a long, long time.

[Bang]

Agree. They already protect the head and tackles that lead with the head so what else is there?

 

How can they maintain the integrity of the game by having a player that can't be touched but can tackle and affect the play?

 

Skins are already down to a backup that is getting drilled on a dead ball AS BAD OR WORSE than Foles is on a live play!!!!!!!!

 

This league needs to eliminate these contradictions in the game. Have players sign waivers, stay safe but don't legislate the game into oblivion with this ticky tack BS.

 

Baker's hit made me happier than any play in a long, long time.

 

And this is the essence of it (not the moronic "I wanna see more violence" as was implied yesterday.)

they are throwing the competitive balance of the game.

 

they are slowly legislating defense out of the game. Aside from protecting the QB, they have pretty much decided unless the offense does something egregious then they can do pretty much whatever they want.

Holding doesn't exist anymore. For an offensive lineman to be called for holding, it has to be so blatantr that there's no reasonable way the ref can ignore it, and that STILL does not work.

These days you see defensive players literally get tackled in front of refs and no call. By the neck, around the back, by the shirt.. a nice new move is to grab a jersey as you're going down, jerk the defender down with you. Somehow physics are suspended and the obvious hold is ignored.

it used to be a cliché that you could call holding on literally every play, and for a while there it was pretty bad, they called it a LOT,,  they over-called it. now it hardly exists. it's replaced with "hands to the face", which is what OL get called for if they will get called these days.

You see more defensive holding calls these days than offensive holding.

 

 

Now, the "illegal contact" rule can literally be called on every play. it is such a ticky tack bull**** rule that is strictly left up to the judgment of the official that it can be called whenever. For whatever. 

 

Without exaggerating even slightly, a defense can make two great plays, and then on third down have an incomplete pass nullified and a first down granted because someone 30 yards away from the play put his hand on a man's jersey. he did it the play before, the play before that, and the one before that, but this time it's called.. . just because.

Offensive guys can run straight into a DB on their pattern, DB can get called. 5 yards, first down.

It used to be that Pass Interference caused all the controversy, because it's a subjective call based on the judgment of the ref. There is no perfect criteria to it. 

Now those types of calls are all over the rules.  "Illegal contact"..  "Defenseless receiver", "Unneccesary roughness"..  which is called WAY too much these days.

UR has been around for a long time, and USED to be used for obvious transgressions. Now it's used for practically any hit that just LOOKS like it hurt.

 

the problem with the NFL is that they have gone absolutely crazy over the quarterback, and they forget that for every person who wants to play offense, there's a person who wants to play defense.

and if the NFL keeps pushing defense out and fining players outrageous sums of money for playing the game the way they have been taught since they were kids, then all of the "Play 60" and "heads up" programs won't matter.

Who on earth would EVER want to play defense?

Why on earth would anyone want to play defense professionally?

Think of it in terms of your job. You work, and at the end of the day you pay back a good chunk of your check because of bull**** transgressions picked out during your day.

How long would you keep working there?

 

the NFL has never had any competition of note since 1970 because they present the best product and they present the best product because the best players WANT to play there.

But if they keep changing the product, they will open the door to competing leagues who CAN put out a better product, not by making stupid changes ie XFL, but by playing FOOTBALL, the way the NFL used to do it. And that will attract players and fans.

 

~Bang

[Going Commando]

This league needs to eliminate these contradictions in the game. Have players sign waivers, stay safe but don't legislate the game into oblivion with this ticky tack BS.

Agreed, there is a contradiction in that rule. The QB can't be designated as in a defensive posture and simultaneously be able to make a tackle or take an angle to close off a lane for the returner. And as it would be unfair to force the offense to play 10 on 11 on returns during changes of possession, you have to change the way defensive posture is defined. It should be defined as being X distance from the play IMO. And maybe some sort of hands up gesture to indicate you're taking yourself out of the play.

[Rodriggo]

Now, the "illegal contact" rule can literally be called on every play. it is such a ticky tack bull**** rule that is strictly left up to the judgment of the official that it can be called whenever. For whatever. 

 

UR has been around for a long time, and USED to be used for obvious transgressions. Now it's used for practically any hit that just LOOKS like it hurt.

 

~Bang

 

Completely agree. I remember week 2 Steelers at Ravens, first Steeler drive 3rd down, Big Ben gets hammered on a sack, guy hits him square in the chest, great play, drive is over......only it's a flag b/c the lineman led with the helmet into his chest. Didn't spear upwards or launch himself, just ran right into him and buried him. Steelers drive kept alive b/c you can't hit the QB I guess? Not even close to being a Ravens fan but I felt disgusted.

 

What are defenders supposed to do? Detach their heads when they come in contact with someone? This game is too fast and violent to be so ticky tack. 90% of helmet to helmet hits are simply a result of the fact that defenders have a head not because of an intent to intentionally injure someone with it.

 

They're legislating the safety position out of existence while at the same time tying DBs hands behind their backs. It's just dumb.

 

If they don't want spearing then they just need to do away with the safety spot or move them up the field. Make it open season on WRs and contact, anything goes. Checks and balances man, not this backpedaling patchwork policy junk.