Couple of points on the Ref calls in the game

[GoSkins0721]

I have a buddy who went to the STL/DAL game Sunday & he's saying the same thing as Skins fans: refs handed the game to the Cowgirls.

DAL - 3 penalties 15 yards

STL - 8 penalties 119 yards

Apparently 1 of the STL penalties was a very questionable roughing the passer penalty late in the game on a key 3rd or 4th down. Rams fans are pissed.

[MartinC]

what, specifically, was your basis for thinking it was a penalty again?

 

The NFL rule book. Specifically Article 7 (Players in a defenceless posture) item 7 

 

 

(7) 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);

 

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

[grego]

The NFL rule book. Specifically Article 7 (Players in a defenceless posture) item 7 

 

 

(7) 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);

 

 

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

 

 

article 8f makes it either murkier or clearer, depending on your perspective. 

 

(f) A passer who is standing still or fading backwards after the ball has left his hand is obviously out of the play and must 

not be unnecessarily contacted by the defense through the end of the play or until the passer becomes a blocker, or 

until he becomes a runner upon taking a lateral from a teammate or picking up a loose ball, or, in the event of a 

change of possession on the play, until the passer assumes a distinctly defensive position. However, at any time 

after the change of possession, it is a foul if (i) an opponent forcibly hits the quarterback’s head or neck area with his 

helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, or (ii) if an opponent lowers his head and makes forcible contact with the 

top/crown or forehead/”hairline” parts of his helmet against any part of the quarterback’s body. This provision (ii)

does not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or the helmet in the course of a conventional block.

 

 

my guess is that the NFL defines assuming a  'distinctly defensive position' as a QB both 'in the vicinity' of the play and 'while pursuing the ball carrier', as backwards and strange as it sounds.

 

i say its a 'guess' because i havent found (yet) a provision that talks specifically about when its actually ok to block the QB. but it obviously has to be ok at some point, or the QB would be off limits at all times, even as hes tackling, or about to tackle, a ball carrier, which would be silly. 

 

has the nfl or troy vincent said anything more specific about why exactly they said its legal? kinda seems like they should. it would be nice for fans, as well as players, to know.

[MartinC]

 

article 8f makes it either murkier or clearer, depending on your perspective. 

 

 

 

my guess is that the NFL defines assuming a  'distinctly defensive position' as a QB both 'in the vicinity' of the play and 'while pursuing the ball carrier', as backwards and strange as it sounds.

 

i say its a 'guess' because i havent found (yet) a provision that talks specifically about when its actually ok to block the QB. but it obviously has to be ok at some point, or the QB would be off limits at all times, even as hes tackling, or about to tackle, a ball carrier, which would be silly. 

 

has the nfl or troy vincent said anything more specific about why exactly they said its legal? kinda seems like they should. it would be nice for fans, as well as players, to know.

 

 

Not heard any specifics yet and it all seems very subjective right now around when a QB 'takes defensive posture" - it all needs a re write if not a re think IMO.

[pointyfootball]

I'm biased, I know.  But if not illegal, it was a cheap shot by Baker.  Calling it both ways, I think Jenkins dive onto Djax early in the game was a cheap shot AND illegal, which I think the ref realized later when he threw the flag for shoving.

 

But, IMO, as a football fan, I don't think there's a place for hits like Baker on Foles.  I know everyone wants the league to not be "flag football", but the NFL is having enough trouble with injuries, and IMO, that hit defined "unnecessary roughness".

[Hersh]

I was just thinking about the play and the actual result of it. Basically the Redskins lost a NT and the Eagles lost their all-pro left tackle. and the down and distance didn't change, which I don't quite understand. If one is a live ball foul vs dead ball, after the play foul, but whatever on that one.

 

If someone gave Washington fans a scenario in return for Chris Baker not playing, neither would Justin Peters, is there anyone that wouldn't take that immediately? Didn't the Redskins actually get the best of that?

[grego]

I'm biased, I know.  But if not illegal, it was a cheap shot by Baker.  Calling it both ways, I think Jenkins dive onto Djax early in the game was a cheap shot AND illegal, which I think the ref realized later when he threw the flag for shoving.

 

But, IMO, as a football fan, I don't think there's a place for hits like Baker on Foles.  I know everyone wants the league to not be "flag football", but the NFL is having enough trouble with injuries, and IMO, that hit defined "unnecessary roughness".

 

is it because its on foles? or should all hits or blocks on any player- wr, rb, anyone- be included?

 

i actually understand what youre saying, but i dont know if we can start asking defensive players to hit players 'less hard', so long as its within the rules (as far as not helmet to helmet, etc). 

[TheGreek1973]

First play of the 2nd half, 15 yard pass to Maclin, well before the pass Hatcher gets past the center and what does the center do? He falls on top of him and lays there, no flag with the ref staring right at it.

 

2 plays later on 3rd down Kerrigan sacks foles but they call a BS holding on Robinson because he touched a receiver 2-3 yards from the LOS. Next play was the hold on Biggers on an uncatchable pass for 40ish yards. Then we stop them they get 3 pts off a bunch of BS calls.

 

I just have a feeling its not even worth looking more at the 2nd half. The fix was obviously in too bad Cousins couldn't make a single play on that last drive but I'm sure some kind of penalty would've been called lol.

SkinsFTW I can't agree with you more.  We got called for 131 yards in penalties 60 yards more than the Eagles.  On top of it a couple of the penalties against us were very crucial and very iffy.  Again how can a OL that is made up of 2nd and 3rd stringers keep their QB from getting sacked against a line that had 10 sacks the game before...and no the Jaguars starters can't be worse than the Eagles 3rd string RT, RG and LT (after the injection).  The probability of this happening with as many throws as Foles had is just about impossible.  Someone from the Redskins needs to take the tape and request this officiating crew, especially the ref never officiates another skins game.  This **** has got to stop.

[grego]

btw- danny rouhier on 106.7 is botching this- foles was not '10 yards away, minimum' at the time breeland went down. 

 

and grant is being unfair by saying 'the play was over' when its bang-bang. 

 

(of course he just said something different by saying foles was hit just as the play was ending, so i dont know what his point is)

 

still, one of these talking heads who does this for a living needs to know the facts. 

 

its not that hard to get facts.

[Burgold]

I was just thinking about the play and the actual result of it. Basically the Redskins lost a NT and the Eagles lost their all-pro left tackle. and the down and distance didn't change, which I don't quite understand. If one is a live ball foul vs dead ball, after the play foul, but whatever on that one.

 

If someone gave Washington fans a scenario in return for Chris Baker not playing, neither would Justin Peters, is there anyone that wouldn't take that immediately? Didn't the Redskins actually get the best of that?

No, because we have no back up NT and couldn't generate any pressure up the middle especially with Hatcher hobbled. Besides, since the refs determined that not only holding, but tackling our pass rushers was legal throughout the game what difference did having Peters out make for them?

[grego]

No, because we have no back up NT and couldn't generate any pressure up the middle especially with Hatcher hobbled. Besides, since the refs determined that not only holding, but tackling our pass rushers was legal throughout the game what difference did having Peters out make for them?

 

 

you would think having peters out of the game would benefit us greatly, but thats not how it played out. 

 

were the eagles o linemen called for any holds? i cant recall any. 

 

if not, thats a bit ridiculous. 

[TheGreek1973]

I'm biased, I know.  But if not illegal, it was a cheap shot by Baker.  Calling it both ways, I think Jenkins dive onto Djax early in the game was a cheap shot AND illegal, which I think the ref realized later when he threw the flag for shoving.

 

But, IMO, as a football fan, I don't think there's a place for hits like Baker on Foles.  I know everyone wants the league to not be "flag football", but the NFL is having enough trouble with injuries, and IMO, that hit defined "unnecessary roughness".

You want to see cheap shot AND ilegal? 

 

http://i.imgur.com/CBub86R.gif

 

Oh look, the complainers. 

[cakmoney61]

I owe Chris Baker an apology.  I thought the hit was unnecessary and a cheap shot, although he certainly could have hit Foles much harder than he did.  I thought the hit would fire up the Eagles.  I'm not sure if it did or not.  Regardless, I'm glad he won't be fined or suspended.

 

Oh yeah, add that to the list of bad penalties and ejection by the officials against the Redskins.

[Tarpon75]

I haven't read all the posts in this thread,so not sure if it was brought up earlier or not. There was a play early in the game where Cousins was blown up by an Eagle's defender after he released a pass. Defender's helmet clearly in the chinstrap,face mask area after KC released the ball,of course,no call. So many bad calls in this game, seems to happen almost every week.

[Rocky21]

I think "dirty" is a sliding scale.. Baker's hit was more dirty than the one Sapp leveled, and the only reason i make a distinction is because Sapp and Clifton had many a day brawling it out in the trenches, and I'm sure there was some payback in the hit for something deserved somewhere down the line. not the injury, mind you, but the chance to give him a good shot. Line play gets ugly, and most of it we never know about. 

 

 

I have to disagree on this one. Sapp put a guy in the hospital. He missed the rest of the season because of that hit. Baker knocked a guy down and he played the next down.

[emor09]

This is the hit that should've been penalized. Noticed every other player heard the whistle and stopped. 

 

[SkinsFTW]

you would think having peters out of the game would benefit us greatly, but thats not how it played out. 

 

were the eagles o linemen called for any holds? i cant recall any. 

 

if not, thats a bit ridiculous. 

 

There was one call on their OL for holding but heres the thing. Kerrigan sacked Foles on that play and the refs also called holding on Robinson who touched a receivers arm 2-3 yards from the LOS. So we lost the sack and the Eagles got a 3rd down mulligan, then the next play was the one where Foles overthrew their receiver but Biggers TOUCHED his arm as he was diving, not even close to what was fine and not called in most other games unless the fix was also in there too. So what would have been a Kerrigan sack and a punt turns into a 40+ yard penalty into a FG for them

 

Besides that ive seen everything from Kerrigan having a lineman climbing up his back and literally tackling him while Kerrigan is trying to drag down Foles but of course the QB got away and made a play. In the first Qtr Kerrigan gets between the TE and tackle and the TE pushes him from behind past foles onto the ground, easily would've been a sack but Foles throws it away, On the play with 20 seconds left in the half the Eagles still needed 40 yards and Maclin shoved D. Hall hard and comes back to where Foles hits him with the ball at the 15. No call. 2 plays later its a TD. Then early in the 3rd the play after Hall goes down Breeland gets called for a similar but lesser tap to Maclin which is of course an Eagles first. Basically the same thing Maclin did to Hall except Breeland if anything helped him get back to a ball he'd never have caught 2-3 yards behind him. Then Eagles can't convert again so Murphy gets called for roughing the passer on another BS call. It's basically impossible to stop that offense with these rules and OL being able to tackle. Then Aikman goes into a speel how well the Eagles have been moving the ball on our D in the 2nd half. Hilarious.

 

3rd Qtr Akeem Davis grabs Sproles facemask there was no call but apparently the refs heard the fans reaction so threw a flag but didn't even get the call right since NONE of them saw it. They gave him 15 yards unsportsmanlike for a horse collar. Kerry Williams rides Garcons back on what would've been a catch in the 3rd, no call of course. Next play 3rd-9 Cousins throws behind Grant so we punt. We don't get those calls to extend drives. Eagles were 4 of 11 on 3rd down in the game now imagine how many drives were extended by those calls that we didn't get. We were 8-15 on 3rd though. If we were getting similar calls  (but even just the legit calls) to what the Eagles were getting on BS like that Murphy almost sack, we'd have smoked the Eagles. They converted 4 first downs the entire game legitimately. I'd guess they got 6 for free from the refs.

 

I don't even know if I want to rewatch the 4th but I've got to the point where Cousins throws over the middle to Roberts on 3rd down and he's not paying attention and the ball goes over him as he's putting his arms up way too late so we punted. So Cousins hardly lost this game on his own. I'd say the refs, the special teams TD, the missed FG, then Cousins. If everything was perfect and refs were honest we'd have blown these fools out in Philly IMO. Even with an un-clutch Cousins.

[ILikeBilly]

This is the hit that should've been penalized. Noticed every other player heard the whistle and stopped. 

 

If I am not mistaken, this is the series where we missed the FG.  So, instead of going backwards, if they call this, we get a 1st down on an unsportsmanlike and have the ball around the 7 yard line.  Or, at the worst, we have off-setting penalties, play over.  But, we are 5 yards closer in and the FG goes thru and doesn't hit the upright.

[Bang]

I have to disagree on this one. Sapp put a guy in the hospital. He missed the rest of the season because of that hit. Baker knocked a guy down and he played the next down.

 

Well, yeah, the result was different, but the hit was similar. If Foles was 330 he may have gotten hurt in the fall as well.

 

~Bang

[Gallen5862]

http://www.bigbluevi...t-on-nick-foles

 

 

 

So, Eagles fans are complaining about a hit on Nick Foles
 

 

 

Apparently, they don't remember this cheap shot on Eli Manning a few seasons back.

[SkinsFTW]

If I am not mistaken, this is the series where we missed the FG.  So, instead of going backwards, if they call this, we get a 1st down on an unsportsmanlike and have the ball around the 7 yard line.  Or, at the worst, we have off-setting penalties, play over.  But, we are 5 yards closer in and the FG goes thru and doesn't hit the upright.

 

We had the ball on the 9 and late hit unsportsmanlike wouldve been 1/2 the distance to the goal first down and im sure that trumps delay of game but even if they knocked it back 5 for delay of game we'd have it first at the 7 after the auto first down.

 

http://www.bigbluevi...t-on-nick-foles

 

 

 

So, Eagles fans are complaining about a hit on Nick Foles

 

 

 

Apparently, they don't remember this cheap shot on Eli Manning a few seasons back.

 

 

Most Eagles fans wont remember last week, next week.

[pointyfootball]

You want to see cheap shot AND ilegal? 

 

http://i.imgur.com/CBub86R.gif

 

Oh look, the complainers. 

 

That was/is as well, agreed.  And, I'm not complaining.  My point was I think that is the definition of unnecessary roughness.  I have no doubt Baker did it to try and knock Foles out of the game which I despise, no matter the team.   

 

If you'll go back in my post history you will also see that I thought Jenkins hit on Djax was both as well, so although I'm an Eagle fan, I can call a spade a spade. 

[pointyfootball]

is it because its on foles? or should all hits or blocks on any player- wr, rb, anyone- be included?

 

i actually understand what youre saying, but i dont know if we can start asking defensive players to hit players 'less hard', so long as its within the rules (as far as not helmet to helmet, etc). 

 

I think QBs are the targeted players in these instances.  Even in high school football, if there was a turnover, our DL couldn't give a crap where the interceptor was, they found the QB and went & hit him. 

 

It's a very dangerous play for everyone though, just like blindside blocks by WR/TEs are. 

[Burgold]

Pointyfootball,

 

If you go to the other thread on this topic they posted the video of the hit.  Foles is moving in a direct line towards the interceptor Breeland.  He is about five yards away.  Given the speed that these guys go... heck, given the speed that I jog... he's between 1 and 2 seconds away from intersecting with the interceptor who is still running as Baker lays his block.  That block is from the front, not at the head, Baker doesn't launch, or do anything which isn't text book perfect.

 

Your guy got clobbered absolutely fairly and legally.

[pjfootballer]

Not to mention I think Baker held up a bit and didn't really hit him full force.