AlexGreen#20 Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 19 minutes ago, theuntouchable said: You were saying? Which of these posts is in reference to the second play? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenrik Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 19 minutes ago, theuntouchable said: You were saying? I think in these quotes he was referring to the first call. That last quote with the photo is the 1st call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theuntouchable Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 6 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Which of these posts is in reference to the second play? Edited the post to give you the references Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theuntouchable Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Kenrik said: I think in these quotes he was referring to the first call. That last quote with the photo is the 1st call. That photo is from the 2nd call. someone had posted a video to the 2nd call and his response was that he didn’t even think that one was flagged. several general statements about hand placement. Edited October 15, 2019 by theuntouchable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matts4313 Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffee & Contemplation Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Damikeeeee said: Ummm no. Just no Seriously? You think that was pass interference? The ball is in the receivers hands and then he gets forcefully contacted by the defender, or at worst they happen simultaneously. That's not pass interference, it's a pass breakup (and not even a very good one). You're not allowed to do much as a defender anymore, but you are still allowed to touch receivers and contest passes. Defenders don't just have to play the ball. Edited October 15, 2019 by Coffee & Contemplation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 31 minutes ago, Matts4313 said: Thank God. They owed us after we went 28th according to their metric last year. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damikeeeee Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 32 minutes ago, Coffee & Contemplation said: Seriously? You think that was pass interference? The ball is in the receivers hands and then he gets forcefully contacted by the defender, or at worst they happen simultaneously. That's not pass interference, it's a pass breakup (and not even a very good one). You're not allowed to do much as a defender anymore, but you are still allowed to touch receivers and contest passes. Defenders don't just have to play the ball. 😂😂😂😂 Just stop. With that view you can't ever see his hand NOT on the face time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40Year Pack Fan Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 1 hour ago, theuntouchable said: He’s already stated he didn’t think it should have been overturned. I figured it wouldn't get overturned.....When they went to the break, I said to myself there wasn't enough evidence to change the call... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainmaker90 Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 I can’t believe Booger McFarland’s on air tantrum is sparking this debate... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Reed Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 2 minutes ago, Rainmaker90 said: I can’t believe Booger McFarland’s on air tantrum is sparking this debate... It's not. People with eyeballs watching the game last night is sparking this debate. And i root for the Packers in the NFC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainmaker90 Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 10 minutes ago, Ray Reed said: It's not. People with eyeballs watching the game last night is sparking this debate. And i root for the Packers in the NFC. Bad calls/ no calls happen in literally every game. Detroit kicked 5 FGs. Finish the drive and score TDs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChazStandard Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 2 hours ago, LeotheLion said: Does anyone think the Tracy Walker penalty was a bad call? I get that Walker is in a horrible situation but that to me was an easy defenseless receiver call. I've seen it referenced as a bad call and I just don't see it. I hate the call for defenceless receiver when its clearly unintentional because it’s just not fair. He was making a play on the ball, as was the WR. Any helmet to helmet contact is just as risky for him as the WR, but the DB can be penalised for it when the WR can’t. That’s not right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onizuka Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 40 minutes ago, Rainmaker90 said: Bad calls/ no calls happen in literally every game. Detroit kicked 5 FGs. Finish the drive and score TDs. This makes no sense and I'm not sure why posters think this is such a good defense. An offense was held to FG's due to it becoming more difficult to move the ball in the redzone and they get criticized because they didn't score TDs. Yes, they should have prob scored another TD or two, but that has ZERO meaning when the Refs are the reason why two of the Packers drive didn't end in a punt instead of a TD and the game winning FG in the 2nd half. I'm sure the Lions would have loved a fresh set of downs instead of being forced to kick two of those field goals. Basically, it's like giving the Packers defense credit for holding the Lions offense to FGs while ignoring the fact that the Lions defense did the same thing to the Packers offense, but instead got phantom calls against them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeotheLion Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 14 minutes ago, ChazStandard said: I hate the call for defenceless receiver when its clearly unintentional because it’s just not fair. He was making a play on the ball, as was the WR. Any helmet to helmet contact is just as risky for him as the WR, but the DB can be penalised for it when the WR can’t. That’s not right. But you'd agree it's a good interpretation of the rule? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.