
|
11-11-2009
|
#1
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Jun 2009 |
Posts: | 418 |
|
NFL.COM Official Review w/ Mike Pereira - 2 plays
|
|
|
11-11-2009
|
#2
|
|
Surrealist
Years Donated 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
Joined: | Nov 2005 |
Posts: | 43,250 |
|
Why would he continually say it "might have made a difference" if he concedes that he would have put the tip of the ball to the tip of the beak and the first down marker was several inches past the beak. He should have come out and said he would have moved it but it still wouldn't have been a first down.
|
|
|
11-11-2009
|
#3
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Jun 2009 |
Posts: | 418 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by theogt
Why would he continually say it "might have made a difference" if he concedes that he would have put the tip of the ball to the tip of the beak and the first down marker was several inches past the beak. He should have come out and said he would have moved it but it still wouldn't have been a first down.
|
cause he is an idiot? 
|
|
|
11-11-2009
|
#4
|
|
Illegitimi non carborundum
Years Donated 2004, 2007, 2010
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Location: | Granbury, Texas |
Posts: | 9,084 |
|
On the McCoy challenge I think they should have actually moved the ball further back after the review. He actually got a favorable spot if you ask me.

mahalo nui loa, Juke
|
|
|
11-11-2009
|
#5
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | May 2009 |
Location: | Idaho |
Posts: | 4,729 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by theogt
Why would he continually say it "might have made a difference" if he concedes that he would have put the tip of the ball to the tip of the beak and the first down marker was several inches past the beak. He should have come out and said he would have moved it but it still wouldn't have been a first down.
|
I guess he's trying to say that if the ball was spotted closer to that tip of the logo it could have been a first down, but by judging where the sticks were at it would be really close.
Personally I think if the call was wrong than this is a wash on the non PI call on Samuel on RW. That hold was pretty blantant and if Samuel doesn't grab RW entire arm he makes the catch and it's TD. We can all agree the officiating was poor on both sides of the ball and that both sides got calls their way all night so to blame the refs is plain retarded.
|
|
|
11-11-2009
|
#6
|
|
Surrealist
Years Donated 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
Joined: | Nov 2005 |
Posts: | 43,250 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluestang
I guess he's trying to say that if the ball was spotted closer to that tip of the logo it could have been a first down, but by judging where the sticks were at it would be really close.
Personally I think if the call was wrong than this is a wash on the non PI call on Samuel on RW. That hold was pretty blantant and if Samuel doesn't grab RW entire arm he makes the catch and it's TD. We can all agree the officiating was poor on both sides of the ball and that both sides got calls their way all night so to blame the refs is plain retarded.
|
It was absolutely not a first down, so it doesn't matter. HD pictures confiirm.
|
|
|
11-11-2009
|
#7
|
|
Member
|
I think what he was trying to say was that yes the spot should have been changed but it probably wouldn't have been a first down anyway, however it would not have cost the Eagles a timeout. But I'm only speculating.
|
|
|
11-11-2009
|
#8
|
|
K9NME
Years Donated 2004, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Location: | Houston, TX |
Posts: | 10,274 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by theogt
It was absolutely not a first down, so it doesn't matter. HD pictures confiirm.
|

“Hit them in the mouth, bloody their nose, throw them to the ground and step on their throat!”--Brooking, Pregame Huddle 2009
|
|
|
11-11-2009
|
#9
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Posts: | 3,003 |
|
Everyone keeps talking about moving the ball to the tip of the beak but I can't see anything that proves he got the ball that far. The camera is not directly across from the play so there is distortion to to camera angle. That fact right there should preclude movement of the ball. Then there is the fact that you cannot see his left arm. His left wrist or elbow could have hit the ground before he lunged forward. I think there were right in not moving the ball because nonr of the video shows undisputable proof where the ball should be. Therefor it has to stay where they put it on the field.
|
|
|
11-11-2009
|
#10
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Posts: | 3,003 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by illhurtya
I think what he was trying to say was that yes the spot should have been changed but it probably wouldn't have been a first down anyway, however it would not have cost the Eagles a timeout. But I'm only speculating.
|
Yes, it would still have cost them a timeout. Even if they moved the ball, if it wasn't a first down, the eagles would have lost the challenge. I have seen that exact scenario in another game. It didn't make much sense to me but that is the rule. When you challenge it, you are saying it should be a first down. If it isn't, you lose the challenge.
|
|
|
11-12-2009
|
#11
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Posts: | 1,395 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by theogt
Why would he continually say it "might have made a difference" if he concedes that he would have put the tip of the ball to the tip of the beak and the first down marker was several inches past the beak. He should have come out and said he would have moved it but it still wouldn't have been a first down.
|
He said at the beginning that it appeared that the the first down sticks were a few inches past the beak. But, he was right not to say with absolute certainty that it wouldn't have been a first down, the pictures do seem to indicate it wouldn't have been, and he probably could have and maybe should have stated one more time, that it doesn't appear that it would have been a first down still. But without him actually spotting the ball exactly where he was going to, no one can say for 100% put your life on it, that it wouldn't have been a first down.
|
|
|
11-12-2009
|
#12
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Location: | Houston, Texas |
Posts: | 70,346 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeonDixson
On the McCoy challenge I think they should have actually moved the ball further back after the review. He actually got a favorable spot if you ask me.
|
I agree. His own momentum took him back a good yard to 2 yards shy of the 1st before James touched him.
|
|
|
11-12-2009
|
#13
|
|
That's my Quarterback
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Location: | On a horse |
Posts: | 2,882 |
|
I refuse to watch these clips anymore.
Has Pereira ever flat out admitted that a ref just simply f'ed up before?
He always defends them no matter how ridiculous the call is it seems.
|
|
|
11-12-2009
|
#14
|
|
Stay Thirsty, My Friends
Joined: | Feb 2006 |
Location: | El Paso, Texas |
Posts: | 5,163 |
|
This segment is always useless. They never address officials actually missing a call, and Pereira never straight out admits "we were wrong." Why don't they address the no PI call on Roy Williams? Or how about the phantom PI on Jason Witten? Or the 'illegal contact' on Mike Jenkins?
I'm happy he's retiring after this season. I hope the person that replaces him ends up being more accountable for their mistakes. I'd like to see Mike Carey or Ed Hochuli as VP of officiating.

__________________________________
Jason Garrett spit in the parking lot this morning... That spit knows more about football than any of us.
Last edited by CowboyMike : 11-12-2009 at 01:48 PM.
|
|
|
11-12-2009
|
#15
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Apr 2005 |
Posts: | 29,081 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboys22
Yes, it would still have cost them a timeout. Even if they moved the ball, if it wasn't a first down, the eagles would have lost the challenge. I have seen that exact scenario in another game. It didn't make much sense to me but that is the rule. When you challenge it, you are saying it should be a first down. If it isn't, you lose the challenge.
|
So what happens when there is a spot challenge that doesn't involve the team getting a 1st down or not?
Lets say its 4th and inches and the defense wants to challenge that the 3rd down play should have been downed earlier resulting in 4th and 1. What happens then if the challenge is successful?
Defense wins the challenge and the ball is moved but they are still charged a timeout?
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:53 AM.
|