Cowboys vs. Refs

[xwalker]

This would be a great point if I, in fact, was arguing that the Free play was definitely a hold. Except I haven't argued that. Why? Because I don't remember the play exactly, ergo, why I asked people to remind me of the Free play.

Other than that, great point.

Escobar penalties?

 

[BourbonBalz]

Question, on that would-be 1st down catch to Witten that was called back because of the holding call on Elliott....was that a legit call?

Yes, it was. The one on Free when Zeke had a 40+ yard run not so much.

 

[Sydla]

Escobar penalties?

Ummmmm............. I said the Escobar clip was a tough and questionable call. Do you need a refresher here?

- The hold on Elliott was legit
- The hands to the face on Scandrick was a tough call but by the letter of the rule, it was a penalty
- The clip on Escobar was a reach by the refs.
- The hold on Escobar was a solid call. He had a fistful of jersey and when Robison went to disengage and spin, he couldn't because Escobar was clearly grabbing him. I have little doubt that if Asiata busted a big run and Rudolph did the same thing to Lawrence, you'd have been screaming to high heaven.
- Based on the clip on twitter I just saw, the Free hold was indeed a bad call.

Further, here is my opinion on officiating so you don't mischaracterize me there as well.

- NFL officiating is inconsistent
- NFL officiating can be terribly bad at times
- NFL officiating crews are not making calls to affect the outcomes of games

 

[Cowboy4ever]

The call on Scandrick was legit. His hand was on the ear piece and neck area of Rudolph. If you read the illegal hands to the face rule, that's a penalty. It specifies the face, NECK and HEAD area. So yeah, that's technically illegal hands to the face.

The problem I have with that call is that the Player, moved OS arm up to his head. It was not that Scandrick made a bad play, the other player forced his arm up which is what caused the contact to the head area. It should have been a no call.

 

[sweetness0986]

I get frustrated from time to time on bad calls/non calls, not only during Cowboys games but other NFL games as well. But this game was really bad. The part I was most irritated at honestly was the refs not even acknowledging the possibility of a fumble on that kick return until Garrett brought it up. Really? You have a possible change of possession and the game goes on like nothing happened?

On another note, does anyone have video of some of the questionable calls? Specifically the Free hold and Scandrick hands to face?

 

[Sydla]

The problem I have with that call is that the Player, moved OS arm up to his head. It was not that Scandrick made a bad play, the other player forced his arm up which is what caused the contact to the head area. It should have been a no call.

Rudolph's head was pushed back though. So Rudolph indeed moved Sandrick's arm up there, Scandrick still pushed pretty hard to on the side of the neck, helmet to get the call.

 

[Sydla]

I get frustrated from time to time on bad calls/non calls, not only during Cowboys games but other NFL games as well. But this game was really bad. The part I was most irritated at honestly was the refs not even acknowledging the possibility of a fumble on that kick return until Garrett brought it up. Really? You have a possible change of possession and the game goes on like nothing happened?

On another note, does anyone have video of some of the questionable calls? Specifically the Free hold and Scandrick hands to face?

They ruled him down on the field and that the ball came out after his knee was down. Why would they acknowledge that he "may" have fumbled? That's why coaches have challenges.

 

[DogFace]

You clearly don't understand what is or isn't holding according to NFL rules.

The called that because at the end the defender pushed himself up to Free and pretented to be getting held.

They

 

[sweetness0986]

They ruled him down on the field and that the ball came out after his knee was down. Why would they acknowledge that he "may" have fumbled? That's why coaches have challenges.

Because it's their job to get calls like that right. You have a ball that is out before he hits the ground with the ref standing in clear view 5 yards away. Why WOULDN'T a ref acknowledge that?

 

[DogFace]

I don't think some of you see very well. Their were, and have been for 3 games, some horrible calls against the Cowboys. Last night they many were momentum killers. The hands to the face on Scandrick was absurd. Holds are obviously always debatable. Some in this game were very questionable at best.

How many holds have been called against our opposition the last 3 games? Seems like very few.

 

[CWR]

The same crew were refs during the Washington game. I feel some of these refs are just plain biased. Thus they call any tickytack foul on the Cowboys on every single big play, kill our momentum.

Yep and it doesnt have to be some crazy far fetched conspiracy theory to believe some refs are biased. Refs are also fans. Wed all like to believe they are professionals first but its naive not to consider this as a possibility. All it has to do is factor in as a tie breaker on wether or not to throw a flag on a questionable call. All those arguing about the human element need to consider this is a part of the human element.

 

[Plankton]

Question, on that would-be 1st down catch to Witten that was called back because of the holding call on Elliott....was that a legit call?

Yes. Hunter would have hit or sacked Prescott had Elliott not grabbed him around the waist.

 

[Doomsday101]

People can complain about some of the calls including a call that went Dallas way. Bradford was clearly hit in the head on the 2 point conversion but was not called. Refs will miss calls it happens just as players are human and make mistakes so will refs. No one is out to get the Cowboys, the refs not against the Cowboys.

 

[Sydla]

Because it's their job to get calls like that right. You have a ball that is out before he hits the ground with the ref standing in clear view 5 yards away. Why WOULDN'T a ref acknowledge that?

Because the ref ruled that the guy's knee was down when he lost the ball. If the ref closest to the play rules he was down, the crew isn't then going to acknowledge he may have fumbled. It's then up to the coaching staff of any team to then decide if they want to challenge.

What does that even mean, "acknowledge he may have fumbled"? Should the ref announce over the loudspeaker, "The ruling on the field he is down, but he may have fumbled, so hey Dallas, if you want to challenge, now is the time."

I mean using your logic, they should acknowledge something did or did not happen on every turnover, sack, penalty, etc.

 

[DFWJC]

Bradford is so awful. Dink and dunk his whole career

In this case though, they really have little choice. That oline is almost entirely made of backups at this point. Even our joke of a pass rush was getting pressure if he didn't get rid of it in 2 seconds.

 

[Melonfeud]

Refs forgot their blind hatred of the Cowboys when they awarded that fumble to the Cowboys inside the 10.

Huh? It WAS BEGRUDGINGLY AWARDED only cuz the GARRETT pried it outta there basement of b.s. with a sledgehammer and crow bar.

 

[sweetness0986]

Because the ref ruled that the guy's knee was down when he lost the ball. If the ref closest to the play rules he was down, the crew isn't then going to acknowledge he may have fumbled. It's then up to the coaching staff of any team to then decide if they want to challenge.

I mean using your logic, they should acknowledge something did or did not happen on every turnover, sack, penalty, etc.

When did the ref rule the knee was down? When did he acknowledge that? I didn't see that happen.

That is not my logic at all.

 

[Denim Chicken]

Can anyone GIF that Free hold? I'd like to see it again.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Because it's their job to get calls like that right. You have a ball that is out before he hits the ground with the ref standing in clear view 5 yards away. Why WOULDN'T a ref acknowledge that?

And if the same play happened but the teams reversed we'd have a 20 page thread of how the refs only reviewed the play so they could take a turnover away from Dallas.

 

[Sydla]

When did the ref rule the knee was down? When did he acknowledge the ball came out? I didn't see that happen.

That is not my logic at all.

When they spotted the ball at the 8 yard line and signaled it was Minnesota's ball.

You are making this far more difficult than it needs to be.