How was that not interference on Turpin (running into punt receiver)?

[HungryLion]

ok so based on some of the responses in this thread. Fassell should coach cowboys players to grab blockers by the face and push them into the punt returner. Then as soon as the blocker touches the punt returner, kick the returner in the nuts and knock them to the ground, which is now legal because his own player touched him first.

Ok Fassell. Get on it

 

[droopdog7]

Any official definition of what a “passive” player is?

The defender hit Turpin so it doesn’t matter. I’d just like to know if the ref missed two fouls

I’ll give you examples. Very often on a punt, you see the ball roll. Sometimes members of the receiving team is watching the ball too. That is a passive player. You cannot push him into the ball to cause a muff. Same applies during any part of the punt. If a guy calls a fair catch, a guy might stop blocking or might stand near the receiver in case he drops it. That is a passive player.

The refs do not judge who is doing what. Guys were blocking each other and stuff happened. Next time get out of the way.

 

[lopey]

I think the key words are passive player. Tolbert was blocking. I have no explanation for the hands to the face. Thats a penalty

 

[Praxit]

...I will never get that part. Only REFS throwing shade on Dallas game.

It was clear defender blocked Dallas player INTO Turps. It was on the screen.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I think the key words are passive player. Tolbert was blocking. I have no explanation for the hands to the face. Thats a penalty

Okay for the sake of argument let's say you are right. Now justify the clear hands to the face.

 

[Calvin2Tony2Emmitt2Julius]

They tried to Give us the bidness, plain and simple. They did everything to steal this game from us. This was just one of many calls that were utter BS

 

[RonnieT24]

Three things actually happened on that play that should give the ball to the Cowboys.

1) the tackler pushed the Cowboys blocker into the returner
2) the tackler also hit the returner himself with his arm and knee
3) a tackler pushed Tolbert into the ball before he touched it

Any one of those three should cause the ball to remain with Dallas so all 3 should have definitely done it.

You missed the hands to the face of Tolbert before the first impact as well. The refs' ability to miss not one, not two, not three, but FOUR fouls on the Chargers on a single play led me to believe the fix was in. Somebody needed the Chargers to at least cover or even win outright. It's the only explanation that makes sense. I mean the end zone no call against Gallup with the guy pulling his jersey out a good two feet for all the world to see .. Even if you don't call PI how is it not at least illegal contact and automatic first down?

 

[RonnieT24]

Okay for the sake of argument let's say you are right. Now justify the clear hands to the face.

That whole sequence reeked of Vegas influence. The Cowboys were about to get the ball with a 7 point lead and momentum. If they go down and even kick a FG it's game over. Vegas needed some of that Chargers cover money to come over to their side.

 

[lopey]

Okay for the sake of argument let's say you are right. Now justify the clear hands to the face.

I cant as i stated in original post. Hands to face should of been a penalty’s

 

[Runwildboys]

I'm watching the game again, and I just noticed that Tolbert was pushed to the ball from behind. Wouldn't that also be illegal?

 

[Bagman]

Tolbert is to blame. He needs to get out of the way or stand his ground like a man.

The refs need to act like men and call the appropriate hands to the face penalty when they occur

 

[Romo_To_Dez]

Question for NFL if they say it's not a penalty, if it isn't kick catch interference then why don't all special teams coaches start instructing their players to push a opposing player into his teammate who is trying to catch the ball on punts and kickoffs?

 

[BaybeeJay]

I feel like this is a loophole that this SP coach is exploiting. It's clearly coached -- the gunner was ahead of our player, then as he got closer he slowed down to allow our player to get in front of him. He then engaged him, causing Turpin to fall over.

 

[MarcusRock]

I'm watching the game again, and I just noticed that Tolbert was pushed to the ball from behind. Wouldn't that also be illegal?

No. There is an exception when a loose ball is at play which is the case on a punt that can either be fielded by the receiving team or downed by the kicking team.

RULE 3 DEFINITIONS​

SECTION 4 BLOCKING​

Blocking is the act of obstructing or impeding an opponent by contacting him with a part of the blocker’s body.​

​

A Block in the Back is a block that is delivered from behind an opponent above his waist. It is not a block in the back:​

(a) if a player is making a personal attempt to recover a loose ball;​

(b) if the opponent turns away from the blocker when contact is imminent;​

(c) if both of the blocker’s hands are on the opponent’s side. (If either hand is on the back, it is a foul.)​

 

[nalam]

I cant as i stated in original post. Hands to face should of been a penalty’s

When they reviewed the whole thing they could have seen the hands to face . But I think they only can judge on the possession of ball , but the ref standing in the vicinity of Turpin how he could miss the hands to the face and Tolbert being pushed into Turpin ? Why didn’t he throw the flag ?

 

[RonnieT24]

I'm watching the game again, and I just noticed that Tolbert was pushed to the ball from behind. Wouldn't that also be illegal?

Yes it is..

 

[kskboys]

You missed the hands to the face of Tolbert before the first impact as well. The refs' ability to miss not one, not two, not three, but FOUR fouls on the Chargers on a single play led me to believe the fix was in. Somebody needed the Chargers to at least cover or even win outright. It's the only explanation that makes sense. I mean the end zone no call against Gallup with the guy pulling his jersey out a good two feet for all the world to see .. Even if you don't call PI how is it not at least illegal contact and automatic first down?

Keep games close. That is the fix. I noticed it several seasons ago.

 

[Runwildboys]

No. There is an exception when a loose ball is at play which is the case on a punt that can either be fielded by the receiving team or downed by the kicking team.

RULE 3 DEFINITIONS​

SECTION 4 BLOCKING​

Blocking is the act of obstructing or impeding an opponent by contacting him with a part of the blocker’s body.​

​

A Block in the Back is a block that is delivered from behind an opponent above his waist. It is not a block in the back:​

(a) if a player is making a personal attempt to recover a loose ball;​

(b) if the opponent turns away from the blocker when contact is imminent;​

(c) if both of the blocker’s hands are on the opponent’s side. (If either hand is on the back, it is a foul.)​

Does it count as a loose ball if a Cowboy hadn't touched it yet? I feel like that's pertaining to a fumble.

 

[MarcusRock]

Yes it is..

Quote the rule.

 

[plymkr]

Three things actually happened on that play that should give the ball to the Cowboys.

1) the tackler pushed the Cowboys blocker into the returner
2) the tackler also hit the returner himself with his arm and knee
3) a tackler pushed Tolbert into the ball before he touched it

Any one of those three should cause the ball to remain with Dallas so all 3 should have definitely done it.

The tackler also had a firm grip on Tolbert’s face mask. How was that not called? I saw that and I thought, “man I hope I find a woman that holds me the way he held Tolbert’s facemask “.