How was the kicking play at the end of the

[rojan]

game aloud to be challanged.......I dont understand, it was a refs call, i didnt knownyou could challange that....I would of challanged like 4 false starts Vs. the Skins

 

[Ashwynn]

If it was inside 2 minutes, only the booth can initiate a review.

 

[rojan]

Ya i know but I though that the play wasnt a reviewable play like a fumble or a false start

 

[EMMITTnROY]

I was wondering this too because you can't review a penalty.. Ive always said that you should be able too.. bad penalty calls can decide a game just as much as a bad play call.. anyways, Im guessing that if they decided that he did touch the ball, then the penalty never should have been called.. but I didnt think that was possible to do either, to get rid of any penalty because of a review..

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

It was reviewable because it was against the Cowboys

 

[rojan]

It was reviewable because it was against the Cowboys

Makes sence

 

[theogt]

Think about it this way. If an offensive player fumbles and the defense recovers and is then called for an illegal block or holding, AND THEN the offense (or the booth for that matter) reviews whether the play was a fumble or not, they're not actually reviewing the holding call. They're reviewing the fumble. In this case they were reviewing whether or not there was a tip. I take that if the ball was touched you can't have a roughing the kicker call. In any event, that is a ridiculous rule. It should be the case that a roughing the kicker penalty would be negated ONLY AFTER someone is attempting to recover the ball.

 

[JackMagist]

The play was reviewable because it concerned whether or not the Panthers players had touched the ball. So the review was to see if the ball had been touched by the guys who did the roughing. Had they gotten a hand on the ball then it would not have been roughing but since they did not touch it it was roughing; it is a strange rule but that is the way it reads.

 

[silver]

I didn't think it was reviewable either. I'm glad I'm not the only one out there, I though I was going beserk. I agree that they shouldn't have reviewed it. Fox had to call a time out and all which eventually cost him. And then the replays don't show that the ball was tipped yet everybody including Jimmy said that it was tipped. I hate the bias against the Boys. It's nauseating.

 

[big dog cowboy]

It was reviewable because it was against the Cowboys

 

[cowboyfan4life_mark]

The play was reviewable because it concerned whether or not the Panthers players had touched the ball. So the review was to see if the ball had been touched by the guys who did the roughing. Had they gotten a hand on the ball then it would not have been roughing but since they did not touch it it was roughing; it is a strange rule but that is the way it reads.

Bingo!!

If a player touches the ball first, then there can't be a roughing the kicker or punter penalty. Only the person blocking the ball can be the one that touched the kicker.

 

[Kevinicus]

The same thing applies to pass interfernce calls. They can review to see if the ball has been tipped. It has happened before. Don't know what the big deal is. I think they should be allowed to review a whole lot more, but this is definately something that can and should be reviewable.

 

[Tuna Helper]

It was reviewable because it was against the Cowboys

Bite thy tongue! The play occurred within 2 minutes, meaning that the booth, and only the booth can initiate the review (not John Fox). Were it not within 2 minutes, John Fox could have thrown the red panties on the field for a review.

To have a play reviewed within 2 minutes by the booth...that occurs to all NFL teams, not just the Cowboys.

To have a coach call a timeout and jump, scream, and shout to have a play reviewed within 2 minutes...and to actually have his wishes granted? Well, that only occurs if the coach is playing against the Cowboys.