I didn't see game: 2 things

LittleBoyBlue

Redvolution
Messages
35,766
Reaction score
8,411
1) Like everyone said, the throw was made just before the face mask/helmet hit. I'm sure Thornton's pressure helped cause the disastrous throw (out of the endzone...nobody had a play on it) but the hit to the helmet was on the follow-through. The PF should have been called, but whatever. :)

2) Theilen caught the punt at the 8, took a couple of steps, got stripped on the way down and before hitting the ground. But then the ball landed in his lap while he was laying one the ground. Minny thought play over at that point but in the scrum we got the ball as a play continuation, I suppose. I assume that even though the ball was in his lap with him lying on the ground, it was ruled he did not have full possession before losing it a second time.
Very tough call for Minny, but I kind of think the replay crew got in right in our favor.



Owed to us for Romo ;-)
 

Cowboy4ever

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,192
Reaction score
4,495
The hit to the head never happened because the False Start should have been called. It's not rocket science.
What planet is that accurate ? They should have called the play dead no question there BUT they didn't and the hit to the head should have been called . Its ok to say we got away with one there, which we did. Just because they missed one call doesn't mean that the other shouldn't be called
 

Clove

Shrinkage
Messages
64,955
Reaction score
27,581
What planet is that accurate ? They should have called the play dead no question there BUT they didn't and the hit to the head should have been called . Its ok to say we got away with one there, which we did. Just because they missed one call doesn't mean that the other shouldn't be called
You can't call one without the other pal. There was no personal foul because there WAS false start. Are you in 3rd grade?
 
Messages
10,145
Reaction score
7,365
CowboysZone DIEHARD Fan
a game of two travesties and one surprise:

1. Game hijacked by inconsistent over-officiating, rendering the most viewed Thursday Night game ever into an almost unwatchable embarrassment for the NFL.
2. The game's victors were mostly victimized until the very end where they were then awarded a 'tainted' win,,,, gee, thanks,,, I guess.
3. Surprise! No instant replay screw-ups. Even though the results were seemingly obvious there was room for loose interpretations of the rule book, ala Green Bay Dez catch...
 

robbieruff

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,709
Reaction score
5,108
The false start by Minny on the same play should also have been called. Should have been offsetting penalties and replayed from the same spot.
Right you are. Actually the play should've been blown dead with the false start and Vikes pushed back another 5 yards. Rt?
 

robbieruff

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,709
Reaction score
5,108
1) Like everyone said, the throw was made just before the face mask/helmet hit. I'm sure Thornton's pressure helped cause the disastrous throw (out of the endzone...nobody had a play on it) but the hit to the helmet was on the follow-through. The PF should have been called, but whatever. :)

2) Theilen caught the punt at the 8, took a couple of steps, got stripped on the way down and before hitting the ground. But then the ball landed in his lap while he was laying one the ground. Minny thought play over at that point but in the scrum we got the ball as a play continuation, I suppose. I assume that even though the ball was in his lap with him lying on the ground, it was ruled he did not have full possession before losing it a second time.
Very tough call for Minny, but I kind of think the replay crew got in right in our favor.
No kinda on #2. He clearly did not secure possession of the football.
 

robbieruff

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,709
Reaction score
5,108
Yeah. Even if called, half the distance to the goal line. So Minny runs a play from like the 3.5 yard line and it's no gimme they convert with that crap offense.
And what I'm tripping about is it was only for the tie. Media coverage acting like that play was equivalent to Dez catch or something. With never mentioning the missed false start on the same play. Smh. I called it karma for the lame calls we had go against us for much of the game.
 

robbieruff

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,709
Reaction score
5,108
That "hit to the head" or "facemask" whatever they are wanting it to be called... the funny thing is, if the roles would have been reversed the same people complaining about it would be saying "naw, they just need to let these guys play, incidental contact like that after the ball was thrown shouldn't effect the game."

I mean come on... he put his hands up to try and block the pass, his momentum came forward and his arm hit Bradford in the facemask. He didn't grab it, he didn't tug, he didn't even hit him with a enough force to knock Bradfords head around any... get over it. Hell, that's what we Cowboys fans have been told to do since that non-catch in Green Bay. Deal with it.
Exactly. Commentary you hear is as if the play took points off the board. Smh.
 

LandryFan

Proud Native Texan, USMC-1972-79, USN-1983-2000
Messages
7,400
Reaction score
6,347
Right you are. Actually the play should've been blown dead with the false start and Vikes pushed back another 5 yards. Rt?
Yes. I misspoke. Play should have been blown dead from the beginning.
 

mahoneybill

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,921
Reaction score
4,533
Great challenge by Garrett. I'm always critical of him, but that was a game changing call

He and his staff for seeing it. I saw a cowboy player with the ball, but never thought we had actually made a recovery, as many times an opposing players takes the ball away after the play is already dead.
 

jazzcat22

Staff member
Messages
81,837
Reaction score
102,997
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Actually, and this was said on NFLN or ESPN...if the officials would have blew the whistle on the false start, that play would not have counted. Heck even DLaw could have pulled up and not even had his hands up or got to Bradford.

So they get moved back another 5 yards. At worse, even if offsetting, a replay either way.

Also the ref was on the backside of the players, right where he was supposed to be, and his view was blocked. It happens.
 

Clove

Shrinkage
Messages
64,955
Reaction score
27,581
Wow. Might be the dumber thing I ever heard
Let's try this like you're a 4 year old. If one thing happens first, the other thing is invalid. With a false start, it cancel's out the play. Never mind, I'm talking to a wall here.
 

Cowboy4ever

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,192
Reaction score
4,495
Let's try this like you're a 4 year old. If one thing happens first, the other thing is invalid. With a false start, it cancel's out the play. Never mind, I'm talking to a wall here.
Only if they call it. Since they didn't call the false start, it has zero bearing on the rest of the play. To say they couldn't call the hands to the head because they didn't call the false start is beyond stupid
 

Clove

Shrinkage
Messages
64,955
Reaction score
27,581
Only if they call it. Since they didn't call the false start, it has zero bearing on the rest of the play. To say they couldn't call the hands to the head because they didn't call the false start is beyond stupid
You can't call ONE THING without calling the other man. If they missed the first thing, then nothing else matters.
 

Clove

Shrinkage
Messages
64,955
Reaction score
27,581
You can't say we got lucky, when they got lucky the false start wasn't called.
 

Cowboy4ever

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,192
Reaction score
4,495
You can't call ONE THING without calling the other man. If they missed the first thing, then nothing else matters.

So using that theory, since they didn't call the false start, someone could have piled drived bradford and they couldn't call it?? That's just insane and totally irrational. They could have called the hit to the head and they should have. They should have called the false start, I agree, but they didn't but that has nothing to do with them not calling the hands to the face on the QB. They missed both calls and yes both teams got lucky.. they were lucky they missed the false start and we were lucky they missed the hit to the head.
 

Clove

Shrinkage
Messages
64,955
Reaction score
27,581
So using that theory, since they didn't call the false start, someone could have piled drived bradford and they couldn't call it?? That's just insane and totally irrational. They could have called the hit to the head and they should have. They should have called the false start, I agree, but they didn't but that has nothing to do with them not calling the hands to the face on the QB. They missed both calls and yes both teams got lucky.. they were lucky they missed the false start and we were lucky they missed the hit to the head.
They were lucky they missed the false start. That's the end of it.
 

Clove

Shrinkage
Messages
64,955
Reaction score
27,581
It's like saying, I hit the car because I ran the light. If you didn't run the light, there would be no accident.
 
Top