My meaningless thoughts on the game...

[AdamJT13]

If I read the rule you posted correctly, it does leave some grey area in there. It reads to me if you use the helmet almost like weapon (raming, head butt, or spear) it is a penalty. It does not say that any helmet to helmet contact on a defenseless player is a penalty. If that was the case, I would think the rule would clearly say that vs. leaving it up to interpretation. At least that is the way I read the rule, but I'm not an NFL official.

As the rule I posted mentions, it's explained further in the roughing-the-passer rule regarding use of the helmet and facemask --

"A defensive player must not use his facemask or other part of his helmet against a passer who is in a virtually defenseless posture—for example, (a) forcibly hitting the passer’s head, neck, or face with the helmet or facemask, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the passer by encircling or grasping him, or ..."

 

[mwj473]

As the rule I posted mentions, it's explained further in the roughing-the-passer rule regarding use of the helmet and facemask --

"A defensive player must not use his facemask or other part of his helmet against a passer who is in a virtually defenseless posture—for example, (a) forcibly hitting the passer’s head, neck, or face with the helmet or facemask, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the passer by encircling or grasping him, or ..."

That's against a QB. I think the rule you posted talks about the punt returner correctly. It just seems to have some grey area in the way ir reads.

...nevermind, I see what you are saying. I don't think the defender was was trying to use his helmet, it just happened.

 

[joseephuss]

I have watched the replays of the Burnett INT and I don't see any conclusive evidence that Harrison and Burnett touched. In my homer eyes, it looks like Roy was the one who touched Burnett. In my objective eyes, the call would not have been overturned due to lack of evidence.

The Fasano play is reviewable due to a new rule this year. A new rule that I said was dumb at the time it was approved and still think is dumb. The reason I think it is dumb is that the whistle no longer stops play in these types of situations. That can lead to injuries. The whistle blows and some guys stop playing and some guys go for a loose ball. It is only a matter of time that someone get hurt because they get hit by another player going for what may or may not be ruled a fumble. Witten appeared to go after the ball initially on that play. He came running by and then pulled up. I was glad Dungy challenged the play because it burned one of their time outs.

 

[CooterBrown]

I have watched the replays of the Burnett INT and I don't see any conclusive evidence that Harrison and Burnett touched. In my homer eyes, it looks like Roy was the one who touched Burnett. In my objective eyes, the call would not have been overturned due to lack of evidence.

The Fasano play is reviewable due to a new rule this year. A new rule that I said was dumb at the time it was approved and still think is dumb. The reason I think it is dumb is that the whistle no longer stops play in these types of situations. That can lead to injuries. The whistle blows and some guys stop playing and some guys go for a loose ball. It is only a matter of time that someone get hurt because they get hit by another player going for what may or may not be ruled a fumble. Witten appeared to go after the ball initially on that play. He came running by and then pulled up. I was glad Dungy challenged the play because it burned one of their time outs.

The way it was explained by the NFL's VP of officiating, when there is a ruling of "down by contact" and the defending team challenges the call, the first determining factor is whether the ball was out prior to the whistle. IF the ball was out prior to the whistle, then they determine if it was clearly recovered by the challenging team. In this case, the whistle had clearly blown prior to the ball coming out so the was no fumble, even if he had not been touched.

As far as Burnett's INT, I don't think he had possession of the ball until after he had been hit, regardless of who hit him. I believe the contact has to come after you have possession of the ball in order for you to be ruled "down by contact".

 

[Doomsday]

I have watched the replays of the Burnett INT and I don't see any conclusive evidence that Harrison and Burnett touched. In my homer eyes, it looks like Roy was the one who touched Burnett. In my objective eyes, the call would not have been overturned due to lack of evidence.

The Fasano play is reviewable due to a new rule this year. A new rule that I said was dumb at the time it was approved and still think is dumb. The reason I think it is dumb is that the whistle no longer stops play in these types of situations. That can lead to injuries. The whistle blows and some guys stop playing and some guys go for a loose ball. It is only a matter of time that someone get hurt because they get hit by another player going for what may or may not be ruled a fumble. Witten appeared to go after the ball initially on that play. He came running by and then pulled up. I was glad Dungy challenged the play because it burned one of their time outs.

I know there is a knew rule I just dont think that type of play should fall under that rule. Its dumb like you said. There is a difference between a running back being tackled having the ball pop out and a guy hearing a whistle signaling the end of a play and throwing the ball down. It makes no sense. When exactly are players suppose to stop playing if the whistle doesnt mean nothing?

It was a great challenge by Dungy because they were going to have to use a time out to stop the clock anyway but it should not of been reviewable in my opinion.

 

[alancdc]

Then i'm the 3rd. I rewatched the game and still don't see the contact. It says a lot to me that this is the best excuse people (Collinsworth) can come up with why they lost.

Honestly I couldn't tell if he touched him or not. I don't see how any of us could tell one way or the other.

 

[dfense]

Very nice post, YR.


Yeah, that Spears bump of Manning was amazing.

That isn't a foul even in touch football.

Toward the end of the game, they called a 15 yard face mask against the Colts for a brief touch of MBIII's head gear. Well, at least the refs are being consistent - so that's good. But I gotta say, I don't think there is a 5-yard facemask penalty anymore. Everything is 15.

--------------------

I was both awed by and in love with the aggressive offensive playcalling by the Cowboys at the end of the game.

Parcells earned his paycheck this week - no doubt about it.

Any smart coach is going to tell a player; If his hand touches your facemask, turn your head around and read the name on your jersey. It'll get the extra 5 yards every time.