NFL.COM Official Review w/ Mike Pereira - 2 plays

[tchoice23]

I searched and couldn't find any threads about this.


McCoy Play Around 5 min mark - http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d8142045a/Official-Review-Week-9

McNabb qb Sneak - http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-netwo...14206ab/Official-Review-Week-9-bonus-coverage

 

[theogt]

Why would he continually say it "might have made a difference" if he concedes that he would have put the tip of the ball to the tip of the beak and the first down marker was several inches past the beak. He should have come out and said he would have moved it but it still wouldn't have been a first down.

 

[tchoice23]

Why would he continually say it "might have made a difference" if he concedes that he would have put the tip of the ball to the tip of the beak and the first down marker was several inches past the beak. He should have come out and said he would have moved it but it still wouldn't have been a first down.

cause he is an idiot?:grrr:

 

[LeonDixson]

On the McCoy challenge I think they should have actually moved the ball further back after the review. He actually got a favorable spot if you ask me.

 

[Bluestang]

Why would he continually say it "might have made a difference" if he concedes that he would have put the tip of the ball to the tip of the beak and the first down marker was several inches past the beak. He should have come out and said he would have moved it but it still wouldn't have been a first down.

I guess he's trying to say that if the ball was spotted closer to that tip of the logo it could have been a first down, but by judging where the sticks were at it would be really close.

Personally I think if the call was wrong than this is a wash on the non PI call on Samuel on RW. That hold was pretty blantant and if Samuel doesn't grab RW entire arm he makes the catch and it's TD. We can all agree the officiating was poor on both sides of the ball and that both sides got calls their way all night so to blame the refs is plain ********.

 

[theogt]

I guess he's trying to say that if the ball was spotted closer to that tip of the logo it could have been a first down, but by judging where the sticks were at it would be really close.

Personally I think if the call was wrong than this is a wash on the non PI call on Samuel on RW. That hold was pretty blantant and if Samuel doesn't grab RW entire arm he makes the catch and it's TD. We can all agree the officiating was poor on both sides of the ball and that both sides got calls their way all night so to blame the refs is plain ********.

It was absolutely not a first down, so it doesn't matter. HD pictures confiirm.

 

[illhurtya]

I think what he was trying to say was that yes the spot should have been changed but it probably wouldn't have been a first down anyway, however it would not have cost the Eagles a timeout. But I'm only speculating.

 

[adbutcher]

It was absolutely not a first down, so it doesn't matter. HD pictures confiirm.

 

[Cowboys22]

Everyone keeps talking about moving the ball to the tip of the beak but I can't see anything that proves he got the ball that far. The camera is not directly across from the play so there is distortion to to camera angle. That fact right there should preclude movement of the ball. Then there is the fact that you cannot see his left arm. His left wrist or elbow could have hit the ground before he lunged forward. I think there were right in not moving the ball because nonr of the video shows undisputable proof where the ball should be. Therefor it has to stay where they put it on the field.

 

[Cowboys22]

I think what he was trying to say was that yes the spot should have been changed but it probably wouldn't have been a first down anyway, however it would not have cost the Eagles a timeout. But I'm only speculating.

Yes, it would still have cost them a timeout. Even if they moved the ball, if it wasn't a first down, the eagles would have lost the challenge. I have seen that exact scenario in another game. It didn't make much sense to me but that is the rule. When you challenge it, you are saying it should be a first down. If it isn't, you lose the challenge.

 

[SMCowboy]

Why would he continually say it "might have made a difference" if he concedes that he would have put the tip of the ball to the tip of the beak and the first down marker was several inches past the beak. He should have come out and said he would have moved it but it still wouldn't have been a first down.

He said at the beginning that it appeared that the the first down sticks were a few inches past the beak. But, he was right not to say with absolute certainty that it wouldn't have been a first down, the pictures do seem to indicate it wouldn't have been, and he probably could have and maybe should have stated one more time, that it doesn't appear that it would have been a first down still. But without him actually spotting the ball exactly where he was going to, no one can say for 100% put your life on it, that it wouldn't have been a first down.

 

[Doomsday101]

On the McCoy challenge I think they should have actually moved the ball further back after the review. He actually got a favorable spot if you ask me.

I agree. His own momentum took him back a good yard to 2 yards shy of the 1st before James touched him.

 

[JBell]

I refuse to watch these clips anymore.

Has Pereira ever flat out admitted that a ref just simply f'ed up before?



He always defends them no matter how ridiculous the call is it seems.

 

[CowboyMike]

This segment is always useless. They never address officials actually missing a call, and Pereira never straight out admits "we were wrong." Why don't they address the no PI call on Roy Williams? Or how about the phantom PI on Jason Witten? Or the 'illegal contact' on Mike Jenkins?

I'm happy he's retiring after this season. I hope the person that replaces him ends up being more accountable for their mistakes. I'd like to see Mike Carey or Ed Hochuli as VP of officiating.

 

[Hoofbite]

Yes, it would still have cost them a timeout. Even if they moved the ball, if it wasn't a first down, the eagles would have lost the challenge. I have seen that exact scenario in another game. It didn't make much sense to me but that is the rule. When you challenge it, you are saying it should be a first down. If it isn't, you lose the challenge.

So what happens when there is a spot challenge that doesn't involve the team getting a 1st down or not?

Lets say its 4th and inches and the defense wants to challenge that the 3rd down play should have been downed earlier resulting in 4th and 1. What happens then if the challenge is successful?

Defense wins the challenge and the ball is moved but they are still charged a timeout?

 

[tchoice23]

So what happens when there is a spot challenge that doesn't involve the team getting a 1st down or not?

Lets say its 4th and inches and the defense wants to challenge that the 3rd down play should have been downed earlier resulting in 4th and 1. What happens then if the challenge is successful?

Defense wins the challenge and the ball is moved but they are still charged a timeout?

Not challenge-able UNLESS they challenge him being out of bounds before the spot.

 

[SMCowboy]

So what happens when there is a spot challenge that doesn't involve the team getting a 1st down or not?

Lets say its 4th and inches and the defense wants to challenge that the 3rd down play should have been downed earlier resulting in 4th and 1. What happens then if the challenge is successful?

Defense wins the challenge and the ball is moved but they are still charged a timeout?

I do not understand all the intracasies of this. But, I HAVE seen in several games before, where a team challenges the spot of the ball, and the officials do move the ball but don't give the team the first down, and the team IS still charged a timeout.

 

[Hoofbite]

Not challenge-able UNLESS they challenge him being out of bounds before the spot.

Defenses can't challenge a spot unless it involves being out of bounds?

 

[SMCowboy]

Defenses can't challenge a spot unless it involves being out of bounds?

According to the NFL replay rules, you can only challenge spot of the ball under two scenarios:
#1.) If it was a first down or not.
#2.) If a player was out of bounds or not.

Plays it specifically says can not be challenged.
#1.) Spot of the ball not involving first down, endzone or out of bounds.
#2.) Down by contact not involving a fumble.

 

[Hoofbite]

According to the NFL replay rules, you can only challenge spot of the ball under two scenarios:
#1.) If it was a first down or not.
#2.) If a player was out of bounds or not.

Plays it specifically says can not be challenged.
#1.) Spot of the ball not involving first down, endzone or out of bounds.
#2.) Down by contact not involving a fumble.

Do you have a link to the rule book? I've looked online and can only find bits and pieces of it.