Official non-PI Call Thread **merged**

[Boyzmamacita]

He couldn't turn his head to look back if we wanted to. And none of the networks have shown this angle or even this point of the play. They leave it out of every highlight.

 

[Risen Star]

The league wants the Cowboys to win because it's good for business. Which explains the 20 years of not winning before this year. It's a brilliant plan.

 

[Plankton]

With the way so many announcers and talking heads and fans talk about face guarding, i was surprised to find out it's not actually illegal in the NFL. Hitchens doesn't have to turn his head.

Face guarding and turning your head are two totally different things.

Yes, raising your hands vertically is not a penalty. But, you can't extend your hands into a receiver without turning for the ball. If you don't turn for the ball, by rule, you aren't making an effort to play the ball. This is what happened on the play, which is why I think it was interference on the play.

 

[Plankton]

I'm going to have to fight these haters off at work all week. This SF lover had the nerve to tell me that's the worse call he's seen in the history of the NFL. And if the call would have stood we would have lost.

When SF was having all their problems this year, no one said a word to him because what was going on was all that was needed to make them miserable.

I stood toe to toe with him with all his fantasies. He act like we wouldn't have scored if they would have scored on that drive. I hate it for him. Respect the

You should remind him of the referees picking up the flag in the fourth quarter of the Cowboys-49ers game in 1997 in San Francisco. Rod Woodson tackled Michael Irvin on a deep pass into the end zone with less than one minute to play with the Cowboys down 17-10. Clear, obvious, textbook pass interference. The refs picked up the flag, and called it "incidental contact". Even the 49er scribes, some of the biggest homers on the planet, acknowledged that it was a bad call.

 

[Vegas_Cowboy]

Again. If this play happens in any other game this past weekend, nobody is even talking about it.

 

[Jammer]

The league wants the Cowboys to win because it's good for business. Which explains the 20 years of not winning before this year. It's a brilliant plan.

They wanted to build the suspense for this year's squad.

 

[gimmesix]

It is a penalty. Almost every article I've read regarding this rule has the rule included and it mentions players on the field with no helmet and confronting refs. Below is a good link because it talks about how 4 penalties could have been called on the play, even the facemask

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/p...potential-penalties-on-key-lions-cowboys-play

Seconds later, Cowboys receiver Dez Bryant ran onto the field to protest the call. He was not wearing a helmet. Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1(j) prohibits "removal of a helmet by a player in the field of play or the end zone during a celebration or demonstration or during a confrontation with a game official or any other player."

Have you ever seen a player called for removing his helmet who had no helmet to remove? I think the most the officials would have and should have done in that case is tell Bryant to get off the field. He did not rush onto the field and remove his helmet "during a confrontation with a game official," which is what the rule states he would have had to have done.

Again, the idea behind this penalty being created is that it was a type of taunting that escalated confrontations and led to unsafe conditions for the player who took off his helmet. No such situation existed when Bryant came out onto the field. If a Detroit player had ran over and confronted Dez, it probably would have led to a penalty being called on Bryant for being on the field.

It would have been best if Bryant had stayed on the sideline because some officials have a hair trigger when it comes to unsportsmanlike conduct, but there was no rule broken by strict interpretation of the rules.

 

[adbutcher]

That's all I've been reading about or watching on ESPN. How the lions got screwed.

Nothing acknowledging about how clutch Romo was yesterday in the 2nd half.

It really shows how many people hate the cowboys and root against them, because honestly this call had almost nothing to do with the ultimate outcome. Even if the penalty stood, there is no guarantee they would even score a field goal! There was still nearly 7 minutes in the game.

Lions could have gone for it on 4th and 1. They could have punted it further than 8 yards. They could have stopped the cowboys on 4th 6. They were gift wrapped a 2nd chance by DLAW, only to lose it again!

Kinda scary how uninformed the public is, running straight to conspiracy theories before using rationale.

Plus Stafford had nearly 3 minutes and a full compliment of timeouts at the end of the game. That's why Detroit are perennial losers, losers blame others. Winners walk into the bar, sink the eight ball, and leave with your girl. Suh will look fugly in a dress.

 

[Sportsbabe]

You should remind him of the referees picking up the flag in the fourth quarter of the Cowboys-49ers game in 1997 in San Francisco. Rod Woodson tackled Michael Irvin on a deep pass into the end zone with less than one minute to play with the Cowboys down 17-10. Clear, obvious, textbook pass interference. The refs picked up the flag, and called it "incidental contact". Even the 49er scribes, some of the biggest homers on the planet, acknowledged that it was a bad call.

Copying and pasting it as I type. Thanks.

 

[CalCBFan]

I think the proper call would have been offsetting penalties (illegal hands to face offense; holding - defense) and replay the down. But it is a fact that I have not seen one media outlet show Pettigrew grabbing Hitchens facemask, and that is a big part of this play. His hand was not flat a la a stiff arm, but pulling the hemet down. And the Cowboys have gotten more than their fair share of bad calls and non-calls over the years...

 

[Jammer]

I don't delete people from my FB, but I'm seriously considering it. My page is flooded with anti-Cowboys rhetoric. One guy, who is a die hard Eagles fan, is the worst. He posted a long list of "penalties" that the ignorant refs ignored because they had the Cowboys' "parts" in their mouth. I posted the video of the opposite angle showing the receiver tugging on the facemask and naturally there are crickets on that post.

 

[WV Cowboy]

Plus Stafford had nearly 3 minutes and a full compliment of timeouts at the end of the game. That's why Detroit are perennial losers, losers blame others. Winners walk into the bar, sink the eight ball, and leave with your girl. Suh will look fugly in a dress.

Yea, .. there was 2:32 and two time-outs.

 

[adbutcher]

Yea, .. there was 2:32 and two time-outs.

Ok, 2:32, a 2 minute warning and 2 timeouts. Under similar circumstances Romo would have pulled it out.

 

[Miller]

Have you ever seen a player called for removing his helmet who had no helmet to remove? I think the most the officials would have and should have done in that case is tell Bryant to get off the field. He did not rush onto the field and remove his helmet "during a confrontation with a game official," which is what the rule states he would have had to have done.

Again, the idea behind this penalty being created is that it was a type of taunting that escalated confrontations and led to unsafe conditions for the player who took off his helmet. No such situation existed when Bryant came out onto the field. If a Detroit player had ran over and confronted Dez, it probably would have led to a penalty being called on Bryant for being on the field.

It would have been best if Bryant had stayed on the sideline because some officials have a hair trigger when it comes to unsportsmanlike conduct, but there was no rule broken by strict interpretation of the rules.

The issue I have is that Dez already had this called on him this year and said he didn't know the helmet rule. I don't tgink the act of taking off the helmet has to be done. As you said it is for protection so running out on the field of play without one on to disoute something has the same effect.

 

[TheDoctor]

The media will stop their crying in a few days. As the hoodie once said, "on to Cincinatti"....er... Green Bay!

Can't say I'll agree with that. There has been so many iffy calls over the last decade that's been ignored but because this happens to involve Dallas we might never hear the end of it.

Cowboy haters are pathetic little things that live vicariously through this team's failure and love nit-picking any thing they can, like a leech on the shell of a tortoise.

 

[TheDoctor]

He couldn't turn his head to look back if we wanted to. And none of the networks have shown this angle or even this point of the play. They leave it out of every highlight.

Of course they do. It doesn't fit their sad little agenda, we all know the theme of yesterdays game was "Finish the fight" to it's truest meaning and the team never backed down. So many haters thought they would have a second Christmas by seeing the 'Boys be 1-and-done. They didn't get their wish now they want to cry oceans.

 

[Avery]

What's hilarious to me is how the Lions were up 20-17, there's 8:25 seconds left in the game (yes, more than half of a quarter) and ESPN is doing all they can to make this as the reason the Lions lost forgetting that:

1. The Lions scored 3 points the second half
2. The Lions failed to stop us on 4th down multiple times
3. The Lions committed clear holding penalties repeatedly in the 4th that allowed us to extend drives
4. The Lions had a chance to win the game with 3 TO's and 2:30 left yet fumbled the ball away twice even after DLaw gifted them another series.

If you want a true picture of how a bad call changes the outcome, I submit to you the GB-SEA game of Tate catching the game-winner (or more appropriately, laying a hand on the ball when it's clearly in the arms of a GB DB).

 

[wconn1979]

I am not scrolling through 17 pages to see if this has been posted. but I think this shows it best.

https://vine.co/v/OdD5hWMBK2q

Oh and what about this blatant play??

https://vine.co/v/OdDeOIBWr0g
https://vine.co/v/OdDb3vBEDea

 

[gimmesix]

The issue I have is that Dez already had this called on him this year and said he didn't know the helmet rule. I don't tgink the act of taking off the helmet has to be done. As you said it is for protection so running out on the field of play without one on to disoute something has the same effect.

If I'm an official, I'm not calling that unless he breaks the letter of the law. From my understanding of the rule, he did not violate the specifics or the purpose.

He did not jump into the middle of a group of Detroit players. He did not get in the face of an official or cause that official to not be able to do his job. He did not cause a disruption.

Too often, we've seen officials make poor calls that change a game instead of using restraint and good judgment. I'm just happy that wasn't the case Sunday. (And again, Dez should stay off the field in that case because not all officials use good judgment.)

 

[johnnygt]

As I watch sports center right now, jaws is on a rant about how there should have been 3 penaltys on Dallas. Holding, PI, and dez. I guess I should just smile we won!! But why not just say offsetting because of hands to the face. Guess that doesn't sell good enough. Smh