The botched coin toss thread

BoysForLife

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,648
Reaction score
10,232
He did change it to "defer", after the official asked twice.

I agree. That was my point. I think it had zero bearing on the game but to me, we caught a huge break by getting the ball for second half.

Imo by rule it should have been their ball
 

Runwildboys

Confused about stuff
Messages
51,069
Reaction score
95,695
CowboysZone DIEHARD Fan
I agree. That was my point. I think it had zero bearing on the game but to me, we caught a huge break by getting the ball for second half.

Imo by rule it should have been their ball
No, I disagree. Even if Dak hadn't eventually corrected himself, the official should have made sure he understood the intent. As Perreira said, he should have used common sense.
 

Hadenough

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,820
Reaction score
13,204
Only in Dallas do they have to use instant replay to resolve a coint toss. If the Ref put his hearing aid in he would of heard the first time that Dak said we want to kick off.
 

Quickdraw

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,051
Reaction score
1,712
Wasn't it years ago that there was only 1 rule that if you said you'd kick, that you automatically received the ball in the 2nd half? What's up with this "defer" crap now? Good lord man.
 

Knauftd

Member
Messages
48
Reaction score
5
This debacle took me way back to the 1962 AFL Championship, when the city of Dallas won its first pro football championship in spite of a major coin toss blunder at the start of overtime, which allowed Houston to receive AND have the strong winds that day at their backs.

First Abner Haynes, now Dak Prescott, insisting they elect to Kick...

Jason Garrett reminds me so much of Hank Stram, too. It's uncanny.

A championship must be in our near future!
 

RustyBourneHorse

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,728
Reaction score
44,826
The NFL was right to give the cowboys the ball.

No team would willingly choose to kick the ball to start both halves. Dak’s intent was clear.

Exactly. In no world, particularly with our playoff backs against the wall, would we want the Rams to start twice on offense. The logic of that is so stupid. What advantage is gained from that?
 

RustyBourneHorse

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,728
Reaction score
44,826
Dumb question maybe, but why would a team ever want to kickoff for both halves?

Why even have this as an option?

Exactly! What advantage does that serve? Yeah, let's play defence to start! Especially against an offence that is usually high flying, and our playoff hopes are on the line. Yeah, we don't actually want to go to the playoffs. I mean, it's just so dumb!!! I don't understand how that's even an option.
 

RustyBourneHorse

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,728
Reaction score
44,826
But he said kick that way first. Dallas got a break.

Brad even read a statement from someone on the radio broadcast that Al Riveron was wrong to overturn Walt Anderson and give the ball to Dallas and then cited a rule as to why.

I'm glad they did but I can not believe how people can not admit Dak screwed up here like it affects them personally or something.

He screwed up initially, but he did clarify from what I heard. And, as I said, in no world do we get an advantage from kicking off twice against the Rams. Lucky for us, even if they didn't overturn it, we were thrashing them at halftime.
 

PA Cowboy Fan

Well-Known Member
Messages
25,221
Reaction score
51,029
Exactly! What advantage does that serve? Yeah, let's play defence to start! Especially against an offence that is usually high flying, and our playoff hopes are on the line. Yeah, we don't actually want to go to the playoffs. I mean, it's just so dumb!!! I don't understand how that's even an option.
The NFL makes everything so complicated.
 

RustyBourneHorse

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,728
Reaction score
44,826
Walt Anderson’s a clown for this.

Even if Dak didn’t use the word “defer” (which he did), common sense should’ve prevailed.

OBVIOUSLY Dak didn’t want to NOT have possession to start either half.

Anderson could’ve made the common-sense call and explained to Dak/Garrett later on that, “Hey, in the future, you need to use the word ‘defer’, otherwise...”

Don’t ruin a game over a technicality.

That's just the thing, thinking and NFL doesn't exactly mix that much. See John Cleese:



If Walt were to use his brain, he'd know that Dak was trying to say that we wanted the ball to start the second half.
 

NumOneQB

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
3,716
As with anything, laws/rules are in place and are meant to be interpreted by officials. This was handled poorly by the head referee. He knew what the player meant when he said “we want to kick” on the initial response. He should’ve immediately followed with “you want to defer?”
The NFL stepped in with a little common sense and did the right thing.
 

jaythecowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,994
Reaction score
2,342
yet, they cowboys were allowed to receive to start the 2nd half.

The first thing Dak said that was a legitimate choice was "defer". First Dak said defense, which isn't an option. Then Dak said we'll kick this way (while pointing in a direction) which isn't legitimate either because you can't pick kick and direction.
 

camelboy

mgcowboy
Messages
4,615
Reaction score
2,775
First time in my life I see a sport where a team can kick off both halves. :huh:

I thought it is automatic when a team chooses to kick-off a half, the other team kicks off the other half :huh:

I call it over-regulating, or too much technicality, or COMPLEX

:cool:
 
Top