The Offsides Call at the end of regulation

[FloridaRob]

PFT had a write-up about the call today and I was thinking at the time the call was made that the refs messed it up. If there is an injury during the last two minutes the refs have to stop the clock and take a timeout away from the team. As it was the refs called an offside penalty. If Dallas would have kicked the field goal and won the game instead of tying it, Dallas-NFL-Jerry Jones Conspiracy no 376 would have been started.

Refs screwed it up.....Again.....

 

[Tom [Giants fan]]

PFT had a write-up about the call today and I was thinking at the time the call was made that the refs messed it up. If there is an injury during the last two minutes the refs have to stop the clock and take a timeout away from the team. As it was the refs called an offside penalty. If Dallas would have kicked the field goal and won the game instead of tying it, Dallas-NFL-Jerry Jones Conspiracy no 376 would have been started.

Refs screwed it up.....Again.....

Actually, the Cardinals messed up too. They could have easily called a timeout. They probably didn't thinking the Cowboys might not get the ball spiked in time but once it became apparent they would, the coach should have called a timeout. They messed up too.

 

[Boysboy]

PFT had a write-up about the call today and I was thinking at the time the call was made that the refs messed it up. If there is an injury during the last two minutes the refs have to stop the clock and take a timeout away from the team. As it was the refs called an offside penalty. If Dallas would have kicked the field goal and won the game instead of tying it, Dallas-NFL-Jerry Jones Conspiracy no 376 would have been started.

Refs screwed it up.....Again.....

PFT got it all wrong-it was a TWELVE MEN ON THE FIELD penalty.

 

[theogt]

If they'd called it an injury time out, it seems to me that they would have had to put a bunch of time back on the clock because it took so long to run down and snap the ball. Which would have likely resulted in the same situation either way.

 

[superpunk]

If they'd called it an injury time out, it seems to me that they would have had to put a bunch of time back on the clock because it took so long to run down and snap the ball. Which would have likely resulted in the same situation either way.

This.

They would have had to put about 15 seconds on the clock, charge Arizona a timeout, and Dallas would have had a chance to get even closer.

It didn't matter one way or the other, ultimately.

 

[bsheeern]

PFT got it all wrong-it was a TWELVE MEN ON THE FIELD penalty.

nope it was offsides. even reviewed it

 

[Tom [Giants fan]]

This.

They would have had to put about 15 seconds on the clock, charge Arizona a timeout, and Dallas would have had a chance to get even closer.

It didn't matter one way or the other, ultimately.

Actually, if the Cardinals called a timeout when the Cowboys came up to the line like they should have, there would have been 6 seconds left with the Cowboys having to kick a 57 yard FG. It did matter.

 

[DaBoys4Life]

This.

They would have had to put about 15 seconds on the clock, charge Arizona a timeout, and Dallas would have had a chance to get even closer.

It didn't matter one way or the other, ultimately.

We could have scored a TD......

 

[FloridaRob]

PFT got it all wrong-it was a TWELVE MEN ON THE FIELD penalty.

the penalty the refs called was offsides. I agree about the time tho. there was 15 seconds left when the ball was spotted. Refs should have stopped the play and given the Cowboys at least 10 seconds and taken away Az timeout.

 

[superpunk]

Actually, if the Cardinals called a timeout when the Cowboys came up to the line like they should have, there would have been 6 seconds left with the Cowboys having to kick a 57 yard FG. It did matter.

Well then that's the Cardinals fault, and had nothing to do with the referees, or the general premise of this thread, did it?

 

[Nightman]

The refs try not to stop the clock at the end of the game. I think it was the Buffalo game last year when they let the clock run even though the catch needed to be reviewed. They only reviewed after Romo successfully spiked the ball with time left, even though a play had been run.

It was up to the Cardinals to call a TO when they saw Romo was going to be able to spike it in time. I think the refs played it right.

 

[aikemirv]

Actually, if the Cardinals called a timeout when the Cowboys came up to the line like they should have, there would have been 6 seconds left with the Cowboys having to kick a 57 yard FG. It did matter.

They could have, they did not - offsides.

If the refs do it, you have to put time back on the clock period!

 

[FloridaRob]

Well then that's the Cardinals fault, and had nothing to do with the referees, or the general premise of this thread, did it?

the NFL rule to an injury in the last two minutes is explicit. The refs stop the clock and take away a time out or they stop the clock for the injury and take off 10 seconds if the team has no time out left. (for the offense) it was not up to the Cardinals to take a timeout for injury. No team does that anyway..

 

[aikemirv]

the NFL rule to an injury in the last two minutes is explicit. The refs stop the clock and take away a time out or they stop the clock for the injury and take off 10 seconds if the team has no time out left. (for the offense) it was not up to the Cardinals to take a timeout for injury. No team does that anyway..

It was not an obvious injury in the fact that the guy was not laying on the ground, he was running upfield . Not really the refs responsibility IMO

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Arizona didn't do it cause they didn't want Dallas to have time to run another play, maybe two, in order to get closer. If the refs had done it then, yes, they have to put whatever time back on the clock and, again, that would have given Dallas enough time to run another play or two to get closer.

Plus you have to figure, on the Cards side of it, that if you give them time for another play or two you could have disaster strike, a blown coverage, a missed tackle, and all the sudden Crayton, TO, or Witten are jogging into the endzone with the game winning TD.

 

[kmd24]

the NFL rule to an injury in the last two minutes is explicit. The refs stop the clock and take away a time out or they stop the clock for the injury and take off 10 seconds if the team has no time out left. (for the offense) it was not up to the Cardinals to take a timeout for injury. No team does that anyway..

I always thought the player has to take a knee in order for the refs to stop the clock due to injury. In the replays I saw, Laboy was on his feet and walking towards the sideline.

 

[aikemirv]

Detriot didn't do it cause they didn't want Dallas to have time to run another play, maybe two, in order to get closer. If the refs had done it then, yes, they have to put whatever time back on the clock and, again, that would have given Dallas enough time to run another play or two to get closer.

Plus you have to figure, on the Cards side of it, that if you give them time for another play or two you could have disaster strike, a blown coverage, a missed tackle, and all the sudden Crayton, TO, or Witten are jogging into the endzone with the game winning TD.

Also if the refs call a timeout and Dallas could not get the snap off before the clock hit zero - which in this case was no guarantee, the refs would have messed up royally.

It was on the Cards staff to call the timeout!

 

[Reality]

If a player is not laying, sitting or kneeling on the ground OR attemping to leave the field of play but struggling, the refs are told not to stop the play.

Think about it like this .. let's say it was apparent that the Cowboys were not going to be able to spike the ball in time (ie: the pass was further down the field) yet the refs call an injury timeout because a player who was running, albeit slowly, to catch up "appeared" injured rather than winded. How do you think the Cardinals coaches/team would react to that?

-Reality

 

[FloridaRob]

If a player is not laying, sitting or kneeling on the ground OR attemping to leave the field of play but struggling, the refs are told not to stop the play.

Think about it like this .. let's say it was apparent that the Cowboys were not going to be able to spike the ball in time (ie: the pass was further down the field) yet the refs call an injury timeout because a player who was running, albeit slowly, to catch up "appeared" injured rather than winded. How do you think the Cardinals coaches/team would react to that?

-Reality

The rule again is explicit. If the refs call a timeout on the offense with no timeouts left, the refs must run 10 seconds off the clock before they are allowed to hike it. In your scenario the game would have been over.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

The rule again is explicit. If the refs call a timeout on the offense with no timeouts left, the refs must run 10 seconds off the clock before they are allowed to hike it. In your scenario the game would have been over.

Except the refs CAN'T call the time out on the offense. The Cowboys aren't required to call time out for an injured Card player.

If the refs stop the clock in that situation they're putting time back on the clock and they're charging the Cards with the Timeout, not Dallas.