"The Timeout"

[ryanbabs]

I said to myself I would be happy no matter the results because this has been a magical year. That being said...I'm still pissed!

Anyways...I want to revisit that timeout before the half that costed us a first down. If GB challenged that spot, would they have been out of challenges to challenge the Dez catch? I can't remember the sequence or time on the clock. Too mad to DVR it.

 

[Nova]

I said to myself I would be happy no matter the results because this has been a magical year. That being said...I'm still pissed!

Anyways...I want to revisit that timeout before the half that costed us a first down. If GB challenged that spot, would they have been out of challenges to challenge the Dez catch? I can't remember the sequence or time on the clock. Too mad to DVR it.

It was a booth review. Had nothing to do with the packers challenges.

The timeout was fine, IMO. Romo just had a bad bobble on the snap and nowhere to go with the football.

 

[ryanbabs]

It was a booth review. Had nothing to do with the packers challenges.

The timeout was fine, IMO. Romo just had a bad bobble on the snap and nowhere to go with the football.

Yeah, that what I was saying. If they don't take that timeout, maybe the Packers review it. Not sure if the booth would've had we not called timeout.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

If they'd simply lined up and ran the ball up the middle, in a quick play, they'd have been fine. Garrett should have realized that they were given the first down when they shouldn't have been and should have encouraged them to immediately line up and go for the play. I think Dallas could have gotten a play off to run for a few yards then took the time out and all would have been fine.

But it's water on the bridge now. It might not have mattered at all because the booth might have called for a review before Dallas could even get the play off in the first place.

 

[Nova]

Yeah, that what I was saying. If they don't take that timeout, maybe the Packers review it. Not sure if the booth would've had we not called timeout.

Gotcha. No you can't challenge things under 2 minutes. You can only take a timeout and hope the refs look at it again.

 

[Nova]

If they'd simply lined up and ran the ball up the middle, in a quick play, they'd have been fine. Garrett should have realized that they were given the first down when they shouldn't have been and should have encouraged them to immediately line up and go for the play. I think Dallas could have gotten a play off to run for a few yards then took the time out and all would have been fine.

But it's water on the bridge now. It might not have mattered at all because the booth might have called for a review before Dallas could even get the play off in the first place.

Disagree. There were 40 seconds left. You never want to waste a play and time in that situation.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Disagree. There were 40 seconds left. You never want to waste a play and time in that situation.

Cool.

Instead they wasted a time out, lost the first down, and got nothing.

The few extra seconds they would have lost by running the play and keeping the first down, leaving them with 2nd down and two time outs, is more than enough time to move into closer field goal range and to also take a serious shot at scoring a TD.

 

[AdamJT13]

Not sure if the booth would've had we not called timeout.

I'm certain they would have. It was an obviously bad spot. It's not very often, if ever, that the TV heads notice something right away and the NFL officials who are watching the same thing -- and watching FOR something to review -- completely miss it.

 

[Reality]

I assumed someone would post this already, but since this keeps coming up in threads, I will say it ..

The reason Garrett called the timeout was because he thought they got the first down. The officials spotted the ball past the first down marker and signaled it was a first down. The reason Garrett was so upset is because if they had not gotten the first down, they would NOT have called timeout, and instead ran another play. That way, if they get the first down on the next play, they would then call the timeout. If they did not, they would run more time off the clock. You only stop the clock in that situation if you know you have control of the ball to effectively score or run out the clock.

They should have given the timeout back to the Cowboys in that situation. I have seen that done in other games this season when the same thing happened. That said, I can understand why they didn't give it back as well (it's a judgement call). The bottom line though is that the timeout was called based on the results on the field, which were changed after the fact.

 

[Word Mofo]

Joe Buck really blew the timeout thing out of proportion. Garrett did exactly what the clock dictated. It stinks that he lost a timeout because of it.

 

[Nightman]

Garrett calling the TO was 100% the right call. Dallas wasn't trying to settle for a FG. They wanted a TD there and that is why they called the TO with 40 secs left and threw the ball on 3rd and 1.

 

[Blackspider214]

Garrett calling the TO was 100% the right call. Dallas wasn't trying to settle for a FG. They wanted a TD there and that is why they called the TO with 40 secs left and threw the ball on 3rd and 1.

Huh? How about you run the ball on 3rd down, get the 1st and then take your shots? PAssing from shotgun was 3rd and 1 was idiotic.

 

[links18]

Should have been PI against the Packers on the pass to Williams.

 

[Nightman]

Huh? How about you run the ball on 3rd down, get the 1st and then take your shots? PAssing from shotgun was 3rd and 1 was idiotic.

So passing on 3rd and 1 was idiotic but throwing on the ensuing 1st down is OK. Got it.

Look they were trying to score a TD and where already in FG range. Running the ball only provides for a shorter FG attempt. I'd rather go for the TD since they had the lead.

 

[Staubacher]

Should have been PI against the Packers on the pass to Williams.

Blatant PI and more blatant dropped ball by Cobb.

Our only chance was to win by enough scores the refs couldn't matter. I KNEW the would try to "even things up" today

 

[Hook'em#11]

Disagree. There were 40 seconds left. You never want to waste a play and time in that situation.

Yet, they waste a play by going into the shotgun, when the O-line at that time was doing pretty well. You run that ball there, take the precious seconds off of the clock... And, maybe making Green Bay use a timeout.

I think that play pissed me off more than the fumble. LOL. It just look like the "same ol' Cowboys" on that play.

 

[Blackspider214]

So passing on 3rd and 1 was idiotic but throwing on the ensuing 1st down is OK. Got it.

Look they were trying to score a TD and where already in FG range. Running the ball only provides for a shorter FG attempt. I'd rather go for the TD since they had the lead.

Yes, why not? Because if it's incomplete, you have 2 more downs to work with.

Am I debating with someone who watched their first game today?

 

[Hook'em#11]

Blatant PI and more blatant dropped ball by Cobb.

Our only chance was to win by enough scores the refs couldn't matter. I KNEW the would try to "even things up" today

Yeah, I was wondering why that Cobb "catch" that was tipped by Crawford, didn't at least warrant a challenge. Hell, at least give the defense a breather. Can't take em with ya when you leave.

 

[Staubacher]

Yeah, I was wondering why that Cobb "catch" that was tipped by Crawford, didn't at least warrant a challenge. Hell, at least give the defense a breather. Can't take em with ya when you leave.

I was talking about the 1st half one sorry. On the tipped one Scandy blew it. If he turned around he could have interfered w Cobb since it was tipped

 

[Dave_in-NC]

I assumed someone would post this already, but since this keeps coming up in threads, I will say it ..

The reason Garrett called the timeout was because he thought they got the first down. The officials spotted the ball past the first down marker and signaled it was a first down. The reason Garrett was so upset is because if they had not gotten the first down, they would NOT have called timeout, and instead ran another play. That way, if they get the first down on the next play, they would then call the timeout. If they did not, they would run more time off the clock. You only stop the clock in that situation if you know you have control of the ball to effectively score or run out the clock.

They should have given the timeout back to the Cowboys in that situation. I have seen that done in other games this season when the same thing happened. That said, I can understand why they didn't give it back as well (it's a judgement call). The bottom line though is that the timeout was called based on the results on the field, which were changed after the fact.

So the refs screwed us twice? Well that's just dandy.