Video: Mike Pereira on Pat Watkins PI No Call

[dbair1967]

To be fair, Aikman was just as adament about the "bad no call", maybe even moreso than Joe Buck

he was bad, but Buck claimed that "was one of the most blatant examples of PI that you will ever see"

what a freaking putz

David

 

[baj1dallas]

does anybody else have trouble getting these nfl.com videos to play? they show up but when i click play they disappear.

 

[dbair1967]

Yeah... Aikman said that Watkins went THROUGH the WRs shoulder... he couldnt have been more wrong.

he also claimed he wasnt playing the ball, when clearly he was

and thats the reason it wasnt PI...he was going for the ball, which several of us argued for days on end afterward

David

 

[WoodysGirl]

Like the Gaffney TD against the Ravens :bang2:

I think Per said it was a catch anyway.

Actually I don't think he said that. He said it was too tough to call and whether it was called a catch or incomplete, it would've been stood after the review.

 

[03EBZ06]

I could see Buck & Aikman claiming PI without looking at the replay but I couldn't believe that they continued to claim it was a blatant PI after several replays.

 

[Next_years_Champs]

There are a lot of fans who just do not understand what PI is. When that play happened and even after the replay I knew that by the rules as written Watkins was not guilt of PI. He was clearly a half step ahead of the receiver and was clearly playing the ball and not the receiver, if anyone was going to catch that pass it was Watkins not the receiver.

Another thing that is puzzling to me is all those fans who complain that the Cowboys secondary isn't aggressive enough, Well hello that is what aggressive coverage looks like in todays NFL. You can't bump and run aggressively any more but you can make a aggressive move while playing for the interception. That is the only time after the 5 yard zone which aggressive contact is allowed, so you bump them off the LOS and you make plays on the ball when it is delivered. That is todays NFL.

It is a judgment call so it could have been called PI but in this instance it was called correctly and was a great play by Watkins.

 

[YosemiteSam]

http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d8050dfc7

Pereira says emphatically, "this is NOT A FOUL."

I knew that, but someone needs to tell idiot Aikman and idiot Buck that.

 

[cowboyed]

This was pretty obvious to most of us.

I wonder if there is email access to Joe Buck or Troy Aikman so that we can vent a little on this. It would be nice if they fessed up to their unfounded inflammatory remarks.

 

[YosemiteSam]

A few people were arguing with me about this play last week. It is nice to be right for once.

There is a fine line between right and wrong. Like Doomsday & Doomsday101 :laugh2:

 

[TheHerd]

Another thing that is puzzling to me is all those fans who complain that the Cowboys secondary isn't aggressive enough, Well hello that is what aggressive coverage looks like in todays NFL.

I am one of those complaining fans and I have that attitude because that one play shows what COULD be, but almost never is. If we played more passes like that I'd be ecstatic, but we usually either aren't close enough to even attempt a play on the ball, or our corners, TNew included, aren't looking for the ball.

 

[khiladi]

I happen to agree with Pereira here... that said, he almost ALWAYS defends his guys.

So just because he says it, it doesn't necessarily make it so.

From what I have been observing, they have a tendency to only review plays where the refs got it right. So in one way, he is defending his guys, but that defense of his guuys is by presenting plays that are normally correct by refs. And Watkins defense was clearly one of the plays where the ref got it correct.

 

[khiladi]

Where was Pereira when we played NE and Watkins had position on Moss and Moss ran in to him and got the PI call?

As I just stated before, Pereira usually only reviews plays where the referees got it right. The reviews of calls that are controversial and impact the game and the ref got it wrong, they don't review them. If it is cotroversial, and the ref got it right, such as the field goal kick in the Ravens game, when the ball hit the post and bounced back in, they will review them.

 

[Next_years_Champs]

I am one of those complaining fans and I have that attitude because that one play shows what COULD be, but almost never is. If we played more passes like that I'd be ecstatic, but we usually either aren't close enough to even attempt a play on the ball, or our corners, TNew included, aren't looking for the ball.

I agree our secondary needs to look for the ball in the air more, Roy Williams play on the TE in the endzone was also a play which I would say was a sign of aggressive coverage. Bradie James bumped the receiver off the LOS and RW made a strong move on the ball.

Both of these plays received some strong criticism on this board, were the people complaining the same people complaining about soft coverage? I don't know that, my point was only to point out what aggressive secondary coverage looks like in the NFL today.

 

[Idgit]

I am one of those complaining fans and I have that attitude because that one play shows what COULD be, but almost never is. If we played more passes like that I'd be ecstatic, but we usually either aren't close enough to even attempt a play on the ball, or our corners, TNew included, aren't looking for the ball.

And yet, where do we rank relative to all of the other defenses in the NFL in interceptions? Any idea?

 

[Future]

Buck and Aikman are calling this week's game vs. Philly. Maybe they will man up and come clean that they were wrong.

Not a snowball's chance in you know where.:laugh2:

I said it once before but I'll post my thoughts on it again. The right call was made, we all know that, but the fact that it wasn't called is shocking. Any time that I can think of there is contact like that it has been called a penalty, and Dallas would not have even argued if it was called I don't think. It's the right call, but Buck and Aikman weren't wrong thinking that it should be called because it usually is.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

And yet, where do we rank relative to all of the other defenses in the NFL in interceptions? Any idea?

LOL. No kidding.

Anyway... I never got the "controversy" on that call, or even Roy's play in the endzone. I didn't think either was a PI.

It's hard to believe the commentators made such a big deal out of those while ignoring the Green Bay DB so obviously running up on Austin's legs.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

wow......I honestly thought it was a penality

 

[03EBZ06]

And yet, where do we rank relative to all of the other defenses in the NFL in interceptions? Any idea?

We are tied for 4th in NFL with 18 INTs, 4 INTs behind the league leader, Chargers. Just to help out other person.

 

[Longboysfan]

Buck and Aikman are calling this week's game vs. Philly. Maybe they will man up and come clean that they were wrong.

Even though it's philly.... Don't be waiting on those pigs flying either.

 

[LeonDixson]

To be fair, Aikman was just as adament about the "bad no call", maybe even moreso than Joe Buck

Correct. Aikman was outraged that there was no call. I have a friend that says "If I'm going to be wrong, I'm going to be wrong at the top of my voice". Aikman took his advice.

Yeah... Aikman said that Watkins went THROUGH the WRs shoulder... he couldnt have been more wrong.

He made a comment like, "It's obvious Watkins wasn't even trying to make a play on the ball". I like Aikman, but he was totally wrong on this one.

Wow. He slapped down all the people on this one, including the host. The host was thinking--great, what am I going to do with my agenda now?

Good call.

Even after Pierra's answer, the guy said it's something the league will have to look closely at in the offseason. (referring to a rule to allow coaches to challenge a non call on PI). lol, what a goofball.