Video: Tony Romo pass to Terry Glenn gets intercepted.

[Skinsmaniac]

Actually I think he stopped reading after the below:

Here's my take on the Cowboys

I know I did.

"Good breeding consists of concealing how much we think of ourselves and how little we think of the other person." -
-- Mark Twain
:

 

[Zman5]

Then educate me or tell me why I am incorrect. I am not here for some Commander/Cowboy thing, I'm here to defend the referee's because people are claiming inconsistency. (I am a zebra myself and I know the rules pretty well)

These are simple plays, quick slants. Trust me, an NFL referee knows how to call this play with a blindfold on. There is a reason why flags fly from multiple refs on one play and not on another.

On the PI, Randle-El is in-between the defender and the ball. On the int, Springs is in-between the defender and the ball.

So you were the one who made all the bad PI calls yesterday.

 

[Next_years_Champs]

Then educate me or tell me why I am incorrect. I am not here for some Commander/Cowboy thing, I'm here to defend the referee's because people are claiming inconsistency. (I am a zebra myself and I know the rules pretty well)

These are simple plays, quick slants. Trust me, an NFL referee knows how to call this play with a blindfold on. There is a reason why flags fly from multiple refs on one play and not on another.

On the PI, Randle-El is in-between the defender and the ball. On the int, Springs is in-between the defender and the ball.

Then how is it that Henry is the only player who touched the ball? If that pass had been caught it would have been caught by Henry.

And the term "playing through the receiver" means when the defender is behind the receiver and goes through the receivers back making a play for the ball. That doesn't apply here because Henry was never behind the receiver.

The head of the NFL officials had a very clear explanation just a couple of weeks ago, when the ball is in the air both the defender and the receiver have equal rights to it. If contact is made while both players are making a play on the ball, it is incidental contact and no foul should be called.

As I said at the start Henry touched the ball the receiver didn't so he was clearly playing the ball, thus it should have been no call or incidental contact.

 

[Next_years_Champs]

Yeah my bad, I meant to write Henry.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nui8ZEV54EI

No problem I figured you meant the Henry play, It is posted on this thread as well.

 

[firehawk350]

Then how is it that Henry is the only player who touched the ball? If that pass had been caught it would have been caught by Henry.

And the term "playing through the receiver" means when the defender is behind the receiver and goes through the receivers back making a play for the ball. That doesn't apply here because Henry was never behind the receiver.

The head of the NFL officials had a very clear explanation just a couple of weeks ago, when the ball is in the air both the defender and the receiver have equal rights to it. If contact is made while both players are making a play on the ball, it is incidental contact and no foul should be called.

As I said at the start Henry touched the ball the receiver didn't so he was clearly playing the ball, thus it should have been no call or incidental contact.

Worst... reasoning... ever... So if some defender blatantly pushes a receiver out of the way or runs over them, they are automatically playing the ball because they are the only one who touched it?

 

[DCBoysfan]

I was yelling at the TV after the flag on Henry. It was the same play that Springs made on Glenn. You can't go thru the WR to get the ball.

 

[Skinsmaniac]

Sure is a lot of talk about a meaningless play in a meaningless game.

 

[random Cs]

Then how is it that Henry is the only player who touched the ball? If that pass had been caught it would have been caught by Henry.

Because Randle-El was falling to the ground from the contact?

And the term "playing through the receiver" means when the defender is behind the receiver and goes through the receivers back making a play for the ball. That doesn't apply here because Henry was never behind the receiver.

I disagree, it looks pretty clear to me that he was.

The head of the NFL officials had a very clear explanation just a couple of weeks ago, when the ball is in the air both the defender and the receiver have equal rights to it. If contact is made while both players are making a play on the ball, it is incidental contact and no foul should be called.

That's not what the rule says and this rule is irrelevant anyway.

The rule says that incidental contact when both players are going for the ball is not considered PI. It does not say that any contact when both players are going for the ball is incidental contact.

Regardless, that certainly wasn't incidental contact, it was a hard collision. The defender is only allowed to do what Henry did if he has gained position on the receiver.

As I said at the start Henry touched the ball the receiver didn't so he was clearly playing the ball, thus it should have been no call or incidental contact.

He was playing the ball, but he didn't have position on Randle-El. Didn't look like he did to me anyway.

I think you are confused with the incidental contact. If the refs thought it was incidental contact, then it is a no-call. Its not incidental contact because the play is a no-call.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

See why I can't wait to watch the Hawks crush the Skins on Saturday?

It has nothing to do with not wanting to see the Skins. I'd love to play them, because maybe then they'd understand what resting starters means. But I don't know if I could take another week of the garbage like they've soiled this thread with.

 

[Bizwah]

Bad call on Henry.

No doubt.

Same exact play as the one on Springs....which I think was a good no-call.

I also think the call on Ball was bad. It was clearly Randle-El that grabbed Ball and pulled him back. No way ARE catches the pass either. Hamlin's pick should've counted.

I'm not too worried about our team. Sure, I'd rather see us enter the playoffs with a head of steam. I think we had a nice game going against the Panthers (who really got hot at the end of the year BTW) until TO's injury. As it stands, we were clearly in control that entire game.

Yesterday's game cannot possibly be looked at as an indicator of how we're playing. Romo basically said we had a basic game plan. And, in watching our defense, it's clear that they were vanilla as well....very few blitzes.

We had nothing to play for, in bad weather, against a desperate team, without five major contributors (three pro-bowlers). That's a recipe for disaster. It's not an excuse....it's a fact. That game is no indicator of what our team will do in the playoffs.

Any Skins fan should know there's no way they got even close to the best we had to offer.....and we were still in the game at half...especially if Austin catches the pass in the third Q.

 

[jimmy40]

Sure is a lot of talk about a meaningless play in a meaningless game.

This is nothing, you should see us cry about the refs after a 20+ point win.

 

[The30YardSlant]

I'm sorry, but they are not the same.

Henry makes contact with Antwaan's back shoulder with respect to the football. Springs makes contact with Glenn's front shoulder with respect to the football.

Dear lord

 

[tyke1doe]

No interference on this play. The Henry PI call was horrible.

Agreed. Obviously the ref wasn't looking on the Henry play. When a defender is going for the ball, it's not pass interference.

 

[Next_years_Champs]

Worst... reasoning... ever... So if some defender blatantly pushes a receiver out of the way or runs over them, they are automatically playing the ball because they are the only one who touched it?

Quote from randomC

On the PI, Randle-El is in-between the defender and the ball.

try reading what I was responding to, he stated that the receiver was between Henry and the ball which simply isn't true. Henry was closer to the ball than the receiver thus he actually got his hands on the ball the receiver didn't.

The rest of your post is nonsense and deserves no reply.

 

[firehawk350]

Bad call on Henry.

No doubt.

Same exact play as the one on Springs....which I think was a good no-call.

I also think the call on Ball was bad. It was clearly Randle-El that grabbed Ball and pulled him back. No way ARE catches the pass either. Hamlin's pick should've counted.

Is it just me, or has this board turned into a bunch of whining about refs lately? Every single game, you complain about one call or another, forgetting that an equally important call/no-call was called for you. It happens just about every game, calling a game is an inperfect science.

I'm not too worried about our team. Sure, I'd rather see us enter the playoffs with a head of steam. I think we had a nice game going against the Panthers (who really got hot at the end of the year BTW) until TO's injury. As it stands, we were clearly in control that entire game.

Didn't you lose to the Eagles the game before, with a healthy TO? You act like you were playing lights out until TO went out, but you weren't. You lost to a mediocre Eagles team that had nothing to play for.

Yesterday's game cannot possibly be looked at as an indicator of how we're playing. Romo basically said we had a basic game plan. And, in watching our defense, it's clear that they were vanilla as well....very few blitzes.

Right... So when WOULD be a good point to look at how you played? November? October? I remember in 05 a very awesome Colts team (14-2 was it?) going into the postseason being the hands-down favorite to win it all but ended up getting knocked out by either the Pats or the Steelers, I forget which one. The point being is it doesn't matter how you played last week or a month ago, it matters how you are playing now.

Either way, that statement Romo made makes me think of another one made by Gibbs in 2006 (prior to the season), "now the gloves come off". If you aren't going to bring your A-game, why play at all? If Wade and Garrett wanted to keep their super-secret gameplans secret, why expose your playmakers with less than effective plans? Just rest your starters.

We had nothing to play for, in bad weather, against a desperate team, without five major contributors (three pro-bowlers). That's a recipe for disaster. It's not an excuse....it's a fact. That game is no indicator of what our team will do in the playoffs.

Wahhhh... wahhhh.. You were missing 4 starters, Washington is missing 6.

Any Skins fan should know there's no way they got even close to the best we had to offer.....and we were still in the game at half...especially if Austin catches the pass in the third Q.

So is playing crappy against the Skins just the thing you do now? In Dallas when you barely won, you said you brought your c-game. In 2006, you won one and then a freak miracle caused another Skins victory and you weren't playing up to your potential anyways. In 2005, you just came out flat (35-7) and the MNF game was just a freak occurence.

Even if, by the score, you were still in, I don't think there's any way you could say you had any chance to win the game. 1 rushing yard? And it's not like you had a bunch and then your back-ups came in and stunk it up, you had two coming into the second half. 147 yards total offense, we had more in the first half, against your first string D. You were outplayed from the second you stepped foot onto the field, first-string or second-string...

 

[Next_years_Champs]

Because Randle-El was falling to the ground from the contact?

When the ball arrived Randle-El had both his hands extended toward the ball and never touched it because Henry had position.

I disagree, it looks pretty clear to me that he was.

Then freeze the frame which shows Henry behind the receiver and post it, what you will find is Henry's shoulders are in front of Randle-El.

That's not what the rule says and this rule is irrelevant anyway.

The rule says that incidental contact when both players are going for the ball is not considered PI. It does not say that any contact when both players are going for the ball is incidental contact.

Regardless, that certainly wasn't incidental contact, it was a hard collision. The defender is only allowed to do what Henry did if he has gained position on the receiver.

Spin. The fact is the head official (I forget his name) had a segment on the NFLN on a play which was very similar to this play. And he stated when the receiver and the defender where essentially side by side and both were playing the ball and not the other player incidental contact did not equal PI. And there is no rule which states a hard collision can't be incidental contact Glenn's collision with Springs was hard as well.

He was playing the ball, but he didn't have position on Randle-El. Didn't look like he did to me anyway.

Again freeze the image when the ball arrives and you will see Randle-El reaching over Henrys shoulder for the ball, that is called position.

I think you are confused with the incidental contact. If the refs thought it was incidental contact, then it is a no-call. Its not incidental contact because the play is a no-call.

I'm not confused a no-call is what this play should have been.

 

[Bizwah]

Is it just me, or has this board turned into a bunch of whining about refs lately? Every single game, you complain about one call or another, forgetting that an equally important call/no-call was called for you. It happens just about every game, calling a game is an inperfect science.

Remove the plank from your eye......Have you seen ES after a loss? What about your coach sending tapes to the league office? Yeah....it's just us that complain about officials.

The first PI cost us the ball at the 50, and gave you a TD on the next play. Not insignificant.

Didn't you lose to the Eagles the game before, with a healthy TO? You act like you were playing lights out until TO went out, but you weren't. You lost to a mediocre Eagles team that had nothing to play for.

No, I said that I would like to have a head of steam. I wish we were playing better, but I don't think we have anything to fear from that game. I was thinking more along the line of the Panther game. Here was a team that beat both Tampa and Seattle the last few weeks. They were a hot team. But we went into their place and began to dismantle them.

We were up 14-0 when TO was hurt. We were up 17-7 at the half. It was a blowout waiting to happen....against a hot team. We were in control even after TO went out.


Are you so worried about playing us again that you have to try to convince me to be WORRIED about my team.

We're simply more talented than the other NFC teams.

Right... So when WOULD be a good point to look at how you played? November? October? I remember in 05 a very awesome Colts team (14-2 was it?) going into the postseason being the hands-down favorite to win it all but ended up getting knocked out by either the Pats or the Steelers, I forget which one. The point being is it doesn't matter how you played last week or a month ago, it matters how you are playing now.

Are you so delusional to believe that yesterday was the true mark of where our team is?

Am I to believe the team that failed to show up yesterday is what I should expect from now on? or....do I look at our body of work? You would focus in on a four game stretch where we admittedly didn't play well, and totally forget about what we had done the other 12 games.

I guess we can forget about possibly adjusting our game plan......

I remember playing like dog crap in 1995 too. We had another losing Dec. We got beat by the Eagles (fourth and one). We saw them again in the playoffs and undressed them. We then played the hottest team in the NFL...the Packers....we undressed them as well.

Either way, that statement Romo made makes me think of another one made by Gibbs in 2006 (prior to the season), "now the gloves come off". If you aren't going to bring your A-game, why play at all? If Wade and Garrett wanted to keep their super-secret gameplans secret, why expose your playmakers with less than effective plans? Just rest your starters.

That's just what we did.....rest our starters. That's why you didn't see guys like Newman, Ratliff, and Watkins. Romo only played a half. Glenn only played a couple of series. By the middle of the third Q Adams was out, Columbo was out. We had one starter on the OL that played the whole game.

It's just a fact that we didn't bring the whole game. Wade basically said, he didn't have us ready. The players admitted it. I know you want to believe that we went balls out and just got hammered. I know you want to believe that your team is dominating.

It did yesterday......but again, yesterday's team isn't the same that will show up in two weeks.

Wahhhh... wahhhh.. You were missing 4 starters, Washington is missing 6.

Couple of points:
1. our starters are better than your missing starters.
2. it was more than four by the end of the game.

So is playing crappy against the Skins just the thing you do now? In Dallas when you barely won, you said you brought your c-game.

We didn't play well now that you mention it. But we were in no danger of losing that game. Even when you cut the lead to five, I was never worried.

Could've been worse if Gurode doesn't do the rocket snap thing. But I'm sure that counts as a forced error in your book.

In 2006, you won one and then a freak miracle caused another Skins victory and you weren't playing up to your potential anyways.

It was a miracle.....coupled with a poor face mask call. It was Romo's second or third game as a starter if I recall. You did well to make it a close game.

In 2005, you just came out flat (35-7) and the MNF game was just a freak occurence.

The 35-7 game is just another reason why Skins fans annoy me. You guys still don't get it. We were missing 4/5 of our starting OL. We had what Jerry Jones called the worst OL situation in the NFL. We had a terrible rash of injuries that year. Which made me feel sorry for the situation you all were in last year.

Even if, by the score, you were still in, I don't think there's any way you could say you had any chance to win the game.

The score was 13-3 at halftime. In our first drive of the second half, Austin dropped a sure TD that would've pulled us to three. He also dropped another TD in the fourth. I'd say a 13-10 score is still "in the game"....wouldn't you?

1 rushing yard? And it's not like you had a bunch and then your back-ups came in and stunk it up, you had two coming into the second half.

No backups?

Ok....keep believing the team you saw yesterday will be the one you see in two weeks. At least, I hope that's what your team thinks.

147 yards total offense, we had more in the first half, against your first string D. You were outplayed from the second you stepped foot onto the field, first-string or second-string...

First string D?

No Ratliff, no Newman....we were playing Alan Ball (just activated from the PS). Why? Well, Wade wanted to see him in action. We sat our normal fourth string CB to see Ball in the Nickel. Watkins, another nickleback, was inactive due to injury....he was replaced by another rookie seeing his first game action....Courtney Brown.

Yes, we were outplayed. All of us are admitting that. We're all admitting that you beat us. We had zilch to play for. We were missing a bunch of players. We played a vanilla scheme.

All that resulted in a 27-6 outcome yesterday. If you think that's the same team you'll see in two weeks.......well, just get ready to be disappointed.

 

[Oh_Canada]

I don't think it was interference, but wasn't this the exact same Buck/Aikman who were flipping out about Watkins doing the VERY same thing against the Lions a few weeks ago???

 

[slogriff]

I thought Glenn should've ran through Springs and atleast broke it up, it looked like Glenn began to pull up right before Springs got there, perhaps afraid of getting contact on his knee at that point.

Glenn did pull up. This is why is was crucial to have him at least step on the field and get hit a couple of times in this game. We can't afford having him play tentative like that in the playoffs. Hopefully, he gained a little confidence getting hit and playing in slick conditions and will be able to be a strong contributor in the playoffs.

 

[ThreeSportStar80]

Clearly pass interference based on the PI called on Henry later in the game, if you're going to call it be fair all the way around...