Why not Block in the back on the INT return for a TD?

[JustChip]

Again, video tells the story. Here's a slomo stopped a single frame before the DB makes contact. You see Dak striding, plant a right to turn towards the ball carrier and then pulls up because he's about to get hit. At that point his upper torso is turning away from the contact as the DB lowers to hit Dak in the shoulder, which he does (and catches Dak's helmet - incidental). Heck, look at Dak's legs at the stop point. They're pointed towards the DB. You say "the blocker was never in front or at his side to begin with"? Dak would have been facing him if he didn't wince for the blow.

At the freeze point, look at Dak's left elbow and shoulder pull way up versus how he had been striding. That is the action of someone turning. No ifs, ands, or buts about that. It's human nature when you're about to get hit. You go from seeing the 4 on Dak's back to the edge of the 4 on his front before any impact at all. That is because Dak turned all on his own in preparation for contact. "Contact is imminent" is what the rules say, no?

Also notice that the DB's elbow at the moment of impact that you claim goes "squarely into the numbers on Dak's back" is curled and not even touching the back of Dak at the moment of impact that happens with the DB's left shoulder. That happens after the initial hit and the follow through from the hit and Dak turning before impact.

Again. Video. Trumps. Stills.

@CWR, what say ye? Any requests? More detail, less detail? I got it all. Lol.

The only comment I have is the angle the defender is taking relative to Dak almost guarantees it’s going to be a borderline legal block regardless of Dak turning is back or not. But I’m ok with it not being called. That’s the nature of judgement and borderline calls.

What I have issue with are the call/non-call on blatant plays. I’d be livid if I was an WFT fan after the non-PI at the end of their game Monday. Maybe the ref wasn’t in position to see the DB with his arm draped over the receiver restricting his arm. The DB looked like me in high school at the movies trying to cop a feel if my girlfriend.

But that’s why penalties should be reviewable, at least game affecting penalties. I don’t understand the NFL’s aversion. If it’s ok to review whether a player got out of bounds or not, why isn’t ok to review a PI call/non-call?

That non-call on the block on Dak was absolutely not why the Cowboys lost. Shoot, the reason this question is in play is because a Cowboy player had an unforced error, to use a tennis term. Brown does his job and this block doesn’t happen. Or numerous other mistakes by the team, including coaches.

 

[JustChip]

You could say the same thing when Parsons came up with the fumble. A flag should have been thrown when the Jacksonville player came out of nowhere to " STICK" a helpless Parsons as he laid on the turf. Officials should be fined or suspended for missing serious penalties like the ones they missed in the Cowboy/Jacksonville game.

I couldn’t believe that didn’t get called. Like the Jaylon Smith play on Thanksgiving. I get Micah’s unhappiness. There would’ve been flags flying from multiple directions if that was on a QB.

 

[_sturt_]

Lost 99.2% interest in the topic... that was, until I watched Break on YouTube last night before going to bed... and learned that Nick Eatman concurs that flags well-beyond-a-doubt should have flown. (Not that I always agree with Nick Eatman, but he's a media guy who, though a homer, has been known to overcompensate fairly often for his homer-ism in my observation.)

There.

Balance of 0.8% now spent.... hehe.

As you were, and carry on.... hehe.

 

[MarcusRock]

I see your point. The angle Dak had to take to make the tackle was going to push him more towards the sidelines. I don't believe he turned into it necessarily. At contact it looks like the blocker hits Dak in his r rear shoulder area. I don't take issue with the non-call, but I also think it was very borderline and would probably be called 5/10 times.

That is fair. I agree that at real speed that could easily look like a block in the back, especially with the DB's follow through. But if the ref was keying in on where the impact took place and that it was not "delivered from behind," the wording of the rule is clear and I think you don't call that a foul most times. So I can jive with Dak not doing a full turn (it was a small one in a millisecond), but he was also not hit from behind and there was not a hand or arm on his back when the block was delivered per the rule.

 

[MarcusRock]

The only comment I have is the angle the defender is taking relative to Dak almost guarantees it’s going to be a borderline legal block regardless of Dak turning is back or not. But I’m ok with it not being called. That’s the nature of judgement and borderline calls.

What I have issue with are the call/non-call on blatant plays. I’d be livid if I was an WFT fan after the non-PI at the end of their game Monday. Maybe the ref wasn’t in position to see the DB with his arm draped over the receiver restricting his arm. The DB looked like me in high school at the movies trying to cop a feel if my girlfriend.

But that’s why penalties should be reviewable, at least game affecting penalties. I don’t understand the NFL’s aversion. If it’s ok to review whether a player got out of bounds or not, why isn’t ok to review a PI call/non-call?

That non-call on the block on Dak was absolutely not why the Cowboys lost. Shoot, the reason this question is in play is because a Cowboy player had an unforced error, to use a tennis term. Brown does his job and this block doesn’t happen. Or numerous other mistakes by the team, including coaches.

I agree that refs are bad all around. But they kinda have to be. 7 refs can't watch all 22 players. The Washington penalty, the crappy roughing the passer penalties and the laughable Seattle 12th player jumping off the sideline to block are just some of the egregious stuff they miss. It's the "they have it in for the Cowboys" part that I take issue with. It's just funny that fans project bias on refs while being a fan of a team with extreme incentive to have bias. Lol.

 

[MarcusRock]

Lost 99.2% interest in the topic... that was, until I watched Break on YouTube last night before going to bed... and learned that Nick Eatman concurs that flags well-beyond-a-doubt should have flown. (Not that I always agree with Nick Eatman, but he's a media guy who, though a homer, has been known to overcompensate fairly often for his homer-ism in my observation.)

There.

Balance of 0.8% now spent.... hehe.

As you were, and carry on.... hehe.

You warn me about the logical fallacy of ad hominem but come back with the logical fallacy of appeal to authority? Tsk. Tsk. Lol.

 

[JustChip]

I agree that refs are bad all around. But they kinda have to be. 7 refs can't watch all 22 players. The Washington penalty, the crappy roughing the passer penalties and the laughable Seattle 12th player jumping off the sideline to block are just some of the egregious stuff they miss. It's the "they have it in for the Cowboys" part that I take issue with. It's just funny that fans project bias on refs while being a fan of a team with extreme incentive to have bias. Lol.

I agree with one caveat.

I don’t believe any corporate NFL or referee group anti-Cowboy bias. But every human has biases except Spock, and he’s not human. Those intrinsic biases affect our emotions and decisions. A referee individually or as a group working a particular game may have a bias towards calling holding, whereas another referee or group might have a bias toward PI.

That’s how you get games like the Thanksgiving penalty-fest against the Raiders. It wasn’t anti-Cowboys, it was a propensity to call certain “judgement” plays a particular way. It’s likened to a baseball umpire having his own strike zone. The pitcher & batter that recognize this and adjusts have a better chance of success. The Raiders & Carr recognized and took advantage.

The League does purposefully influence how games are called, though. It is not uncommon for them to come out before the season and say they’re going to emphasize calling a particular type of infraction.

 

[MarcusRock]

I agree with one caveat.

I don’t believe any corporate NFL or referee group anti-Cowboy bias. But every human has biases except Spock, and he’s not human. Those intrinsic biases affect our emotions and decisions. A referee individually or as a group working a particular game may have a bias towards calling holding, whereas another referee or group might have a bias toward PI.

That’s how you get games like the Thanksgiving penalty-fest against the Raiders. It wasn’t anti-Cowboys, it was a propensity to call certain “judgement” plays a particular way. It’s likened to a baseball umpire having his own strike zone. The pitcher & batter that recognize this and adjusts have a better chance of success. The Raiders & Carr recognized and took advantage.

The League does purposefully influence how games are called, though. It is not uncommon for them to come out before the season and say they’re going to emphasize calling a particular type of infraction.

Well, that's why there's not the consistency that people want. It's a very human element. You can get all the refs in a room and show a video of what PI is but some will call it stricter and some will allow more wiggle room. It's just how it is. There will always be controversy and honestly, I think the NFL likes it that way because it keeps people talking. TV news has had the blueprint for a while that the more you keep people in their feels, the longer they'll watch. And fear and upset/outrage outrank sex and violence, IMO.

 

[JustChip]

well I think it just seems like it cause if your like me , I watch ALL the cowboys games, but only a few games here and there of non cowboy games.
but when I do watch other games, I always see bad no calls, and calls that shouldnt have been called.

That’s me. I can’t remember the last time I watched an entire game outside a Cowboys game. I’ll watch bits and pieces or maybe a half or quarter. I tuned into the Warshinton - Giants game with about 3 minutes left. What I remember of that game was the horrendous non-PI call. I can’t believe that’s what the NFL really wants.

 

[JustChip]

Well, that's why there's not the consistency that people want. It's a very human element. You can get all the refs in a room and show a video of what PI is but some will call it stricter and some will allow more wiggle room. It's just how it is. There will always be controversy and honestly, I think the NFL likes it that way because it keeps people talking. TV news has had the blueprint for a while that the more you keep people in their feels, the longer they'll watch. And fear and upset/outrage outrank sex and violence, IMO.

Correct. And maybe that’s why the NFL doesn’t want to expand replay. Because so many are truly judgement calls so the relay decisions are just more judgement decisions. The 2014 Dez catch/non-catch was just that. It hinged in one’s definition of a “football move.”

But there are certainly non-judgement calls that get missed, including some otherwise “judgement” calls that are blatant. They should strive to get those correct. The Seattle play you mentioned in a previous post is just one such. A coach should be able to challenge that if he feels the impact warrants it.

 

[MarcusRock]

Correct. And maybe that’s why the NFL doesn’t want to expand replay. Because so many are truly judgement calls so the relay decisions are just more judgement decisions. The 2014 Dez catch/non-catch was just that. It hinged in one’s definition of a “football move.”

But there are certainly non-judgement calls that get missed, including some otherwise “judgement” calls that are blatant. They should strive to get those correct. The Seattle play you mentioned in a previous post is just one such. A coach should be able to challenge that if he feels the impact warrants it.

Yes, I think someone on here mentioned that Belicheck wanted the keep 3 challenges but the ability to challenge anything. I think that's a fair compromise for now and you still keep your human element that will continue to muff up plays outside of that and get the controversy you want. Admit it. I'm a better conspiracy theorist than the amateur "anti-Cowboys" ones we get on here, am I not? Lol.

 

[Motorola]

Just something I noticed during the end of the game and haven't seen it mentioned once.

Why didn't they call the clear and obvious "Block in the Back" on Dak during the return? Happens at about the 38... 10-yard penalty. Could have changed the outcome.

Oh, I know we won't ever get a call. But I just can't believe it hasn't even been mentioned.

They get the ball on the 48. Not a promise they move it the 15-20 yards needed to hit a game-winner.

Dallas@Jacksonville game..... four days ago.
Philadelphia@Dallas - 51 & 1/2 hours until kickoff.
Time to cease looking in the rearview mirror - and focus on the road ahead.

GO COWBOYS

 

[FVSTONE]

I couldn’t believe that didn’t get called. Like the Jaylon Smith play on Thanksgiving. I get Micah’s unhappiness. There would’ve been flags flying from multiple directions if that was on a QB.

At some point players need to take a stand. If officials aren't going to throw flags on personal fouls like the Parsons hit, then maybe it's time for players to walkoff the field DURING a game until these bias officials can be outed for their obvious missed calls! Send a message that the Cowboys aren't going to be the league's whipping boys anymore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just imagine if the players headed to the locker-room DURING the action of the game, this would be awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Either clean it up before someone is seriously injured or we're not playing!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[JustChip]

Yes, I think someone on here mentioned that Belicheck wanted the keep 3 challenges but the ability to challenge anything. I think that's a fair compromise for now and you still keep your human element that will continue to muff up plays outside of that and get the controversy you want. Admit it. I'm a better conspiracy theorist than the amateur "anti-Cowboys" ones we get on here, am I not? Lol.

Yes, sir. But the question is, do you wear an aluminum foil headdress?

 

[JustChip]

At some point players need to take a stand. If officials aren't going to throw flags on personal fouls like the Parsons hit, then maybe it's time for players to walkoff the field DURING a game until these bias officials can be outed for their obvious missed calls! Send a message that the Cowboys aren't going to be the league's whipping boys anymore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just imagine if the players headed to the locker-room DURING the action of the game, this would be awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Either clean it up before someone is seriously injured or we're not playing!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That would definitely make a point. But it won’t happen because it would cost the players money. The time to effect a change is during the collective bargaining, but money trumps all else with that.

It’s just like the ridiculous discipline process. It’s a bargaining chip only to trade for more money.

 

[MarcusRock]

At some point players need to take a stand. If officials aren't going to throw flags on personal fouls like the Parsons hit, then maybe it's time for players to walkoff the field DURING a game until these bias officials can be outed for their obvious missed calls! Send a message that the Cowboys aren't going to be the league's whipping boys anymore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just imagine if the players headed to the locker-room DURING the action of the game, this would be awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Either clean it up before someone is seriously injured or we're not playing!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Especially if it happens in a "win and in" game and the team disqualified has to go home instead of to the playoffs. Would be a great decision. Lol.

 

[MarcusRock]

Yes, sir. But the question is, do you wear an aluminum foil headdress?

The FBI would need to catch me first before they took pictures. Official answer: no comment

 

[Runwildboys]

The way you act like a minion of Refs is rather pathetic
Always with an excuse; never admitting just how poor all too many of them are
And of course they are all so pure and unbiased and so on
No wonder so many laugh at you

Rules are rules for everyone. All the people who see plays like this and claim ref bias are the last ones who should ever be considered to be hired as refs, because the bias is on their part, not the refs'. The emotions shouldn't supercede evidence.

It's one thing to see it happen in real time and have a reactionary, "THROW A FLAG!!!", but to look at it repeatedly, after having the rule explained to you, and still insist it should have been flagged is just desperate denial.

 

[cmoney23]

Dallas@Jacksonville game..... four days ago.
Philadelphia@Dallas - 51 & 1/2 hours until kickoff.
Time to cease looking in the rearview mirror - and focus on the road ahead.

GO COWBOYS

I don't think that is something to look forward to! LOL They are going to crush us.

 

[DandyDon52]

At some point players need to take a stand. If officials aren't going to throw flags on personal fouls like the Parsons hit, then maybe it's time for players to walkoff the field DURING a game until these bias officials can be outed for their obvious missed calls! Send a message that the Cowboys aren't going to be the league's whipping boys anymore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just imagine if the players headed to the locker-room DURING the action of the game, this would be awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Either clean it up before someone is seriously injured or we're not playing!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The players cant do that, it might be in their contracts, but if they did it would have to be whole team not just a couple of guys.
The only player to walk off during a game was Brown in the tampa game and he was crucified, and no longer playing in nfl.
He did it cause his coach told him to leave , so he did in a dramatic fashion.

But goodell would freak out, as the network would be furious for a game to be stopped and forfeited.