PDA

View Full Version : Packers Game



Kleinsasser40
10-31-2004, 04:27 PM
I was following the live play updates for the Pack - Redskins game in the last 3 minutes of that one. I saw that the TD that would give the skins the lead was nullified with an "illegal motion" or "illegal shift" or something like that. Then next play was the Harris INT. That one penalty cost the Redskins the game. FOr anyone watching the game, can you answer completely unbias on wether it looked like the illegal motion could have cause that touchdown? In other words if there was no motion do you think the touchdown would have happened? I was not watching the live game so I do not know.

I think minor calls like that should not be able to completely take away big plays like that. The play completely turned the game from one team to the other. I agree they should be penalized, but only to the severity of the penalty. If the guy accidentally takes a small step then corrects himself, or if he is going down in his stance, and the ball is snapped while the righ foot is one inch off of the ground while he is stepping down to enter his stance a big play like that should not be fully taken back, then pushed back further. They shouldn't have the TD, but maybe put them on the 1 yard line.

poult
10-31-2004, 04:29 PM
ive still got the packer post game show on here, and even the announcers on that show said the redskins got hosed on that play.

GBMiah
10-31-2004, 04:33 PM
Totally disagree.

Because there is absolutely no consequences to the penalty, sure the TD is taken away but you've gained a butt load of yards despite the fact that you did something Illegal?

I will say that it was a bad call, the actual penalty was minute at best. He seemed to just come to "set" as the ball was snapped. remember he has to be set and estalished, really could have gone either way.

But im sure this has been something that has been discussed at length on message boards across the country. There are absolutely NO incidents where you can blame game on one call, because you never should have let yourself get into a position for it to come down to that anyway.

poult
10-31-2004, 04:37 PM
ha, now they just said the packers should thank god for the "phantom motion penalty" because they'll never get a gift like that again this year. atleast the packer blitzs reporters are realistic and not completely biased.

GoVikesGo989
10-31-2004, 04:37 PM
Ok, lets be honest here. If the Vikes won by a bad call, we would all be saying "oh well, a win is a win and we'll take it", we wouldnt be complaining about refs, so give it a rest.

poult
10-31-2004, 04:38 PM
"GoVikesGo989" wrote:

Ok, lets be honest here. If the Vikes won by a bad call, we would all be saying "oh well, a win is a win and we'll take it", we wouldnt be complaining about refs, so give it a rest.

oh get off the bandwagon and go back to the cheese.

Kleinsasser40
10-31-2004, 04:40 PM
"GBMiah" wrote:

Totally disagree.

Because there is absolutely no consequences to the penalty, sure the TD is taken away but you've gained a butt load of yards despite the fact that you did something Illegal?

I will say that it was a bad call, the actual penalty was minute at best. He seemed to just come to "set" as the ball was snapped. remember he has to be set and estalished, really could have gone either way.

But im sure this has been something that has been discussed at length on message boards across the country. There are absolutely NO incidents where you can blame game on one call, because you never should have let yourself get into a position for it to come down to that anyway.

Yeeeeah, i'm gunna have to kinda disagree with you there. This game did come down to that one call. If it wouldn't have been called the Skins would have won, hands down. Favre was hurting and he would not have had it in him to throw the ball down the field to win it.

Also, in such a critical situation the penalty for such a small thing like that should not completely nullify a lead changing TD. If the WR pushed the DB away from the ball then caught then yeah, take away the TD and push them back, but for something like that which had no influence on the play at all it is BS. I do not know exactly how it should be handled, the above penalties were just suggestions, but what happened there today should not have happened.

LosAngelis
10-31-2004, 04:40 PM
Actually, I'm not sure it was a bad call, they just called it on the wrong guy.

I think they called it on a different player, and the announcers were having a field day saying he never moved.

But, if you look carefully at the guy in motion on that play, he came across the line, turned towards the line of scrimmage, seemed to take a stutter step forward, then stopped completely. An instant later, the ball was hiked.

That could have been a penalty for either not being set for a full second before the play was called, or drifting towards the line of scrimmage before the ball was hiked.

Personally, I think the call is a lot like holding. It happens on every play...its just a matter of getting away with it. They are more likely to call it when it directly interferes with what happens on the play, and in this case, they felt it did.

If they hadn't called GB for the same call three times earlier in the game, I might be more willing to concede it was a bad call, but since the Pack had a couple of drives halted because of the same calls, I'm not going to be that sympathetic.

GBMiah
10-31-2004, 04:41 PM
Nah he's right, i know it hurts but its the truth. I catch myself doing the same thing on occasion as well.

superior230bartime
10-31-2004, 04:49 PM
Worry about your own fucking team for once. Once again, just as 3 weeks ago when 5 minutes after the Packer loss to the Titans there was 130 post thread about the demise of the Packers, you guys prove again what team you are more interested in. Of course , you fail to mention, that right before the Redskins scored the TD to get within 6 the Packers intercepteed the ball which was overturned by a questionable holding call on Ahmad Carrol. Seriously, you guys should seek medical assistance for this statewide Packer obsession you guys have.

Kleinsasser40
10-31-2004, 04:49 PM
"poult" wrote:

"GoVikesGo989" wrote:

Ok, lets be honest here. If the Vikes won by a bad call, we would all be saying "oh well, a win is a win and we'll take it", we wouldnt be complaining about refs, so give it a rest.

oh get off the bandwagon and go back to the cheese.

Yeah, honestly. The only thing worse than a packer fan is a bandwagon fan. One year they will be here cheering you on, the next year they will be on another team's bandwagon and trashing their old team.

BTW, the day that the Vikes get a good call for them to win a game is the day when....well...it will never happen. If there is a phantom call in any big play of any Vikings game it is against us! TO TD, multiple phantom holding calls, Brooks running TD that was short by a yard or two. I'm sure I could find more if you really wanted me to...

However, if that were to ever happen, I would be classy and honest about it and admit that it was the wrong call. I'm not going to be an a$$ and rub a loss in some other team's face because we won on some phantom call. I think that is a horrible way to win a game.

packmanxxxi
10-31-2004, 04:52 PM
It was a bad call, esp. in a close game. I would be pissed if I were a Redskin fan. Was there illegal motion? yes... was it anymore than happens on most plays? No... But there are calls like that every year for every team. Remember, the ref threw the flag before the pass was even completed.

just an honest answer....

GBMiah
10-31-2004, 04:58 PM
Kleiny, I guess we'll agree to disagree. I think if you polled the Leagues rules committee they would probably vote toward my thinking 32-0. but thats neither here nor there.

And a big "NO" to your statement of that called back TD being the deciding factor. there was about 2:38 minutes left. MORE then enough time. Meaning that call was NOT a game deciding call because of that fact. And again, while I agree the call was iffy at the least, i can see where the ref flagged it. Because you have to show that your in "set" when the ball is snapped and the ball was snapped just as he got to his position with no time to establish being "set" its a ticky tack call I will agree and I probably wouldnt have flagged it. But the game was FAR from over if the TD counted (all they needed was a FG)

cajunvike
10-31-2004, 05:08 PM
"superior230bartime" wrote:

Worry about your own fucking team for once. Once again, just as 3 weeks ago when 5 minutes after the Packer loss to the Titans there was 130 post thread about the demise of the Packers, you guys prove again what team you are more interested in. Of course , you fail to mention, that right before the Redskins scored the TD to get within 6 the Packers intercepteed the ball which was overturned by a questionable holding call on Ahmad Carrol. Seriously, you guys should seek medical assistance for this statewide Packer obsession you guys have.

This coming from a guy (?) who says that he is a Packer fan but is posting on a Vikings board... :scratch: :bootyshake:

LosAngelis
10-31-2004, 05:24 PM
Seriously, though...I really noticed a high number of "odd calls" in that game. There was one call where the Redskins had a play called back because a player was in front of another player at the snap. I had never seen that call made before.

And, as I said before, they had made at least 3-4 pre-snap calls on illegal motion, illegal shifts, and other stuff like that before that one play.

The flag was thrown before Brunell had even tossed the ball, so I'm not sure we can say the Redskins got that screwed. To be honest, there were a bunch of overlly picky calls that, if they hadn't been made, the Packers may have gone on to score two more TD's, and that Portis play never would have mattered.

I'm being unbiased, or at least as much as I can be. If they hadn't been calling those calls throughout the game, and THEN laid that one on the Redskins in the 4th quarter, I'd be ticked.

I've been a ref, and the one thing you learn is that, whether you call the right calls or the wrong calls, it is more important to do it consistently.

poult
10-31-2004, 05:34 PM
the kerry campaign paid off the refs.........

what kinda stat is that anyway, 16 staright elections have gone like that? thats pretty odd.

Webby
10-31-2004, 05:36 PM
I've been a ref for years, same deal. Consistentancy is very important. No one is ever 100% right, coach, player, fan. THat's the beauty of sports and why every week is a joy.

superior230bartime
10-31-2004, 05:51 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:

"superior230bartime" wrote:

Worry about your own fucking team for once. Once again, just as 3 weeks ago when 5 minutes after the Packer loss to the Titans there was 130 post thread about the demise of the Packers, you guys prove again what team you are more interested in. Of course , you fail to mention, that right before the Redskins scored the TD to get within 6 the Packers intercepteed the ball which was overturned by a questionable holding call on Ahmad Carrol. Seriously, you guys should seek medical assistance for this statewide Packer obsession you guys have.

This coming from a guy (?) who says that he is a Packer fan but is posting on a Vikings board... :scratch: :bootyshake:


Actually, i am posting on an anti-packer board since it is as much that as it is a "viking board". Viking fans are all over packer boards that don't even promote viking hatred so I don't really understand why it puzzles you guys so much why there are some Packer fans that show up here. Looking at all the anti-Packer stuff on the front page alone should explain this concept to you. By the way, congratulations on posting 1500 times in your first month on the board....could you possibly lead a more pathetic existence?

cajunvike
10-31-2004, 05:54 PM
"superior230bartime" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

"superior230bartime" wrote:

Worry about your own fucking team for once. Once again, just as 3 weeks ago when 5 minutes after the Packer loss to the Titans there was 130 post thread about the demise of the Packers, you guys prove again what team you are more interested in. Of course , you fail to mention, that right before the Redskins scored the TD to get within 6 the Packers intercepteed the ball which was overturned by a questionable holding call on Ahmad Carrol. Seriously, you guys should seek medical assistance for this statewide Packer obsession you guys have.

This coming from a guy (?) who says that he is a Packer fan but is posting on a Vikings board... :scratch: :bootyshake:


Actually, i am posting on an anti-packer board since it is as much that as it is a "viking board". Viking fans are all over packer boards that don't even promote viking hatred so I don't really understand why it puzzles you guys so much why there are some Packer fans that show up here. Looking at all the anti-Packer stuff on the front page alone should explain this concept to you. By the way, congratulations on posting 1500 times in your first month on the board....could you possibly lead a more pathetic existence?

Only if I had your life, bartime! :bootyshake: :clown:

Kleinsasser40
10-31-2004, 05:55 PM
"superior230bartime" wrote:

Worry about your own fucking team for once. Once again, just as 3 weeks ago when 5 minutes after the Packer loss to the Titans there was 130 post thread about the demise of the Packers, you guys prove again what team you are more interested in. Of course , you fail to mention, that right before the Redskins scored the TD to get within 6 the Packers intercepteed the ball which was overturned by a questionable holding call on Ahmad Carrol. Seriously, you guys should seek medical assistance for this statewide Packer obsession you guys have.

:withstupid:

Sup dude, go back and read what I wrote in the opening of the thread. I was not talking about the rest of the game or what-not. I did not watch the game, we did not get that game here. I was asking about that one illegal motion play. SO sorry dude, if I did not include a debate about a questionable call on a play that I never heard about in a game that I never saw.

SECONDLY, you are going to feel quite stupid after this...ready? Are you a Vikings fan? Are you on a Viking website? No, you are not a Vikings fan, and Yes, you are on a vikings website, now...to take a quote out of your OWN writing..."Worry about your own fucking team for once." Sorry buddy, but you are the guy on the other team's website. Feel kinda stupid, don't you? :violent3:

superior230bartime
10-31-2004, 06:02 PM
"Kleinsasser40" wrote:

"superior230bartime" wrote:

Worry about your own fucking team for once. Once again, just as 3 weeks ago when 5 minutes after the Packer loss to the Titans there was 130 post thread about the demise of the Packers, you guys prove again what team you are more interested in. Of course , you fail to mention, that right before the Redskins scored the TD to get within 6 the Packers intercepteed the ball which was overturned by a questionable holding call on Ahmad Carrol. Seriously, you guys should seek medical assistance for this statewide Packer obsession you guys have.

:withstupid:

Sup dude, go back and read what I wrote in the opening of the thread. I was not talking about the rest of the game or what-not. I did not watch the game, we did not get that game here. I was asking about that one illegal motion play. SO sorry dude, if I did not include a debate about a questionable call on a play that I never heard about in a game that I never saw.

SECONDLY, you are going to feel quite stupid after this...ready? Are you a Vikings fan? Are you on a Viking website? No, you are not a Vikings fan, and Yes, you are on a vikings website, now...to take a quote out of your OWN writing..."Worry about your own fucking team for once." Sorry buddy, but you are the guy on the other team's website. Feel kinda stupid, don't you? :violent3:

No, I don't. Read response to Cajunvike. I am on an anti-Packer site.

cajunvike
10-31-2004, 06:38 PM
Behold Bartime...Great Defender of A$$Packers everywhere...he has come to this Anti-Packer message board to vanquish all those who would speak out against Fav-ray and the rest of the Fudgepackers. Woe is unto them who would do so lest they suffer the wrath of the great Bartime...LOL

Packerguy
10-31-2004, 07:15 PM
The penalty was absolutely correct. The called it on the running back but they meant to call it on thrash for not resetting for at least 1 second after going in motion.

Did it really influence the td? IT certainly wouldnt appear so.

Did that lose the skins the game? Noone will know. The pack would of had just under two minutes I believe left with some timeouts to still drive for a game winning fieldgoal attempt.

Bottom line the point is moot. The packers won a game where favre threw 3 picks. Usually this year they havent done that.

superior230bartime
10-31-2004, 07:32 PM
"cajunvike" wrote:

Behold Bartime...Great Defender of A$$Packers everywhere...he has come to this Anti-Packer message board to vanquish all those who would speak out against Fav-ray and the rest of the Fudgepackers. Woe is unto them who would do so lest they suffer the wrath of the great Bartime...LOL


#1537....and what a great post it is. The average posts per day holding strong at more than 33. This should keep you right in the running along with Carrot Top and Oven Mitt from the Arby's commercials for most pathetic character of the year.

cajunvike
10-31-2004, 07:37 PM
"superior230bartime" wrote:

"cajunvike" wrote:

Behold Bartime...Great Defender of A$$Packers everywhere...he has come to this Anti-Packer message board to vanquish all those who would speak out against Fav-ray and the rest of the Fudgepackers. Woe is unto them who would do so lest they suffer the wrath of the great Bartime...LOL


#1537....and what a great post it is. The average posts per day holding strong at more than 33. This should keep you right in the running along with Carrot Top and Oven Mitt from the Arby's commercials for most pathetic character of the year.

If only I could reach your level of patheticness, I could begin to understand what gets you to even get up in the morning....on second thought, if I had to experience your level of patheticness I'd probably just give up and die.