hardrocker950
7 years ago

On what are you basing the assumption that it was a conscious decision to not throw a flag on that play as opposed to the referee in question not seeing the contact?

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



If he didn't see that, he should find a new job.
Porforis
7 years ago

If he didn't see that, he should find a new job.

Originally Posted by: hardrocker950 



Funny, only one of the six people I was watching with thought anything happened beyond a solid hit to the shoulder in real-time. On replay? Sure. Was the ref in a position where seeing that was possible, with bodies flying about and such? Or is this just a generic "Not good enough, do better" comment in a thread that otherwise seems to be devolving into "The refs stole the game!" thread? I suppose we've blamed everyone else in the book, might as well blame the refs for everything too.
PackFanWithTwins
7 years ago
There is contact with the head of a QB on well over 1/2 the QB sacks in the league that by rule could be called and never are. I wouldn't expect the hit on hundley to be flagged nor would I want them to be. Hundley ducked into the contract. Its different than a play where a QB is hit in the head facemask while upright and throwing.

As for PI calls, the inconsistency and slant towards offense makes me sick. There was a call against Martinez that was declined but is an example. The TE releases straight up field and makes contact into Martinez, only to then stop and make his cut. Martinez gets flagged, when it should be offensive PI against the TE. PLays like the Non-call with Adams should not be called as well as the PI that was called against House in the end zone should not be called. The receivers are just as guilty of initiating the contact and getting their hands on the defenders so they can use their arms to push and gain separation which is also illegal. As long as both the receiver and defender are both using their hands and in position to go for the ball, let them play. None of those calls would have made a difference in the game though.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
TheKanataThrilla
7 years ago

There is contact with the head of a QB on well over 1/2 the QB sacks in the league that by rule could be called and never are. I wouldn't expect the hit on hundley to be flagged nor would I want them to be. Hundley ducked into the contract. Its different than a play where a QB is hit in the head facemask while upright and throwing.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 


I managed to get home from the Grey Cup to see the final 2 minutes of the game. Regarding the head hit, I totally agree with PFWT, I blame the contact more on Hundley and did not think it was worthy of a flag. My only issue is that it seems the flag for type of hit depends on the QB being hit. It might have been a flag against Rodgers for instance.


warhawk
7 years ago

I managed to get home from the Grey Cup to see the final 2 minutes of the game. Regarding the head hit, I totally agree with PFWT, I blame the contact more on Hundley and did not think it was worthy of a flag. My only issue is that it seems the flag for type of hit depends on the QB being hit. It might have been a flag against Rodgers for instance.


Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla 


I guess I just look at it a different way. What I saw was that the contact was caused by TJ leading with his helmet, therefore, the contact was initially helmet to helmet, Also, I don't see in the rules where it has to be intentional and I don't think it was but if your going to lead with your helmet and happen to make contact with the QB's helmet it should be a penalty.
I see an unintentional slap to the helmet called all the time where a defensive lineman is trying to get an arm up to bat a ball. I guess because it's easy to see. I don't see where that enters into the spirit of the rule regarding player safety but it's considered a penalty. All I can say if THAT'S a penalty this damn sure should have been also.


"The train is leaving the station."
Zero2Cool
7 years ago

I managed to get home from the Grey Cup to see the final 2 minutes of the game. Regarding the head hit, I totally agree with PFWT, I blame the contact more on Hundley and did not think it was worthy of a flag. My only issue is that it seems the flag for type of hit depends on the QB being hit. It might have been a flag against Rodgers for instance.

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla 



Helmet to Helmet has been called quite a bit even if the ball-carrier ducks. I believe the Davante Adams hit that he was concussed he put his head down too.

I was shocked the play wasn't flagged. You could hear the helmets collide. I don't know if it SHOULD have been because there's too damn many rules. I just thought a QB would pull that flag every time.
UserPostedImage
PackFanWithTwins
7 years ago

I guess I just look at it a different way. What I saw was that the contact was caused by TJ leading with his helmet, therefore, the contact was initially helmet to helmet, Also, I don't see in the rules where it has to be intentional and I don't think it was but if your going to lead with your helmet and happen to make contact with the QB's helmet it should be a penalty.
I see an unintentional slap to the helmet called all the time where a defensive lineman is trying to get an arm up to bat a ball. I guess because it's easy to see. I don't see where that enters into the spirit of the rule regarding player safety but it's considered a penalty. All I can say if THAT'S a penalty this damn sure should have been also.

Originally Posted by: warhawk 



Usually when the slap to the QB helmet it is because the QB is upright usually throwing which is where they are really trying to protect them. Looking at the helmet contact by Watt. You cant hit a QB high, you can't hit them low, all a defender can do is going for the midsection which is what Watt was doing. I can see why people would want this called as it is really no different than a WR who tucks before contact resulting in helmet contact even though it is clear the defender was trying not hit high. Watt wasn't hitting high, he had his head to the side. Hundley ducked into the contact. If we flag these also just take the defense off the field.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
Nonstopdrivel
7 years ago
In the heat of the moment, it looked to me like Hundley was starting to tuck the ball and make a dash for it. As a runner, he would have therefore forfeited any protection from head-to-head contact. (Though I'm not sure if that happens the moment a quarterback initiates a run or only after he leaves the pocket.) On replay, I wasn't as sure that that was actually Hundley's intent, but maybe in real time that's how the official saw it too? Or more probably, he just didn't see the helmet-to-helmet contact.

I do find it interesting that every aspect of a challenged play is reviewable -- except for the de novo imposition or reversal of penalties. If a spot challenge can add or take away a score, it should probably be able to at least reverse egregiously erroneous personal fouls, especially spot fouls that create significant yardage swings. I understand the objection that an infraction could be found on any play, but some penalties have the potential for huge impacts on the outcomes of games and should have to withstand scrutiny. It's unfortunate that the criteria for these penalties often prove to be so subjective (though, in fairness, they're rarely as nebulous as fans seem to think they are).

What if there were an official in New York whose sole job was to review calls that fall under the currently unreviewable category of judgment call?
UserPostedImage
nerdmann
7 years ago

In the heat of the moment, it looked to me like Hundley was starting to tuck the ball and make a dash for it. As a running, he would have therefore forfeited any protection from head-to-head contact. (Though I'm not sure if that happens the moment a quarterback initiates a run or only after he leaves the pocket.) On replay, I wasn't as sure that that was actually Hundley's intent, but maybe in real time that's how the official saw it too? Or more probably, he just didn't see the blow.

I do find it interesting that every aspect of a challenged play is reviewable -- except for the de novo imposition or reversal of penalties. If a spot challenge can add or take away a score, it should probably be able to at least reverse egregiously erroneous personal fouls, especially spot fouls that create significant yardage swings. I understand the objection that an infraction could be found on any play, but some penalties have the potential for huge impacts on the outcomes of games and should have to withstand scrutiny. It's unfortunate that the criteria for these penalties often prove to be so subjective (though, in fairness, they're rarely as nebulous as fans seem to think they are).

What if there were an official in New York whose sole job was to review calls that fall under the currently unreviewable category of judgment call?

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



The "guy in New York" exists, because they need a centralized authority who is aware of who is "supposed" to win each game.

Generally I think the games are real, but the officials tend to boost the team that is behind, in order to maximize ratings with the tv audience. But the playoffs? Would YOU leave a billion dollars to chance?
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Nonstopdrivel
7 years ago
If you have even a sneaking suspicion the games are fixed, why do you still watch them? Where's the fun in a sport that's subject to even the whiff of tampering? If that's what we're reduced to, you might as well take up watching rugby. Which, come to think of it, isn't such a bad idea after all.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Zero, regarding Woodson, that'd why I find the timing with Williams peculiar
dfosterf (15-May) : Ryan Hall y'all does a great job of tracking thesr
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Fear not!! I planned to do 33mi bike ride tomorrow morning, so ... yeah
Zero2Cool (15-May) : We got some dark clouds and nasty winds right bout now.
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Madison they had hail 4pm.
dfosterf (15-May) : Sure looks like these tornadoes are headed towards Green Bay
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Woodson of Charles fame was reluctant and then loved it. that didn't really come out until post career
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : IE "We bought into the Bears and they let us down, we have no choice to seek alternatives"
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Or that Williams and his family are preparing an exit ramp if they don't like how things are going in a few years
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Either Williams thought it would make him look good (reluctant but then embraces the city and franchise)
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : I can only assume that the Williams camp agreed to cooperate with that article tells me 2 things
dfosterf (15-May) : Ya. They are in a great mood
Zero2Cool (15-May) : I should visit again
dfosterf (15-May) : ChiCity Sports entering freakout mode due to Caleb and his dad not wanting him to go there
Zero2Cool (15-May) : "He's looking really good out there," Derrick Ansley said of Kalen King. Adds that he's been playing inside and out.
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Him saying he doesn't have one to give haha
Zero2Cool (15-May) : True, that was awesome. The whole F thing was great actually.
dfosterf (15-May) : I did like the Mark Murphy part, sorta
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Some comments on it saying it was great, amazing... I came away thinking... awkward.
dfosterf (15-May) : Packers schedule release video is "interesting" I guess.
Zero2Cool (15-May) : SOOO glad that tool still works. Saves from manually entering each game
Zero2Cool (15-May) : NFL Pick'em import was done last night.
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Atlanta with 5 primetime games lol
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Week Five BYE?? NFL is hell.
wpr (14-May) : Vikings schedule leaked. Week 12 in GB. Week 18 in MN.
wpr (14-May) : CBS has GB @ NYG Week 11 Nov 16 and they will face MN in week 18 but don't say where. I think away
Zero2Cool (14-May) : W15: Packers at Broncos
Zero2Cool (14-May) : Ben Sirmans on MarShawn Lloyd: “Everything’s full go for him.”
Zero2Cool (14-May) : Luke Butkus says training camp will allow plenty of time to implement new center Elgton Jenkins
Zero2Cool (14-May) : wk 2 commanders at packers
Zero2Cool (14-May) : Ugh. Packers thanksgiving detroit ...boring
Zero2Cool (14-May) : Panthers at Green Bay in week 9, Nov 2nd
buckeyepackfan (14-May) : Week 1
buckeyepackfan (14-May) : Packers Host Detroit Week 1! ML finally gets a week home opener.
beast (13-May) : I was kind of hoping Douglas might come back to the Pack
beast (13-May) : My question is how much do we trust Jenkins? In bad weather, he seemed to struggle a bit with ball control snapping, though he started at OG
beast (13-May) : Well Jenkins probably knows he's not getting that 2026 salary number without a new contact... so just trying to get the new contact early
Zero2Cool (13-May) : CB Rasul Douglas is visiting the #Seahawks today, per source.
dfosterf (13-May) : He's a switch and baiter. Its the same as a bait and switcher except he agreed to the switch first lol
dfosterf (13-May) : 6.8 mil raise next year. Those are existing contract numbers
dfosterf (13-May) : 12.8 plus 4.8 pro rata signing bonus is 17.6 mil. Top center in the league at 18
Zero2Cool (13-May) : Elgton Jenkins wants to rework contract ahead of position change to center
Zero2Cool (13-May) : 🏈Monday, Nov. 10: Eagles at Packers
buckeyepackfan (12-May) : Packers @ Bears week 16(Saturday Game)
Zero2Cool (12-May) : Clifford hasn't been the same since losing 8
dfosterf (12-May) : Sean Clifford would probably disagree
dfosterf (12-May) : Canuck Cannon. Got a very good feeling about this
Zero2Cool (12-May) : Tom Pelissero also reports what bboy stated
bboystyle (12-May) : The Green Bay Packers on Monday signed Taylor Elgersma, the Canadian-born quarterback who tried out at the team’s rookie camp last weekend
beast (12-May) : There were reports four days ago that the Packers were signing QB Taylor Elgersma, but no official action since
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

15-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

15-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / greengold

15-May / Random Babble / Martha Careful

15-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

15-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

14-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / nyrpack

13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

12-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.