Avernus Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 no interest either way. I have the exact opposite view- I think they got it right. I honestly do not think he would have come down in bounds even without the contact. see...from that viewpoint, I agree... but the fact that he was pushed out before he could try to get both feet in bounds is what qualifies it as a push out and not what it looked like was going to happen... the defensive players didn't allow the play to play out naturally... now if they swatted the ball out of his hands and pushed him out, then that is fine....but he had possession and was pushed out of bounds.....and he managed to get one of his feet right there even after being pushed... elite WR's make plays like that all the time... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROYALWITCHEESE Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 Me too. Did you see his response to the fact that the referees chose to review a FG this year when it is explicitly against the rules? I really wanted to catch that one but missed it. I'm sure he lied and said there was no review ... presuming it was even discussed. I missed that one as well. I think this week they might have to focus on this game entirely! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 Irish, if by "going for the ball" you mean "slamming into Winslow's ribcage with forearms trying to knock him out of bounds" then, yeah, he was going for the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 the ref would have to make a determination if it was a force out by reviewing the play? Can you imagine if a play-off came down to a play like that? Or the Super Bowl? Exactly....I'd rather have them get rid of the force out rule instead of making it reviewable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 do we need 17 pages like the gb-dal game? look, call made game over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 do we need 17 pages like the gb-dal game? look, call made game over. lies and deceit....you are the debil.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted December 3, 2007 Author Share Posted December 3, 2007 not sure what you saw, he didn't even get the 1st foot in............. major stretch to think that was a force out, that toe took out a divot from the ez...the toe was in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 Irish, if by "going for the ball" you mean "slamming into Winslow's ribcage with forearms trying to knock him out of bounds" then, yeah, he was going for the ball. nfl.com They show it here at the end of the highlights reel. I can see it both ways really. Both Cardinal players appeared to be looking at the ball while it was in the air, but maybe #35 he was just timing the hit to Winslow as he did end up in his ribcage as you say. Meh. Probably a good non-call all things considered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted December 3, 2007 Author Share Posted December 3, 2007 (edited) Irish, if by "going for the ball" you mean "slamming into Winslow's ribcage with forearms trying to knock him out of bounds" then, yeah, he was going for the ball. maybe irish can tell us when intent was added to the rule book for a force out for all we know the S was ghey and wanted to rub winslow NTTIAWWT Edited December 3, 2007 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 yeah, the Eagles got screwed here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysight Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 (edited) nfl.com They show it here at the end of the highlights reel. I can see it both ways really. Both Cardinal players appeared to be looking at the ball while it was in the air, but maybe #35 he was just timing the hit to Winslow as he did end up in his ribcage as you say. Meh. Probably a good non-call all things considered. Push out. He would have had the opportunity to get both feet inbounds. Doesn't mean he would have necessarily as it was close, but if you freeze frame it at the moment before contact the opportunity was there. Edited December 3, 2007 by Crazysight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seminoles Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 After looking at it and stop and starting the replay a bunch of times, I'm 95% sure it's a push out. When you watch his left leg, it is on path to land in bounds but once the safety hits him his left leg gets brought back up into the air and then the receiver is unable to get it back down in the endzone. The reason i say that i'm not 100% sure it was a push out is that i only looked at it from one angle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtra Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 (edited) From what I seen he dotted 1 foot and was pushed out without being able to attempt to get the second one in.It would have been close,but his momentum didnt carry him out of bounds ,the defenders did. Edited December 3, 2007 by xtra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night and have determined that I don't care. If loaf, who is a Cleveland homer, doesn't think they got screwed, then that's ok with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 I beleive it was a force out... I think they need to get rid of that rule all together...if the defender is good enough to push him out that should be the same as swatting the ball out of his hands... as it stands, it should have been a TD... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefjay Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 I agree with Irish. I don't know his stance on this but I know he's always right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 I agree with Irish. I don't know his stance on this but I know he's always right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 I agree with Irish. I don't know his stance on this but I know he's always right. And along the same vein he is also the most beloved Huddler too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.