Packers vs Vikings - Printable Version
+- Atlanta Falcons Talk (http://atlantafalconstalk.com)
+-- Forum: Falcons Fans Message Boards (/Forum-Falcons-Fans-Message-Boards)
+--- Forum: Talk About The Falcons & So Much More (/Forum-Talk-About-The-Falcons-So-Much-More)
+--- Thread: Packers vs Vikings (/Thread-Packers-vs-Vikings)
Packers vs Vikings - ATLBound - 12-30-2012 08:00 PM
The NFL is cheating for the Packers. I'm upset because the same "courtesy" wasn't given to the Falcons.
If I'm a Lions fan, then I'm extremely pissed.
If I'm a Vikings fan, then I'm in "sending a letter to the league" mode (Lmao)
The refs just called a fumble on the Packers near the endzone and the Vikings recovered. As we all know, every turnover is reviewed.
Mike McCarthy threw out the challenge flag and instea dof the refs not reviewing the play, they instead reviewed it and then gave McCarthy a 15 yard penalty on the backend.
Their reasoning for continuing to review the play is because the booth ref CALLED for the review prior to McCarthy throwing out the challenge flag.
This is the most retarded reason because.....ALL TURNOVERS ARE REVIEWED ANYWAY. The booth ref shouldn't have to "blow the whistle" in regards to reviewing the play. It's a foregone conclusion that that is going to happen anyway, so why does it matter on the timeframe of when McCarthy throws out the flag.
Here is biased Mike Pieriria's response:
"It's a flawed rule anyway so they (the refs) just made a logical choice."
Oh so I guess for the darling Packers it's ok to override the rule for "logical choice?"
Did anybody else witness this?
RE: Packers vs Vikings - AUTiger7222 - 12-30-2012 08:05 PM
Yeah it's a complete load of BS. What pisses me off the most is everyone remembers this rule screwing over the Lions but nobody knows it happened to the Falcons.
RE: Packers vs Vikings - ATLBound - 12-30-2012 08:09 PM
Here's the rule explanation in writing:
Replay Official’s Request for Review. After all scoring plays, interceptions, fumbles and backward passes that are recovered by an opponent or go out of bounds through an opponent’s end zone, muffed scrimmage kicks recovered by the kicking team, after the two-minute warning of each half, and throughout any overtime period, any Replay Review will be initiated by a Replay Official from a Replay Booth comparable to the location of the coaches’ booth or Press Box. There is no limit to the number of Referee Reviews that may be initiated by the Replay Official. He must initiate a review before the next legal snap or kick and cannot initiate a review of any ruling against a team that commits a foul that delays the next snap. His ability to initiate a review will be unrelated to the number of timeouts that either team has remaining, and no timeout will be charged for any review initiated by the Replay Official.
The bolded and underlined portion was the reason given in the Lions game as well as the our game. It's basically saying that if a penalty is committed that delays the next snap, then the replay is not reviewed as a result of that. The coaches throwing out a challenge flag is a personal foul penalty. A personal foul penalty delays the next snap, but apparently not in this situation.
RE: Packers vs Vikings - ATLBound - 12-30-2012 08:11 PM
(12-30-2012 08:05 PM)AUTiger7222 Wrote: Yeah it's a complete load of BS. What pisses me off the most is everyone remembers this rule screwing over the Lions but nobody knows it happened to the Falcons.
That's true, but the there are three main reasons for that.
The Lions game was nationally televised.
The touchdown was a truly key moment in the game.
The Lions lost the game and a lot of people think it's because of that call.
RE: Packers vs Vikings - McUser - 12-30-2012 08:44 PM
9 yards short AP?? Nooooo!!!!
RE: Packers vs Vikings - Xanthri - 12-30-2012 11:29 PM
(12-30-2012 08:00 PM)ATLBound Wrote: The NFL is cheating for the Packers. I'm upset because the same "courtesy" wasn't given to the Falcons.
I was screaming at the radio that they can't benefit from the review so it should have been the Vikings ball and they would have pounded the rock with AP with the lead......that "non-call" cost AP the record in my mind.
RE: Packers vs Vikings - ATLBound - 12-31-2012 12:26 AM
(12-30-2012 11:29 PM)Xanthri Wrote: I was screaming at the radio that they can't benefit from the review so it should have been the Vikings ball and they would have pounded the rock with AP with the lead......that "non-call" cost AP the record in my mind.
I didn't think of the fact that AP probably would have more opportunity to run and gain more yardage, but you're right.
RE: Packers vs Vikings - Xanthri - 12-31-2012 03:33 AM
Vikings would have been up by a more than a touchdown and no need to drive the field quickly...they definitely would have fed him the rock......but for some reason the Packers got a "pass" I heard some crap about how the review was started already when he threw the flag (highly doubtful considering the referees discussed it and as soon as they made their call the commentators said McCarthy went ape@#$% and threw the challenge flag....I was in my car cheering because I knew the rule YOU CANNOT BENEFIT FROM THE REVIEW IF YOU ILLEGALLY THROW THE CHALLENGE FLAG (That was why they said the Texans score stood against the Lions....
The NFL screwed the pooch for not being consistent there....right call incredibly wrong execution