PDA

View Full Version : Refs were correct on at least the Osi hit.



miken609
01-16-2012, 06:03 PM
rewatch it. there was some helmet to helmet. it was just a small small klink but it was nonetheless correct.

I also think the Jennings fumble was not as clear cut as everyone is saying. it is unclear when exactly the ball came out and when his calf/ankle touched the ground (webster was blocking the view of his ankle in the best camera angle).

The spot on the ware play is a different story although fox did not show a replay as far as I can remember.

slipknottin
01-16-2012, 06:05 PM
Ive watched the Osi hit plenty, there is ABSOLUTELY NO helmet to helmet.

FBomb
01-16-2012, 06:05 PM
Sorry.....but you are completely wrong. It happens.

Drez
01-16-2012, 06:06 PM
No there wasn't. It was a bad call. I've watched that replay a dozen times. Nothing.

M0rbid
01-16-2012, 06:07 PM
If you believe that call was correct, explain to me why Packers D-line late hit on Eli wasn't called.

FBomb
01-16-2012, 06:07 PM
If you beleive that call was correct, explain to me why Packers D-line late hit on Eli wasn't called.
</P>


TWICE!!</P>

Gianthunter
01-16-2012, 06:08 PM
rewatch it. there was some helmet to helmet. it was just a small small klink but it was nonetheless correct. I also think the Jennings fumble was not as clear cut as everyone is saying. it is unclear when exactly the ball came out and when his calf/ankle touched the ground (webster was blocking the view of his ankle in the best camera angle). The spot on the ware play is a different story although fox did not show a replay as far as I can remember.Gregg is that you?

TroyArcher
01-16-2012, 06:08 PM
Are you on Crack?

Diamondring
01-16-2012, 06:09 PM
rewatch it. there was some helmet to helmet. it was just a small small klink but it was nonetheless correct.

I also think the Jennings fumble was not as clear cut as everyone is saying. it is unclear when exactly the ball came out and when his calf/ankle touched the ground (webster was blocking the view of his ankle in the best camera angle).

The spot on the ware play is a different story although fox did not show a replay as far as I can remember.The Osi hit was not spot on because he did not lead with his helmet wich needs to happen inorder for the refs can call it.

miken609
01-16-2012, 06:09 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI

go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58

its not a lot but it is something

M0rbid
01-16-2012, 06:09 PM
Clay Matthews' hit was more dirty!!! And that's a start.

Voldamort
01-16-2012, 06:09 PM
YOUR WRONG THERE WAS NO HIT TO THE HEAD!!!

miken609
01-16-2012, 06:11 PM
If you believe that call was correct, explain to me why Packers D-line late hit on Eli wasn't called.

The Eli call was a bad no-call. That is why it wasn't called.

Desepx
01-16-2012, 06:11 PM
we aren't playing flag football here. Osi was half a step away from hitting rodgers before he passed the ball. There is no way he could have stopped himself, watch it in gametime, not slowmo. Ontop of that, was a "clean shot"...no helmet to helmet.

FBomb
01-16-2012, 06:12 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58 its not a lot but it is something</P>


It's not enough to make the call.</P>

slipknottin
01-16-2012, 06:12 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI

go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58

its not a lot but it is something

You honestly see a hit to the head there? When was the last time you had your vision checked?

Osi's helmet goes right past Rodgers helmet, maybe might graze it, but it certainly is no hit to the head.

arrjay
01-16-2012, 06:14 PM
rewatch it. there was some helmet to helmet. it was just a small small klink but it was nonetheless correct. I also think the Jennings fumble was not as clear cut as everyone is saying. it is unclear when exactly the ball came out and when his calf/ankle touched the ground (webster was blocking the view of his ankle in the best camera angle). The spot on the ware play is a different story although fox did not show a replay as far as I can remember.</P>


</P>


</P>


....couldn't disagree more..</P>

idiotekniQues
01-16-2012, 06:15 PM
if you watch the giants-packers highlights video on nfl.com they trash the refs.

they must have said the officiating was poor like 5 times, and they weren't glossing over it either.

the osi call, the fumble were the ones they really pointed out but they said more than once the officiating was bad the whole game. not just two calls.

MaCkTiC
01-16-2012, 06:16 PM
rewatch it. there was some helmet to helmet. it was just a small small klink but it was nonetheless correct.

I also think the Jennings fumble was not as clear cut as everyone is saying. it is unclear when exactly the ball came out and when his calf/ankle touched the ground (webster was blocking the view of his ankle in the best camera angle).

The spot on the ware play is a different story although fox did not show a replay as far as I can remember.

<h4 class="ForumPostTitle">Bill Leavy agrees with you....
</h4>

StrahanTuck
01-16-2012, 06:16 PM
I hate roughing the passer. It's plagued us over the years. Can you guys recall us being on the receiving end of one that turned things around for us? Yet, I feel like I can think of many ones against us on 3rd downs that lead to touchdowns. Hell, remember Kiwanuka was scared of getting called, so released Vince Young on 4th down?

TuckYou
01-16-2012, 06:17 PM
https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSo5rrJ_ryVm-llv7A9iAOjNGCCSxEmBZF9UHjAViIQ9l975aQeYQ</P>


What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.</P>


</P>

fansince69
01-16-2012, 06:17 PM
First off I really do not see any helmet contact.....and I believe that what they are trying to do is keep players from LEADING with the crown of the helmet which it clearly was not....ON almost any tackle there can be incidental helmet contact and that is NOT what the spirit of the rule is intended for.

miken609
01-16-2012, 06:18 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58 its not a lot but it is something</P>


It's not enough to make the call.</P>
You're probably right but I've seen defensive linemen's fingertips brush against Peyton Manning's helmet and flags fly. I have no idea how the ref could have seen that Osi helmet to helmet on Rodgers. I think it was a bad call tat just so happen to be right by luck.

gabagool
01-16-2012, 06:18 PM
While I feel 100% that the rule is a joke, OSI's helmet grazes Rogers. Nothing more then rubbing against each other, but it 100% hit, FOX only showed 1 replay of the angle we needed to see.

slipknottin
01-16-2012, 06:19 PM
https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSo5rrJ_ryVm-llv7A9iAOjNGCCSxEmBZF9UHjAViIQ9l975aQeYQ</P>


What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.</P>


*</P>

Sums it up best.

slipknottin
01-16-2012, 06:20 PM
While I feel 100% that the rule is a joke, OSI's helmet grazes Rogers. Nothing more then rubbing against each other, but it 100% hit, FOX only showed 1 replay of the angle we needed to see.


Thats not a penalty. Helmets can touch. You cant hit him in the helmet. Osi's helmet clearly goes PAST Rodgers helmet. Bumping the helmets side to side was and is not a penalty.

miken609
01-16-2012, 06:21 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI

go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58

its not a lot but it is something

You honestly see a hit to the head there? When was the last time you had your vision checked?

Osi's helmet goes right past Rodgers helmet, maybe might graze it, but it certainly is no hit to the head.

no "blow to the head" or "hit to the head," as you put it, but there is helmet-to-helmet contact

miken609
01-16-2012, 06:23 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI

go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58

its not a lot but it is something
Bill Leavy was probably wrong in calling a "blow to the head" but there was incidental "helmet-to helmet" contact. That fact is clear in the link I posted.

You honestly see a hit to the head there? When was the last time you had your vision checked?

Osi's helmet goes right past Rodgers helmet, maybe might graze it, but it certainly is no hit to the head.

no "blow to the head" or "hit to the head," as you put it, but there is helmet-to-helmet contact

Diamondring
01-16-2012, 06:24 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI

go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58

its not a lot but it is something

You honestly see a hit to the head there? When was the last time you had your vision checked?

Osi's helmet goes right past Rodgers helmet, maybe might graze it, but it certainly is no hit to the head.

no "blow to the head" or "hit to the head," as you put it, but there is helmet-to-helmet contactThere was just some head to head contact, but the defender did not lead with his head wich needs to happen inorder to make the call.

G-Man67
01-16-2012, 06:26 PM
you are not understanding the rule ... the contact was made with the shoulder, not the helmet ... their helmet's making the slightest of contact, incidental contact, doesnt count



bottom line, we'd probably have chalked it up to another, silly late game, over-sensitive call similar to the one on Williams vs. Atlanta, but not for all the other bad calls in the game and altho late game, the game was far, far from over, we barely recovered the onsides and they didn't even need to onsides it

gsp3
01-16-2012, 06:26 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI

go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58

its not a lot but it is something

You honestly see a hit to the head there? When was the last time you had your vision checked?

Osi's helmet goes right past Rodgers helmet, maybe might graze it, but it certainly is no hit to the head.

no "blow to the head" or "hit to the head," as you put it, but there is helmet-to-helmet contact

BUT THAT DOESNT WARRANT THE CALL. If Osi actually hit Arron Rodgers HEAD ON, helmet-to-helmet, then yes the call would've been made. But it was a clean hit with minor helmet contact. Do you realize how many times helmets collide accidentally on the field? Do you think that call should be made every time a hit like that is made?

You are completely wrong and the fact that not only Giants fans disagree with you, but the vast amount of NFL commentators and other fan bases disagree with the call proves that you are wrong on this.

slipknottin
01-16-2012, 06:26 PM
no "blow to the head" or "hit to the head," as you put it, but there is helmet-to-helmet contact

Which is NOT a penalty. A hit to the head is a penalty. Osi absolutely 1000% did NOT hit Rodgers in the head.

G-Man67
01-16-2012, 06:29 PM
we aren't playing flag football here. Osi was half a step away from hitting rodgers before he passed the ball. There is no way he could have stopped himself, watch it in gametime, not slowmo. Ontop of that, was a "clean shot"...no helmet to helmet.


right and Osi did everything he could to hold up, he hit him as soft as he possibly could being inches away ... Rodgers went down like a soccer player

PIERCEnumber58rules
01-16-2012, 06:32 PM
While I feel 100% that the rule is a joke, OSI's helmet grazes Rogers. Nothing more then rubbing against each other, but it 100% hit, FOX only showed 1 replay of the angle we needed to see.


Then the game is unplayable. Helmets hit each other. It's called football. Fine. Call it every time a helmet "tinks" another helmet so we can have 438 unnecessary roughness penalties a game. Call it everytime!

I don't know how anyone can defend the piss poor officiating yesterday. It was straight up undefendable garbage and all those refs should be fired. PERIOD.

FBomb
01-16-2012, 06:34 PM
While I feel 100% that the rule is a joke, OSI's helmet grazes Rogers. Nothing more then rubbing against each other, but it 100% hit, FOX only showed 1 replay of the angle we needed to see.
Thats not a penalty. Helmets can touch. You cant hit him in the helmet. Osi's helmet clearly goes PAST Rodgers helmet. Bumping the helmets side to side was and is not a penalty.</P>


Their helmets "bumped" when Rogers head snapped backwards from the hit. It's a BS call regardless and the Giants never let it stop the steamrolling, so the point is moot.</P>

Spizi
01-16-2012, 06:34 PM
rewatch it. there was some helmet to helmet. it was just a small small klink but it was nonetheless correct.

I also think the Jennings fumble was not as clear cut as everyone is saying. it is unclear when exactly the ball came out and when his calf/ankle touched the ground (webster was blocking the view of his ankle in the best camera angle).

The spot on the ware play is a different story although fox did not show a replay as far as I can remember.

That is not a helmet to helmet hit though because the hit was initiated with the body. That's legal because he didn't lead with the head.

miken609
01-16-2012, 06:35 PM
Ok I agree I didn't understand the rule and it shouldn't have been called. But now all of the calls that ARE called helmet to helmet can be argued that the helmet contact is incidental and the defender was going after another part of the body.

FlyingTruck
01-16-2012, 06:36 PM
There was SOME. But it wasn't leading with his helmet. It shouldn't have been called. He wrapped him around mid section and his head drifted towards Rodgers. But in no way shape or form should it have been a penalty.

miken609
01-16-2012, 06:38 PM
and im not on crack and my vision is fine.

G-Men Surg.
01-16-2012, 06:40 PM
I don't agree bro and will stand by Carl Banks remarks about it, that was horse manure call .

bengalee28
01-16-2012, 06:40 PM
Sorry but that was a clean hit.

BigBlue1971
01-16-2012, 06:40 PM
that was a clean play. Osi did everything right. the officials gotit wrong as they did several other plays and they all were against the Giants!

JesseJames
01-16-2012, 06:41 PM
I think the fact that our team won the game and beat possibly the best team in the league and we're complaining about the officiating in the game attests to how truly bad it was, will the league deal with the issue probably not...

DJloves
01-16-2012, 06:41 PM
This thread is just stupid.

BParcells777
01-16-2012, 06:42 PM
there was slight helmet to helmet but it was Rodgers's head swaying back after impact that "touched" Osi's helmet long after the initial impact


Hey at least they allowed the Grant fumble and Blackburn return......I was disappointed Blackburn did not give Rodgers the Bradshaw effect at the end of the run

DIPSET_ALL_DAY
01-16-2012, 06:45 PM
Ive watched the Osi hit plenty, there is ABSOLUTELY NO helmet to helmet. Thank you.

Am I the only one who felt they were doing these horrible calls to try and help the Packers? I'm not one who ever believes in this thing of the refs taking sides, but it was obvious in this game.

yoeddy
01-16-2012, 06:56 PM
Ok I agree I didn't understand the rule and it shouldn't have been called. But now all of the calls that ARE called helmet to helmet can be argued that the helmet contact is incidental and the defender was going after another part of the body.

If the helmet makes the first contact, then they will lose that argument..

miken609
01-16-2012, 06:58 PM
you are not understanding the rule ... the contact was made with the shoulder, not the helmet ... their helmet's making the slightest of contact, incidental contact, doesnt count



bottom line, we'd probably have chalked it up to another, silly late game, over-sensitive call similar to the one on Williams vs. Atlanta, but not for all the other bad calls in the game and altho late game, the game was far, far from over, we barely recovered the onsides and they didn't even need to onsides it

I agree, but on the Williams play, the whistle blew before the ball carrier was thrown down. It was a judgement call but probably shouldn't have been called.

miken609
01-16-2012, 07:04 PM
Ok I agree I didn't understand the rule and it shouldn't have been called. But now all of the calls that ARE called helmet to helmet can be argued that the helmet contact is incidental and the defender was going after another part of the body.

If the helmet makes the first contact, then they will lose that argument..
So am I getting this right?..... The rule is if the helmet contact is before any other contact between the defender and the QB, the call should be made. The call could also be made if the ref judges that the player intended to lead with the crown of his helmet and a large force was delivered using the helmet?

Is there a 2011 NFL official rulebook anywhere online where I can confirm this? I can't seem to find one.

buddy33
01-16-2012, 07:32 PM
No, it was the wrong call.

miken609
01-16-2012, 07:33 PM
No, it was the wrong call.thanks

YATittle1962
01-16-2012, 07:37 PM
Ive watched the Osi hit plenty, there is ABSOLUTELY NO helmet to helmet.

zero helmet to helmet on that play....zip

and Eli was taking hits that were late where the defender was dropping his weight on him with no flags thrown

but we get the W ....so...

Joe Morrison
01-16-2012, 07:38 PM
Little late to this but you can take your cheeseblock and put it in the closet.</P>


Troy and even Ferrara called it one of the interesting games with bad calls and replay being wrong all game long.</P>


Just glad the GMEN have not worried about it and taken matters into their own hands regardless of the Homer calls.</P>


I wouldn't want to be lining up against the GMEN's front four this week, I am sure TC and the staff has had plenty of ammo to send to the officials about the total disregard to holding, especially on JPP all game, never mind the late hits on Eli.</P>


Going to be a great punch you in the mouth game this week.</P>

Rudyy
01-16-2012, 07:39 PM
There's a difference between LEADING with your head, and having your head brush off another player.

Harooni
01-16-2012, 07:40 PM
Ive watched the Osi hit plenty, there is ABSOLUTELY NO helmet to helmet. there was he did not lead with the helmet but it did barley contact ar's helmet. Ricky tacky and they missed 1 on Eli.

flimflam
01-16-2012, 07:42 PM
rewatch it. there was some helmet to helmet. it was just a small small klink but it was nonetheless correct.

I also think the Jennings fumble was not as clear cut as everyone is saying. it is unclear when exactly the ball came out and when his calf/ankle touched the ground (webster was blocking the view of his ankle in the best camera angle).

Wrong! No helmet to helmet. Plus the call was wrong. How the hell is a defensive player at full speed supposed to stop on a dime. Wrong call on both counts.

If anything, the refs made plenty of non-calls on late hits on Eli. Effin refs ALWAYS call against us.

The spot on the ware play is a different story although fox did not show a replay as far as I can remember.

YATittle1962
01-16-2012, 07:46 PM
Ive watched the Osi hit plenty, there is ABSOLUTELY NO helmet to helmet. there was he did not lead with the helmet but it did barley contact ar's helmet. Ricky tacky and they missed 1 on Eli.

watch it again

zero contact

its all shoulder ...the camera from behind Osi clearly shows his helmet go behinds Rodgers helmet ...gets close .......never touches his helmet

if it does ever so slightly slightly tap it was the result of Rodgers head snapping back



then Rodgers smashes into Tuck which is hilarious

horrible call

Big Blue 418
01-16-2012, 07:48 PM
The Giants overcame the 12th man and the refs . If this game was close clearly the refs would have tried their best to give the game to the Packers . Good thing we kicked their asses

Duckdownman
01-16-2012, 08:01 PM
Ok I agree I didn't understand the rule and it shouldn't have been called. But now all of the calls that ARE called helmet to helmet can be argued that the helmet contact is incidental and the defender was going after another part of the body.

If the helmet makes the first contact, then they will lose that argument..
So am I getting this right?..... The rule is if the helmet contact is before any other contact between the defender and the QB, the call should be made. The call could also be made if the ref judges that the player intended to lead with the crown of his helmet and a large force was delivered using the helmet?

Is there a 2011 NFL official rulebook anywhere online where I can confirm this? I can't seem to find one.

Thats a general rule for helmet to helmet hits. That is not the only way to get a "blow to the head" call. As everyone else has stated you cant lead with the crown of your helmet. Such a play is usually called as "leading with the helmet" which is not how it was called on the field (which didnt happen anyway). They called "blow to the head" which is usually called on slaps or clotheslines (think of the old reggie white head slap move). This, as with a helmet to helmet call simply didnt happen and was a horrible call. It wasnt late, to the head in ANY fashion or illegal. Your mention of peyton getting calls (as with brady) sound like blow to the head calls and even with that being said those two get some very "iffy" calls in their favor, doesnt make it the right call.

guardplay320
01-16-2012, 08:05 PM
Ok I agree I didn't understand the rule and it shouldn't have been called. But now all of the calls that ARE called helmet to helmet can be argued that the helmet contact is incidental and the defender was going after another part of the body.

If the helmet makes the first contact, then they will lose that argument..
So am I getting this right?..... The rule is if the helmet contact is before any other contact between the defender and the QB, the call should be made. The call could also be made if the ref judges that the player intended to lead with the crown of his helmet and a large force was delivered using the helmet?

Is there a 2011 NFL official rulebook anywhere online where I can confirm this? I can't seem to find one.


Neither of these apply:
A tackler using his helmet to butt, spear, or ram an opponent. <li id="yui_3_4_1_1_1326758534726_1371"> Any player who uses the top of his helmet unnecessarily.

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/penaltysummaries

ToomerFORtheBomb
01-16-2012, 08:12 PM
Ok I agree I didn't understand the rule and it shouldn't have been called. But now all of the calls that ARE called helmet to helmet can be argued that the helmet contact is incidental and the defender was going after another part of the body.

If the helmet makes the first contact, then they will lose that argument..
So am I getting this right?..... The rule is if the helmet contact is before any other contact between the defender and the QB, the call should be made. The call could also be made if the ref judges that the player intended to lead with the crown of his helmet and a large force was delivered using the helmet?

Is there a 2011 NFL official rulebook anywhere online where I can confirm this? I can't seem to find one.


1st off Osi would have to had lead with the helmet which he clearly did not. There was a light incidental graze of the two helmets after the initial contact. That doesn't constitute a personal foul.

2nd... In life, timing is everything and you could not have picked a more bizarre game to defend the officiating.

Joe Morrison
01-16-2012, 08:15 PM
Ok I agree I didn't understand the rule and it shouldn't have been called. But now all of the calls that ARE called helmet to helmet can be argued that the helmet contact is incidental and the defender was going after another part of the body. If the helmet makes the first contact, then they will lose that argument.. So am I getting this right?..... The rule is if the helmet contact is before any other contact between the defender and the QB, the call should be made. The call could also be made if the ref judges that the player intended to lead with the crown of his helmet and a large force was delivered using the helmet? Is there a 2011 NFL official rulebook anywhere online where I can confirm this? I can't seem to find one. 1st off Osi would have to had lead with the helmet which he clearly did not. There was a light incidental graze of the two helmets after the initial contact. That doesn't constitute a personal foul. 2nd... in life, timing is everything and you could not have picked a more bizarre game to defend the officiating.</P>


It was so bad that after the Giants stopped them and made them punt a little later and got the ball on the 20 with time winding down my friend and I both said it's time for them to pull a holding penalty out of their butt now, and sure enough Snee got the hold, Giants were force to punt, but it didn't matter, GMEN took it to them anyway.</P>

OX1
01-16-2012, 08:28 PM
if it does ever so slightly slightly tap it was the result of Rodgers head snapping back





This is what I saw, I very mild graze and only cause Rodgers body fell backwards from the hit. Osi, I'm sure on purpose tackled him from the side. If they want to call that helmet to helmet and be technical weenies, then Eli had 2 or 3 penalties coming.

Either let them play or aggressively enforce the rules, but don't go all NASCAR (if your not a fan, NASCAR owns the world off the wall, inconsistent, and blatantly biased officiating) and enforce the same scenario 7 different ways in one game.**

KidA
01-16-2012, 11:58 PM
Osi tackles Rodgers cleanly and their helmets make incidental contact. That should not be a penalty.

nycisgreat
01-17-2012, 12:39 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI

go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58

its not a lot but it is something

You honestly see a hit to the head there? When was the last time you had your vision checked?

Osi's helmet goes right past Rodgers helmet, maybe might graze it, but it certainly is no hit to the head.

I think you should rephrase the question. What should be asked is when was the last time he took a hit.

rainierjef
01-17-2012, 12:49 AM
just rewatched that like 3 times and OP.... your on thin ice with me from now on!

PrideofNY
01-17-2012, 12:51 AM
<div id="answerImproveLinkContainer">

The question is not whether the two helmets touch at any point during the hit. That's not what warrants a penalty, ever. This is the rule:
</div>

<div id="editorText">


</p>


"using any part of a players helmet (including the top/crown and
forehead/hairline parts) or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent
violently or unnecessarily; although such violent or unnecessary use of
the helmet is impermissible against any opponent, game officials will
give special attention in administering this rule to protect those
players who are in virtually defenseless postures."</p></div>

NYgiants141
01-17-2012, 01:00 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58 its not a lot but it is something</p>


It's not enough to make the call.</p>
You're probably right but I've seen defensive linemen's fingertips brush against Peyton Manning's helmet and flags fly. I have no idea how the ref could have seen that Osi helmet to helmet on Rodgers. I think it was a bad call tat just so happen to be right by luck.

If you need to go to a replay, full screen it, watch it at full HD and look extremely closely, and STILL figure out that its just a little touch then its a bad call.

simms56
01-17-2012, 01:42 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI

go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58

its not a lot but it is something

You honestly see a hit to the head there? When was the last time you had your vision checked?

Osi's helmet goes right past Rodgers helmet, maybe might graze it, but it certainly is no hit to the head.

no "blow to the head" or "hit to the head," as you put it, but there is helmet-to-helmet contact

BUT THAT DOESNT WARRANT THE CALL. If Osi actually hit Arron Rodgers HEAD ON, helmet-to-helmet, then yes the call would've been made. But it was a clean hit with minor helmet contact. Do you realize how many times helmets collide accidentally on the field? Do you think that call should be made every time a hit like that is made?

You are completely wrong and the fact that not only Giants fans disagree with you, but the vast amount of NFL commentators and other fan bases disagree with the call proves that you are wrong on this.


Aww....cmon'....only 97% of hits in the NFL have incidental helmet contact. We should just have the refs flag each team several times every snap, add up all the yards from the flags, and then add or deduct yardage based upon that. It will be Arena Football meets the math team....exceptional entertainment.

JJC7301
01-17-2012, 01:46 AM
Ive watched the Osi hit plenty, there is ABSOLUTELY NO helmet to helmet.
+1. Agreed. The only part was when Rodgers was pushed into Tuck's helmet.

JJC7301
01-17-2012, 01:48 AM
rewatch it. there was some helmet to helmet. it was just a small small klink but it was nonetheless correct.

I also think the Jennings fumble was not as clear cut as everyone is saying. it is unclear when exactly the ball came out and when his calf/ankle touched the ground (webster was blocking the view of his ankle in the best camera angle).

The spot on the ware play is a different story although fox did not show a replay as far as I can remember.
There was only one angle that caught it all, and the ball was indisputably moving out of the receivers hand BEFORE his calf touched the ground. It wasn't out of his hand yet, but it was moving in hand, meaning that he did not have possession anymore.

NWKEffectElement
01-17-2012, 02:16 AM
What an attention *****. Who gives a **** now? We won despite vega's and the NFL best try to rob us.

tikiandphil
01-17-2012, 02:57 AM
Ive watched the Osi hit plenty, there is ABSOLUTELY NO helmet to helmet.

My thumb hurts from playing it back and forth. NO HELMET TO HELMET. Call was very wrong. Not even roughing or late. A call the NFL office should look into at this stage.

BlueJayC
01-17-2012, 09:03 PM
That play happened right in front of where I was sitting. I watched Rodgers take the hit....kept my eye on the offiicial....he didn't throw the flag until 3-4 seconds after Rodgers hit the ground......once Rogers put his hands on his helmet acting like he was hurt the flag came out.....as soon as the flag hit the ground Rodgers popped up and sprinted to the line.....that ref was goaded into that call and he bought the act hook line and sinker....I was disgusted.....it was the only time I cursed (instinctive reaction) all day or made a fuss in that stadium......all 300 Packer fans around me agreed that it was a bogus call.....

FYI nicest fans in the world out there....true class acts.....EXCEPT for the ones who trashed our flag pole outside the stadium.

jomo
01-17-2012, 09:07 PM
rewatch it. there was some helmet to helmet. it was just a small small klink but it was nonetheless correct. I also think the Jennings fumble was not as clear cut as everyone is saying. it is unclear when exactly the ball came out and when his calf/ankle touched the ground (webster was blocking the view of his ankle in the best camera angle). The spot on the ware play is a different story although fox did not show a replay as far as I can remember.In order to post here you must disclose your relationship to the referree....brother, sister, wife, mother or maybe you could even bethe cuprit himself.</P>


Nice try</P>

pino
01-17-2012, 09:19 PM
That's not helmet to helmet. Shame on you for even trying to defend that garbage.

They should be happy Osi was considerate enough to not lay into it. That was a model hit.

Itlan
01-17-2012, 09:22 PM
That's not helmet to helmet. Shame on you for even trying to defend that garbage.

They should be happy Osi was considerate enough to not lay into it. That was a model hit.Uhm. Helmet to helmet implies Osi's helmet hits Aaron Rodgers helmet. It is helmet to helmet. Is it worthy of a penalty? Absolutely not.

But it's helmet to helmet. You sound like a Republican who denies evolution.

yoeddy
01-17-2012, 09:25 PM
That's not helmet to helmet. Shame on you for even trying to defend that garbage.

They should be happy Osi was considerate enough to not lay into it. That was a model hit.Uhm. Helmet to helmet implies Osi's helmet hits Aaron Rodgers helmet. It is helmet to helmet. Is it worthy of a penalty? Absolutely not.

But it's helmet to helmet. You sound like a Republican who denies evolution.

The title of this thread is "The Refs were correct..." when in fact they were not.

Itlan
01-17-2012, 09:25 PM
Francesca proved today on YES it was helmet-to-helmet. He was even kind enough to stop the replay and zoom in for blind idiots like yourself.

Just get over it, jesus christ.

RoanokeFan
01-17-2012, 09:25 PM
rewatch it. <font color="#0000FF">there was some helmet to helmet. it was just a small small klink but it was nonetheless correct.</font>

I also think the Jennings fumble was not as clear cut as everyone is saying. it is unclear when exactly the ball came out and when his calf/ankle touched the ground (webster was blocking the view of his ankle in the best camera angle).

The spot on the ware play is a different story although fox did not show a replay as far as I can remember.

I believe the rule requires the defender lead with his helmet and THAT is not in dispute. There was a slight contact when Rodgers head snapped back. That is not the intent of the rule.

yoeddy
01-17-2012, 09:30 PM
Francesca proved today on YES it was helmet-to-helmet. He was even kind enough to stop the replay and zoom in for blind idiots like yourself.

Just get over it, jesus christ.

Yes, because Francesca knows what he's talking about...please...

pino
01-17-2012, 09:37 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI

go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58

its not a lot but it is something

The penalty was unnecessary roughness (or roughing the passer) due to helmet to helmet. Incidental contact of the helmet does not fall into this category. If you read at the very end of my post (the very last sentence) it will state this very clearly. I hope this answers your concern.

Quoted from the official rule book:

Rule 12, Section 2, Article 8

Unnecessary Roughness

(g) If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or
facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily.

Rule 12, Article 2, Section 13

HITS TO PASSER’S HEAD AND USE OF HELMET AND FACEMASK

(3)?? In covering the passer position, Referees will be particularly alert to fouls in which defenders
impermissibly use the helmet and/or facemask to hit the passer, or use hands, arms, or other parts of
the body to hit the passer forcibly in the head or neck area (see also the other unnecessary-roughness
rules covering these subjects). A defensive player must not use his helmet against a passer who is in
a defenseless posture for example, (a) forcibly hitting the passer’s head or neck area with the helmet
or facemask, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the passer by
encircling or grasping him, or (b) lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or
forehead/”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the passer’s body. This rule does not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or non-crown parts of the helmet in the course of a
conventional tackle on a passer.

pino
01-17-2012, 09:39 PM
That's not helmet to helmet. Shame on you for even trying to defend that garbage.

They should be happy Osi was considerate enough to not lay into it. That was a model hit.Uhm. Helmet to helmet implies Osi's helmet hits Aaron Rodgers helmet. It is helmet to helmet. Is it worthy of a penalty? Absolutely not.

But it's helmet to helmet. You sound like a Republican who denies evolution.

I've already quoted from the rule book that says you are WRONG.

pino
01-17-2012, 09:39 PM
This rule does not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or non-crown parts of the helmet in the course of a
conventional tackle on a passer.

Key word is incidental. You can apologize now.

GCGiant
01-17-2012, 09:51 PM
The first thing that I thought was that Osi held back intentionally so as to not get a bogus penalty...and he got one anyway. That's what made it so sad of a call.

yoeddy
01-17-2012, 10:13 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts--xqbNIWI

go to 720p, full screen it, and watch the view starting at 4:58

its not a lot but it is something

The penalty was unnecessary roughness (or roughing the passer) due to helmet to helmet. Incidental contact of the helmet does not fall into this category. If you read at the very end of my post (the very last sentence) it will state this very clearly. I hope this answers your concern.

Quoted from the official rule book:

Rule 12, Section 2, Article 8

Unnecessary Roughness

(g) If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or
facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily.

Rule 12, Article 2, Section 13

HITS TO PASSER’S HEAD AND USE OF HELMET AND FACEMASK

(3)?? In covering the passer position, Referees will be particularly alert to fouls in which defenders
impermissibly use the helmet and/or facemask to hit the passer, or use hands, arms, or other parts of
the body to hit the passer forcibly in the head or neck area (see also the other unnecessary-roughness
rules covering these subjects). A defensive player must not use his helmet against a passer who is in
a defenseless posture for example, (a) forcibly hitting the passer’s head or neck area with the helmet
or facemask, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the passer by
encircling or grasping him, or (b) lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or
forehead/”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the passer’s body. This rule does not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or non-crown parts of the helmet in the course of a
conventional tackle on a passer.

You are incorrect. The call was "Unnecessary Roughness - Blow to the head"...of which there was none...

Itlan
01-17-2012, 10:35 PM
That's not helmet to helmet. Shame on you for even trying to defend that garbage.

They should be happy Osi was considerate enough to not lay into it. That was a model hit.Uhm. Helmet to helmet implies Osi's helmet hits Aaron Rodgers helmet. It is helmet to helmet. Is it worthy of a penalty? Absolutely not.

But it's helmet to helmet. You sound like a Republican who denies evolution.

I've already quoted from the rule book that says you are WRONG.It's a judgment call. You can't be wrong if contact occurs. It's up to the referee to decide whether it was incidental or not, not you. Dumbass.

Itlan
01-17-2012, 10:36 PM
Francesca proved today on YES it was helmet-to-helmet. He was even kind enough to stop the replay and zoom in for blind idiots like yourself.

Just get over it, jesus christ.

Yes, because Francesca knows what he's talking about...please...
He wasn't even arguing until someone said "THERE WAS NO HELMET TO HELMET CONTACT! RAHHH!" and then he said "well let's look at the tape" and the tape proved them wrong.

Stop crying. Get your fat *** to work tomorrow and shut up.

Itlan
01-17-2012, 10:37 PM
(a) forcibly hitting the passer’s head or neck area with the helmet
or facemask, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the passer by
encircling or grasping him

/thread

Zaggs
01-17-2012, 11:19 PM
rewatch it. there was some helmet to helmet. it was just a small small klink but it was nonetheless correct.

I also think the Jennings fumble was not as clear cut as everyone is saying. it is unclear when exactly the ball came out and when his calf/ankle touched the ground (webster was blocking the view of his ankle in the best camera angle).

The spot on the ware play is a different story although fox did not show a replay as far as I can remember.

He is correct on the first part. Osi's earhole grazed the back stripe of Rodgers's helmet. Where he is incorrect is assuming this is a illegal helmet to helmet hit. Its not. Its when you FORCIBLY hit a player helmet to helmet that its illegal. Osi did no such thing.
As for the fumble its not when the ball comes out. Its when it STARTS to come out that counts if some part of him was down. His calf was not touching the ground when it starts to come out. I would be curious to find out which ref originally called fumble. The line judge who was closest? Why were they over ruled?

barran21
01-17-2012, 11:32 PM
lol that wasn't even close to h2h lol at the blind op, that was a bad call....

NYCDBS
01-17-2012, 11:35 PM
If you believe that call was correct, explain to me why Packers D-line late hit on Eli wasn't called.

Well one hit he turned into the hit I'm pretty sure they would have thrown the flag if he got hit from behind...

Ruttiger711
01-17-2012, 11:39 PM
It was a terrible call, nothing more nothing less.... The hit was clean and jarred Rodgers' head back into Osi's head....so in that case....

Rodgers should have been flagged for the helmet to helmet.

giantman8493
01-17-2012, 11:42 PM
It was a terrible call, nothing more nothing less.... The hit was clean and jarred Rodgers' head back into Osi's head....so in that case....

Rodgers should have been flagged for the helmet to helmet.true

yoeddy
01-17-2012, 11:56 PM
Francesca proved today on YES it was helmet-to-helmet. He was even kind enough to stop the replay and zoom in for blind idiots like yourself.

Just get over it, jesus christ.

Yes, because Francesca knows what he's talking about...please...
He wasn't even arguing until someone said "THERE WAS NO HELMET TO HELMET CONTACT! RAHHH!" and then he said "well let's look at the tape" and the tape proved them wrong.

Stop crying. Get your fat *** to work tomorrow and shut up.

Who cares if there was helmet to helmet contact? The call was "blow to the head", of which there was none. No crying here...just pointing out that Francesca is a bozo...

pica01
01-18-2012, 12:13 AM
wow,this is how you get people to pay attention to a post.I'm new here and noticed how active this thread is.Just say that EVERYONE who saw something and agrees on it is wrong.Well,i just posted something about the fumble.Not the review.About the call on the field being changed in the first place.It's worth discussing.

YATittle1962
01-18-2012, 12:47 AM
Francesca proved today on YES it was helmet-to-helmet. He was even kind enough to stop the replay and zoom in for blind idiots like yourself.

Just get over it, jesus christ.

Yes, because Francesca knows what he's talking about...please...
He wasn't even arguing until someone said "THERE WAS NO HELMET TO HELMET CONTACT! RAHHH!" and then he said "well let's look at the tape" and the tape proved them wrong.

Stop crying. Get your fat *** to work tomorrow and shut up.

Who cares if there was helmet to helmet contact? The call was "blow to the head", of which there was none. No crying here...just pointing out that Francesca is a bozo...

MIke was completely wrong today

the call was "blow to the head" correct?...yes

the blow was Osi shoulder to Rodgers body.......the impact then resulted in Rodgers head snapping back......his head snapping back caused his helmet to tap Osi helmet which was behind his

how in the world is that a blow to the head

absolutely ridiculous

check out Hawk spearing into Eli leading with his head.......late no less

and a play earlier Eli gets plowed extremely late....

nothing on either play

Giants10Joe
01-18-2012, 12:49 AM
I also saw a small inadvertent helmet to helmet tap after the main hit. However, there are so many plays were there is much more contact than that but aren't called. The refs made the wrong call.