The Poojer Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 s against vick? granted those 30 yards killed us, but all in all I did not see them as being terrible fouls, sure crowell(?) should not have gone to his head, but in both cases, it was aggressive play and they missed being effective by split seconds. I can take penalties like that, what I can't take is blatant stupid penalties, and I did not think those 2 fell under that category Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 The hands to the head one was stupid; even if Vick hadn't thrown the ball, it would've been a flag. You can't go that high on a QB. The first personal foul was a bad call, in my opinion. Not that it really ended up mattering I guess. CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted September 26, 2005 Author Share Posted September 26, 2005 but he wasgoing in with hands up to block a pass(presumably), I still do not have a big problem The hands to the head one was stupid; even if Vick hadn't thrown the ball, it would've been a flag. You can't go that high on a QB. The first personal foul was a bad call, in my opinion. Not that it really ended up mattering I guess. CW 454835[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 First one was horrible. Vick ran for 18 yards the play before, and then runs again and gets a free 15 for the two-hand touch out of bounds. The guy plays like a RB, he can surely take a shove. As for the 2nd one, hands to the face is automatic. You can't say you didn't do it when the guy's helmet flies off his head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puhonix Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 The bay of pigs game was the worse, with some of the worst officiating I've seen in a while. I was surprised there wasn't some sort of official complaint filed. QBs are almost getting too much protection these days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 I'll take both of them... We got a RTP against the Falcons - leads me to believe the Refs told the teams it would be a point of emphasis after conversation with Mora and Mularky. Both coaches probably asked that the QBs got looked after by the refs - so they did it. I like the call to get after Vick, it almost paid off. Had they not score on their opening drive we would have won IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 You leave your feet when tackling the QB, its 15 yards the other way. That's texbook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 All I think we can ask is that they call them the same way against both teams. They called a roughing the passer penalty on the Falcons in the next series. I think the first one was because they were trying to stop any headhunting of the QB (particularly given Vick's value to ATL and the league for selling this entertainment product). The second call was automatic because all defenders are required to maintain control of their bodies and not even go to the head inadvertently. The penalty call on ATL for roughing Losman and driving him to the ground made this aspect of the refa calls even (now picking up the flag on the INT call on Moulds by Hall is another thing though). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seadog Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 Why was roughing the passer called on the Bills for hitting Vick? I saw the hits to J.P. coming after he released the ball with no flag. Were the refs trying to protect him? It just seems if they are going to call roughing the passer it should be a two way street. I know the one shot was to the head, and i'm not saying it should'nt have been called. I think they did call it once, but i saw two other occasions when J.P. was driven into the turf. The flag for pass interferance with Moulds being taken away was also B.S.. How do you throw a flag and then pick it up? Is there a review from the booth we don't know about on penelties? This crap with flags coming out 30 seconds after a play is over has to stop also. I've seen several games where the db and wr are walking back to the huddle and sudddenly a flag for pass interferance appears? I'm not exusing the Bills lose, just taking to council poor refs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric in Va Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 The hit to the head penalty for Vick was crap. Vick never had his chin strap clipped. His helmet fell off because it wasn't on securely. If you are going to call a penalty, make sure the guy has hit helmet on correctly before acting like it was some terrible hit. Vick is a wuss, he was a wuss at VT and again in Atlanta. He wants to act like some great QB, but he is a total wuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 Why was roughing the passer called on the Bills for hitting Vick? I saw the hits to J.P. coming after he released the ball with no flag. Were the refs trying to protect him? It just seems if they are going to call roughing the passer it should be a two way street. I know the one shot was to the head, and i'm not saying it should'nt have been called. I think they did call it once, but i saw two other occasions when J.P. was driven into the turf. The flag for pass interferance with Moulds being taken away was also B.S.. How do you throw a flag and then pick it up? Is there a review from the booth we don't know about on penelties? This crap with flags coming out 30 seconds after a play is over has to stop also. I've seen several games where the db and wr are walking back to the huddle and sudddenly a flag for pass interferance appears? I'm not exusing the Bills lose, just taking to council poor refs. 454969[/snapback] To be sure, I must qualify this by stating that I, too, am not excusing our poor play, however there were also some extremely brutal spots yesterday that had me shaking my head. Can't remember who the ball carrier was for Atlanta, but at one point on a third down play we stopped him short by about half a yard...and you could even see the line judge (?) running up to where he was down, and another ref came in and placed the ball far enough ahead to give them the first down. I recall seeing this twice yesterday and I was baffled as to why we didn't challenge them. Like I said...no excuses for our loss. I was just a bit troubled by the officiating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 As for the 2nd one, hands to the face is automatic. You can't say you didn't do it when the guy's helmet flies off his head. 454842[/snapback] That's funny, because I saw a New England OL push a Steelers helmet off his head in their game, no flag thrown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eSJayDee Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 I feel that the 2nd one we got, which was against Crowell, was legit. It was a very 'ticky-tack' (to quote Tasker) call, but he did hit him in the head/face, which is a penalty, regardless of how hard. I'll also concede that it's one of those plays that's hard to avoid as he's reaching to tackle & perhaps trying to block the pass & Vick is falling. Sorta like drawing a foul, but it's the rules. I think the call on Vincent was wrong. Hit wasn't late & didn't look high, either. I'll also add that the roughing called on Losman's hit was kinda dubious, too. So it appears that the refs were fair in that they were calling RTP very close. Personally, I really don't like this, particularly w/ 2 mobile QBs like Losman & Vick. Might as well make QBs play w/ redshirts (or skirts) & not allow them to be touched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eSJayDee Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 My reply to the 'Roughing the Passer' thread below (or is it above?) I feel that the 2nd one we got, which was against Crowell, was legit. It was a very 'ticky-tack' (to quote Tasker) call, but he did hit him in the head/face, which is a penalty, regardless of how hard. I'll also concede that it's one of those plays that's hard to avoid as he's reaching to tackle & perhaps trying to block the pass & Vick is falling. Sorta like drawing a foul, but it's the rules.I think the call on Vincent was wrong. Hit wasn't late & didn't look high, either. I'll also add that the roughing called on Losman's hit was kinda dubious, too. So it appears that the refs were fair in that they were calling RTP very close. Personally, I really don't like this, particularly w/ 2 mobile QBs like Losman & Vick. Might as well make QBs play w/ redshirts (or skirts) & not allow them to be touched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfanone Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 Posted this in another thread: The first one was helmet to helmet, and I agree with the penalty - although I know it's football and impossible to let up when chasing down a QB like Vick. The second one was borderline bush league since Vick was falling backwards. Crowell did get a hand to the face which knocked Vicks helmet off though. I don't like the calls, but they'll be called 99.99% of the time. 455110[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 Neither one of them was a 3rd down play after we had them stopped and we couldn't get off the field on 3rd down all day, so there's no reason to think it would've mattered. The no-call intentional grounding was a joke, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
***PetrinoInAlbany*** Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 Crowell hit him in the head, and you're ALWAYS gonna' get called for that. The first one, however, me and about 78,000 other first-hand, up-close witnesses had a BIG problem with ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Vader Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 I agree the Crowell penalty was justified but the Vincemt penalty was crap. Also, during the Falcons last drive, the refs called timeout to review a play or something, and Michael Vick got mad about it and took his helmet off and started yelling at them. Why was'nt Vick flagged for removing his helmet!!!!! Is that not supposed to be an automatic penalty!!!!! Did anyone else who saw that wonder the same thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JinVA Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 Crowell hit him in the head, and you're ALWAYS gonna' get called for that. The first one, however, me and about 78,000 other first-hand, up-close witnesses had a BIG problem with ... 455346[/snapback] Crowell is a Wahoo. Vick is a Hokie. Crowell did exactly what he was supposed to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
***PetrinoInAlbany*** Posted September 26, 2005 Share Posted September 26, 2005 I agree the Crowell penalty was justified but the Vincemt penalty was crap. Also, during the Falcons last drive, the refs called timeout to review a play or something, and Michael Vick got mad about it and took his helmet off and started yelling at them. Why was'nt Vick flagged for removing his helmet!!!!! Is that not supposed to be an automatic penalty!!!!! Did anyone else who saw that wonder the same thing? 455377[/snapback] YES! Everyone in Section 219 was screaming about that. We actually thought he could've gotten an unsportsmanlike penalty even without removing the helmet. (He was advancing - almost certainly to the point of contact - on the official and had to be restrained by a teamate.) When the helmet came off, it should've been a flag. But he was getting the Micheal Jordan treatment all day. (You guys remember the criteria for whether or not NBA refs called a foul on the guy guarding Jordan? It was, "If Jordan's shot DOESN'T GO IN, he was fouled!") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts