Mike Carey (w Hochuili Bonus) to Ref Our Game

[RavenusMaximus]

The reason why Carey was awful today is because he wanted the Colts to cover the spread.

[brown2RAVEN]

Here is the only clip I could find of the non-recovery, as well as one writer's opinion.http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-sh...2415--nfl.html

[Ravenswintitle]

some pretty questionable calls today; glad it didn't come back to haunt us

[Raveninwoodlawn]

What the hell?

If there is a full collision, it is a forcible hit to the head. With the violence of that collision any part of his upper body hitting Wayne is going to be forcible.

You are arguing intention.

Intention doesn't matter.

When he launched into Wayne, his helmet hit Wayne's.

He will in all likelyhood be fined and even Pollard knows it and said so to a reporter.

Why do you constantly hear defensive players complaining about offensive guys lowering their heads when getting fined?

It's because the league made that rule so that none of that other "intent" or "mistake" stuff is taken into account and they completely remove the "judgemental" stuff out of the officials hands.

No defenseless receiver personal foul is a judgement call. Either the ref sees contact to the head or he doesn't. The only way the ref would have been wrong in this case is if no part of Pollard's body hit Wayne in the head.

[StingerNLG]

What the hell?

The hell here is that you are incorrect on this one, with all due respect my friend. That is what the hell.

If there is a full collision, it is a forcible hit to the head. With the violence of that collision any part of his upper body hitting Wayne is going to be forcible.

You are arguing intention.

Intention doesn't matter.

When he launched into Wayne, his helmet hit Wayne's.

No. Wrong. The collision with his helmet came as Wayne's head reacted to his body being hit. Once again, that is outside of the rule AS IT IS STATED. Pollard did NOT "make forcible contact to the head or neck of the receiver" as I posted the rule from the NFL.

He also did not "launch" into Wayne. If he had launched into him, he would have put his head down or left the ground. THAT would have been a justifiable call.

He will in all likelyhood be fined and even Pollard knows it and said so to a reporter.

Pollard also said he believed the hit was legal. He isn't saying he agrees with the fine, nor did he or Reed agree with the flag.

Why do you constantly hear defensive players complaining about offensive guys lowering their heads when getting fined?

It's because the league made that rule so that none of that other "intent" or "mistake" stuff is taken into account and they completely remove the "judgemental" stuff out of the officials hands.

No defenseless receiver personal foul is a judgement call. Either the ref sees contact to the head or he doesn't. The only way the ref would have been wrong in this case is if no part of Pollard's body hit Wayne in the head.

Yes it is. In this instance it is ABSOLUTELY a judgment call, and there is nothing you can tell me or show me in the rule that I quoted from the official NFL Communications site to prove otherwise. In fact, if that play was reviewable, the penalty would have been taken back.

RIW, I understand the flags for when a player cracks another player with his helmet. Those are plays that result in concussions, and I get that. THIS PLAY was not that play. And the refs made a call based on how they FELT about the hit, and it was the wrong call.

[HoustonRaven]

What the hell?

If there is a full collision, it is a forcible hit to the head. With the violence of that collision any part of his upper body hitting Wayne is going to be forcible.

You are arguing intention.

Intention doesn't matter.

When he launched into Wayne, his helmet hit Wayne's.

He will in all likelyhood be fined and even Pollard knows it and said so to a reporter.

Why do you constantly hear defensive players complaining about offensive guys lowering their heads when getting fined?

It's because the league made that rule so that none of that other "intent" or "mistake" stuff is taken into account and they completely remove the "judgemental" stuff out of the officials hands.

No defenseless receiver personal foul is a judgement call. Either the ref sees contact to the head or he doesn't. The only way the ref would have been wrong in this case is if no part of Pollard's body hit Wayne in the head.

This.

And folks are getting too hung up on the word forcible. It's been called time and time again. Helmet to helmet contact is always going to draw the flag.

That's the rule and its been that way for, what, six seasons now?

And just got done watching the Rice fumble replay. Still don't see whee Yanda had possession other than after the play was dead.

[alien bird]

Here is the only clip I could find of the non-recovery, as well as one writer's opinion.http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-sh...2415--nfl.html

The low-level CBS view clearly shows that #50 for the Colts never had the ball and Yanda recovered it. No matter what it looked like from other angles, that one is quite definitive.

[HoustonRaven]

The low-level CBS view clearly shows that #50 for the Colts never had the ball and Yanda recovered it. No matter what it looked like from other angles, that one is quite definitive.

Thanks. Can't view it on the plane but will look later.

[Raveninwoodlawn]

The hell here is that you are incorrect on this one, with all due respect my friend. That is what the hell.



No. Wrong. The collision with his helmet came as Wayne's head reacted to his body being hit. Once again, that is outside of the rule AS IT IS STATED. Pollard did NOT "make forcible contact to the head or neck of the receiver" as I posted the rule from the NFL.

He also did not "launch" into Wayne. If he had launched into him, he would have put his head down or left the ground. THAT would have been a justifiable call.



Pollard also said he believed the hit was legal. He isn't saying he agrees with the fine, nor did he or Reed agree with the flag.



Yes it is. In this instance it is ABSOLUTELY a judgment call, and there is nothing you can tell me or show me in the rule that I quoted from the official NFL Communications site to prove otherwise. In fact, if that play was reviewable, the penalty would have been taken back.

RIW, I understand the flags for when a player cracks another player with his helmet. Those are plays that result in concussions, and I get that. THIS PLAY was not that play. And the refs made a call based on how they FELT about the hit, and it was the wrong call.

Dude, he is going to get fined and he does then it will show that it was a legit call.

Every single fan, coach, player, nfl employee knows that the bottom line is that if a defenseless player is hit in the head, it's illegal.

Period.

Point blank.

All that forcible and intent nonsense you seem to be stuck on does not matter.

Ask Ed Reed.

[alien bird]

Thanks. Can't view it on the plane but will look later.

It's the only view that shows what actually happened, and it also appears that no official had that view. If you watch, you'll see #50 fall on the ball and it immediately squirts out past the top of his helmet. That's when Yanda dives in and swallows it up. The commentary on TV (Phil Simms) pointed out that the Ravens recovered it, too, after looking at that view.

What I don't understand is why that isn't a reviewable play. At least that's what they seemed to say on TV.

[StingerNLG]

Dude, he is going to get fined and he does then it will show that it was a legit call.

What?? No, it doesn't. It shows the league can't look like they are inconsistent.

Every single fan, coach, player, nfl employee knows that the bottom line is that if a defenseless player is hit in the head, it's illegal.

Period.

Point blank.

All that forcible and intent nonsense you seem to be stuck on does not matter.

Ask Ed Reed.

Yeah, ask Ed Reed. Reed has been fucked by those calls just as badly, even on plays where the replay clearly shows his helmet doesn't even make contact with the receiver's.

I'm stuck on the written rule, which I will repeat for the third time none of which was violated by Pollard on that hit. You're stuck on something I can't figure out to be honest. And you will not move me on this. It was a bullshit call, as many of them have been this year.

Period.

Point blank.

Call it nonsense you want. Doesn't change a thing. Hell next year receivers may as well just head-butt CB's and call it defenseless as you see it.

[HoustonRaven]

What?? No, it doesn't. It shows the league can't look like they are inconsistent.



Yeah, ask Ed Reed. Reed has been fucked by those calls just as badly, even on plays where the replay clearly shows his helmet doesn't even make contact with the receiver's.

I'm stuck on the written rule, which I will repeat for the third time none of which was violated by Pollard on that hit. You're stuck on something I can't figure out to be honest. And you will not move me on this. It was a bullshit call, as many of them have been this year.

Period.

Point blank.

Come on, man.

They've been calling this rule consistently for YEARS now. It was a textbook helmet-to-helmet hit. It wasn't close. It wasn't even close to close.

[StingerNLG]

Come on, man.

You can come on, man me all you want. Doesn't make you right in this situation. Sorry.

They've been calling this rule consistently for YEARS now. It was a textbook helmet-to-helmet hit. It wasn't close. It wasn't even close to close.

THIS is a helmet to helmet defenseless receiver hit:



If you want to somehow equate Pollard's hit on Wayne to this, then I have nothing else for you.

[HoustonRaven]

LOL .... Whatever.

I'm out of this one.

[RavenusMaximus]

On NFL Network, they showed the video of the first fumble from a different angle than what CBS showed during the game, and proved that the refs got the call wrong. All of the commentators agreed.

[RavenusMaximus]

The helmet to helmet call was one of the most ticky-tack of those I've seen called. The contact came more as a result of gravity after the hit. Helmet contact of that sort could happen any time during a tackle. Where will it stop? If guys' helmets bump when they are already on the ground, are they gonna start flagging those soon?

[B-more Ravor]

On NFL Network, they showed the video of the first fumble from a different angle than what CBS showed during the game, and proved that the refs got the call wrong. All of the commentators agreed.

Yes, they did.

They also just showed it on Fox45, with an even different angle, and Yanda clearly recovered it. The Colts player never had possession.

[bacchys]

And folks are getting too hung up on the word forcible. It's been called time and time again. Helmet to helmet contact is always going to draw the flag.

That it's called a certain way doesn't mean that's the way the rule is written.

And just got done watching the Rice fumble replay. Still don't see whee Yanda had possession other than after the play was dead.

Nobody had possession when the play was dead. The officials blew the whistle without seeing the ball.

[Raveninwoodlawn]

LOL .... Whatever.

I'm out of this one.

So am I.

It's obvious to all objective observers.

The purple blinders are extremely thick in regards to that play...I shouldn't be surprised though with all the stupid conspiracy BS that gets thrown around here.

That exact hit has been called countless times over the last 3-4 seasons and will continue to be called.

Pollard will likely be getting a Fed Ex package in the Mail Thursday.

BTW...when there are bogus flags for those hits, the league doesn't fine guys. There are numerous instances of guys getting flagged in games, but not fined so I don't know what the hell you are talking about with the league not wanting to show some "inconsistency" or whatever.

So congrats on not being moved. I certainly have not been either and if you go outside of this board, nobody would share your opinion.

Period

Point blank

[PerpetuallyBored74]

In regards to the helmet to helmet insanity:

Both of you are correct.
The rule as WRITTEN states only forcible contact is to be flagged/fined.

Forcible means direct.
Incidental means indirect.

However the NFL has recently CONSISTENTLY flagged & fined for INCIDENTAL contact too.
Even though according to their own rule as it is written, they're not supposed to.

So, the NFL has chosen to ENFORCE the rule differently from how it was WRITTEN.

IMO, that is pure BS.
These lawsuits have got them spooked bad.