Walt Coleman

[BBelichicken]

What a pleasure it is to have good old Walt Coleman referring today's game. Always a pleasure to hear his voice.

 

[PromisedLand]

Whatever. He blew on on the Braylen Edwards reception that BB challenged, though. I single framed it on my 61" HDTV and Edwards' elbow clearly came down out-of-bounds before his right knee came down in bounds. Edwards caught the ball, got his left knee (=foot) down in-bounds, but not the right.

 

[DaBruinz]

Not to mentioned that Joe Thomas CLEARLY held Jarvis Green on damn near every play... Its no wonder Green couldn't get pressure on Anderson...

 

[PATSNUTme]

Let's set the record straight on Coleman. If he would have made the right call on the head slap by Woodson on Brady, the tuck rule would not have been an issue.

 

[PromisedLand]

Let's set the record straight on Coleman. If he would have made the right call on the head slap by Woodson on Brady, the tuck rule would not have been an
issue.

I know! It amazes me that in all the hundreds of times that play has been replayed on ESPN, no one EVER mentions the blow to the head.

 

[upstater1]

Whatever. He blew on on the Braylen Edwards reception that BB challenged, though. I single framed it on my 61" HDTV and Edwards' elbow clearly came down out-of-bounds before his right knee came down in bounds. Edwards caught the ball, got his left knee (=foot) down in-bounds, but not the right.

Knee = 2 feet.

 

[alamo]

Knee = 2 feet.

Yes. NFL Rule book Rule 8, Section 1, Article 6 Supplemental notes: "(4) A pass is completed or intercepted if the player has both feet or any other part of
his body, except his hands, inbounds prior to and after the catch."

As to why people don't talk about the blow to the head against Brady against Oakland? My guess is if you make a big deal of that play you are inviting others to make a big deal of Vrabel's hit to Warner's head on Law's interception for a TD in the SB. Not that big a difference between the two, and neither was called.

 

[PromisedLand]

Yes. NFL Rule book Rule 8, Section 1, Article 6 Supplemental notes: "(4) A pass is completed or intercepted if the player has both feet or any other part of
his body, except his hands, inbounds prior to and after the catch."
Thank you for that explanation - I had never heard that rule before. (Perhaps BB hadn't either or else why would he challenge the play?)
As to why people don't talk about the blow to the head against Brady against Oakland? My guess is if you make a big deal of that play you are inviting others to make a big deal of Vrabel's hit to Warner's head on Law's interception for a TD in the SB. Not that big a difference between the two, and neither was called.
There I have to disagree with you. One play has nothing to do with the other. The point is that there has been so much discussion about the tuck rule play - and so much whining about it by the Raiders and their fans - but there was an obvious roughing the passer violation on THAT VERY SAME PLAY and no one (outside of a few of us here) ever mention it. The correct call would have been to call the penalty and then all of the tuck rule nonsense would never have happened.

...........

 

[alamo]

There I have to disagree with you. One play has nothing to do with the other. The point is that there has been so much discussion about the tuck rule play - and so much whining about it by the Raiders and their fans - but there was an obvious roughing the passer violation on THAT VERY SAME PLAY and no one (outside of a few of us here) ever mention it. The correct call would have been to call the penalty and then all of the tuck rule nonsense would never have happened.

Agreed that they are not specifically connected, but I do think they both testify to the extremely judgemental nature of roughing the passer calls. Many are not called when fans think they should be, and many are called when fans think they shouldn't have been. In the end, people tend to forget about them over time because they are a judgement call and officials getting them wrong is just part of the game. The tuck play is different, though, as there was no judgement involved and the rule is contrary to many people's intuition. So people remember that one.

 

[PromisedLand]

Agreed that they are not specifically connected, but I do think they both testify to the extremely judgemental nature of roughing the passer calls. Many are not called when fans think they should be, and many are called when fans think they shouldn't have been. In the end, people tend to forget about them over time because they are a judgement call and officials getting them wrong is just part of the game. The tuck play is different, though, as there was no judgement involved and the rule is contrary to many people's intuition. So people remember that one.

My point was not that it is amazing that they didn't call roughing the passer on the play, it is that it is amazing that not one of the talking heads ever points it out, despite looking at the replay countless times times and talking about the play ad nauseum for going on 6 years now. I don't know what amazes me more, that or that people like Terrell Davis and Steve Young go on the air and sanctimoniously pontificate about the Patriots cheating and how it taints their Super Bowl victories but never mention their own teams salary cap violations.