Thread: Different Take on the TO TD

Just a thought:

In my opinion, the referees were making the system work correctly with their call on TO's TD.

Their take: Maybe he bobbled, maybe he was down, maybe he was out. So, when it doubt, call the play as if none of those things happened, and allow the replay system to work as intended. If he was down, the replay official says he's down at the 2. If he bobbled, the replay official says no reception. If he was out, the replay official says out at the 1.

Wrong Take: The referee thinks he bobbled the ball, blows the whistle, and calls incomplete. I'm not even sure if that is able to be overturned. When he blows the whistle, the play is dead, therefore, if Philly challenged, the best it could overturn to is ball on the 2. If the referee thinks he is down, he blows the whistle and places the ball on the 2. We all know the "inadvertant whistle" rule, and that even if Philly argues, they won't give him forward progress on the overrule into the endzone.

By calling that a TD, I think the officials called it correctly, so that replay could do its job. This means, as many of us have guessed, Tice REALLY didn't do his job, because the officials called it as they are coached to.

And, I honestly don't believe the upstairs coaches were only watching ABC for their replays. They have a video feed, and could have even questioned it themselves from watching it live. Tice and his staff dropped the ball, as did TO, but now we'll never know.

I would have to disagree with you los. We don't know exactly what the guys in the booth saw. Granted they probably do have a live video feed, but how can we blame Tice. He's not in the booth looking at it. If we blame anyone, we blame the guys in the booth. Plus, there is no way that Tice saw from on the field if TO bobbled it or not and I don't think Winfield would have seen it either (since he was laying on his ass!). It was a tough play overall and since philly busted their asses to get out there and kick the ep it made it all a mute point!

One other thing. The ref should have clearly seen TO bobbling the ball because as the replayed showed he was laying on his back and still the ball was moving around. Oh well! 14 games to go!

Just an FYI...Andy Reid defended Mike Tice. He said that it was Winfield's job to run over to the sidelines to tell Tice it wasn't a catch.

I don't think Winfield even saw the play while he was laying on his @ss!

The fact still remains that our high-priced CB got cooked and was indeed laying on his A$$. TO was mugging for the camera afterwards because he knew that he had gotten away with it. He is certainly not as dumb as he looks.

"cajunvike" wrote:

The fact still remains that our high-priced CB got cooked and was indeed laying on his A$$. TO was mugging for the camera afterwards because he knew that he had gotten away with it. He is certainly not as dumb as he looks.

I didn't enjoy seeing TO blaze past Winfield on that play, but seriously he gave up one damn deep pass the whole night. Aside from that crappy play Winfield locked him down. Too bad the Vikings front 4 did not lock McNabb down.

My take on Winfield, he has shown for two games in a row now why we picked him up.

I agree that Winfield is worth it, but that play still made him look bad. Just when I wanted to tease the Pack fans for Ahmed Carroll getting cooked on Sunday, Winfield gave them the ammo to come back at me.