New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com

New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com (http://blackandgold.com/community/)
-   Saints (http://blackandgold.com/saints/)
-   -   Refs call Martez for illegal hit on sack - PICTURE EVIDENCE (http://blackandgold.com/saints/52587-refs-call-martez-illegal-hit-sack-picture-evidence.html)

dizzle88 11-06-2012 05:10 AM

Refs call Martez for illegal hit on sack - PICTURE EVIDENCE
 
1 Attachment(s)
Okay so.......tell me where is the illegal hit there?

no helmet to helmet, vick lowered his helmet and martez wrapped him up and smacked him with the shoulder pad

SloMotion 11-06-2012 06:51 AM

Re: Refs call Martez for illegal hit on sack - PICTURE EVIDENCE
 
Yeah, I did not like that call purely from the standpoint that Vick was going into a crouch in anticipation of being sacked and any helmet-to-helmet contact by Martez was incidental.

I thought it was going to be a long night with the officials, but it turned out alright ... didn't like the call on the early completion for Vick either (Vitt challenged it & lost), where the ball clearly hit the turf & even kicked something up before being ruled caught.

TheOak 11-06-2012 07:48 AM

Re: Refs call Martez for illegal hit on sack - PICTURE EVIDENCE
 
The catch was a catch... The ball can touch the turk.. However he had clear control of it the entire time.

The penalty was BS.

jlouhill 11-06-2012 07:50 AM

Re: Refs call Martez for illegal hit on sack - PICTURE EVIDENCE
 
Im all for the safety factor when it comes to the head. But these helmet to helmet calls are getting ridiculous. And I agree, rules or not, that was NOT a catch.

jeanpierre 11-06-2012 07:55 AM

Re: Refs call Martez for illegal hit on sack - PICTURE EVIDENCE
 
I'm just glad the calls didn't turn the game the other way...

Otherwise, we'd have to go and get all Braveheart and placed effigy heads of the refs along with certain NFL officials on pikes outside the Dome...

skymike 11-06-2012 07:56 AM

Re: Refs call Martez for illegal hit on sack - PICTURE EVIDENCE
 
I knew it was bull**** in fast motion.

what do they want him to do? pull his panties?

RaginCajun83 11-06-2012 10:49 AM

Re: Refs call Martez for illegal hit on sack - PICTURE EVIDENCE
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jeanpierre (Post 454668)
I'm just glad the calls didn't turn the game the other way...

Otherwise, we'd have to go and get all Braveheart and placed effigy heads of the refs along with certain NFL officials on pikes outside the Dome...

Good thing that BS call didn't determine the final outcome, but can we still do the whole heads on a stick thing anyways, I can think of a few people from the home office that I'd like to see taken care of that way

Beastmode 11-06-2012 11:19 AM

Re: Refs call Martez for illegal hit on sack - PICTURE EVIDENCE
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by x626xBlack (Post 454666)
The catch was a catch... The ball can touch the turk.. However he had clear control of it the entire time.

The penalty was BS.

I hope they change that rule regardless. There needs to be slightly bigger window of the ball being caught and hitting the ground. If it happens simultaneously, or very close to it, the physics of the force on the ground plays a role. When you watch it in slow motion it make it appear it does not.

I also hope that helmet to helmet hits become something that can be challenged in the future. That is a severe penalty that does not take into account the dynamics of hitting, only the sound. The defender could make a clean hit only to get a flag thrown by a QB slightly moving their head, much like the NBA flop.

WhoDat!656 11-06-2012 12:48 PM

Re: Refs call Martez for illegal hit on sack - PICTURE EVIDENCE
 
If the ball had MOVED while the receiver had his hands on it, it would have been ruled incomplete, but since it never moved, even though it was kicking up the Field Turf pellets, is why it was ruled correctly a catch.

The penalty on Wilson's sack of Vick is 100% Bovine Scatology!

TheOak 11-06-2012 12:51 PM

Re: Refs call Martez for illegal hit on sack - PICTURE EVIDENCE
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by WhoDat!656 (Post 454756)
If the ball had MOVED while the receiver had his hands on it, it would have been ruled incomplete, but since it never moved, even though it was kicking up the Field Turf pellets, is why it was ruled correctly a catch.

The penalty on Wilson's sack of Vick is 100% Bovine Scatology!

exactly... it was more his fingers than the ball knocking up Pseudodirt. Once the ball hit his hands it never moved.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:25 AM.


Copyright 1997 - 2013 - BlackandGold.com