Green Bay Packers Forum

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
2 Pages<12
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline nerdmann  
#16 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:48:12 AM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,168
Applause Received: 783
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
Let me guess, it was bullsh!t and we sh!t ourselves.


We shit ourselves repeatedly to be sure.

But the illegal hit on Finley's head went uncalled, and that cannot continue.
Offline DoddPower  
#17 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 1:06:36 PM(UTC)
DoddPower

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

Rank: Veteran Member
United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA
Applause Given: 2,365
Applause Received: 595
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
or threw it to the RB in the flat there and let let him fight for the first down.

I rather the Packers attack first downs than getting greedy so much. But then I'm also one of the people who says stay on the gas and put the game away.

If the RB wasn't there, I'd be okay with this being Jones fault. Since there's someone wide open and could most likely get the first down if the WR on the edge blocks... I think this is on Rodgers decision making.


The RB just doesn't look that open to me. I see a LB within range that would very likely close and lay the wood right as the RB caught the ball, if he caught it at all. I wouldn't expect that option to get a first down. Sure, the defender could miss, but Jones could have also had better position and caught the ball, but that didn't happen either. Overall, just a bad offensive play/good defensive play.
Offline sschind  
#18 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 1:09:43 PM(UTC)
sschind

Rank: Member
United States
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN
Applause Given: 181
Applause Received: 535
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
We sh!t ourselves repeatedly to be sure.

But the illegal hit on Finley's head went uncalled, and that cannot continue.


We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.
Offline nerdmann  
#19 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:29:18 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,168
Applause Received: 783
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.


Even Pereira mentioned it. Defenseless player.

Three shots to the head in a row, uncalled. Lacy, Starks and Finley. Finally they did one against JJ iirc and it got called.
Offline steveishere  
#20 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:49:57 PM(UTC)
steveishere

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2013

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 7/28/2012(UTC)
Applause Given: 53
Applause Received: 1,124
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.


You mean other than it being against the rules? You can't hit a receiver who is catching a pass in the head. It's as simple as that. The defender didn't hit Finley anywhere BUT his head.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
nerdmann on 9/24/2013(UTC)
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#21 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:52:43 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: Veteran Member
Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 17
Applause Received: 556
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.


I don't think it was an intentional hit, but it was illegal by rule.

Cannot hit the head or neck area of a defenseless player with helment, shoulder or forearm.
Offline dhazer  
#22 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 5:30:10 PM(UTC)
dhazer

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2013Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2009PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2013

Rank: Veteran Member
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 65
Applause Received: 236
People seem to forget how good the Bengal defense is, they haven't given up 300 yards passing in 17 straight games
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Zero2Cool on 9/25/2013(UTC)
Offline Dulak  
#23 Posted : Wednesday, September 25, 2013 12:21:54 AM(UTC)
Dulak

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 1/19/2009(UTC)
Location: London, UK (from kenosha)
Applause Given: 202
Applause Received: 113
dhazer said: Go to Quoted Post
People seem to forget how good the Bengal defense is, they haven't given up 300 yards passing in 17 straight games


hey dhazer havnt seen you post in awhile ... welcome back (or maybe Ive missed em).

ya that was a wacky game ... 0-14 ..... 30-14 ..... ends with 30-34 .... I mean come on.

I dont think we should feel so bad - the niners touted as the second coming this season have the same record as us. I mean seriously we heard more about them then the ravens whom won the superbowl.
Offline sschind  
#24 Posted : Wednesday, September 25, 2013 8:50:05 AM(UTC)
sschind

Rank: Member
United States
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN
Applause Given: 181
Applause Received: 535
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
You mean other than it being against the rules? You can't hit a receiver who is catching a pass in the head. It's as simple as that. The defender didn't hit Finley anywhere BUT his head.


The ONLY other option would have been for him not to hit him at all them because they were going straight for each other. I can see the illegality in light of the defenseless receiver rule but I still don't think it was a bad hit. He didn't dive at him and he didn't lead with his helmet. He was leading with his shoulder (isn't that the way tackles are supposed to be made) and his shoulder hit Finley in the helmet. It was an illegal hit by definition of the rules but I don't think it was intentional and I don't think it was worthy of a fine. Yes it should have drawn a penalty because it was against the rules but it wasn't as bad as everyone is making it out to be.

This is exactly the kind of play that so many Packers fans who are bitching about it now would be defending it as perfectly fine if the roles were reversed. Not saying anyone here in particular but a lot of them would be and you know it.
Offline steveishere  
#25 Posted : Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:00:00 AM(UTC)
steveishere

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2013

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 7/28/2012(UTC)
Applause Given: 53
Applause Received: 1,124
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
The ONLY other option would have been for him not to hit him at all them because they were going straight for each other. I can see the illegality in light of the defenseless receiver rule but I still don't think it was a bad hit. He didn't dive at him and he didn't lead with his helmet. He was leading with his shoulder (isn't that the way tackles are supposed to be made) and his shoulder hit Finley in the helmet. It was an illegal hit by definition of the rules but I don't think it was intentional and I don't think it was worthy of a fine. Yes it should have drawn a penalty because it was against the rules but it wasn't as bad as everyone is making it out to be.

This is exactly the kind of play that so many Packers fans who are bitching about it now would be defending it as perfectly fine if the roles were reversed. Not saying anyone here in particular but a lot of them would be and you know it.


I don't know it was a weird looking hit. Like he was just running by and his shoulder happened to hit Finley in the helmet. I think he just took a bad angle or something and didn't make contact where he wanted to. If he took a better angle he could have smashed Finley legally and it would have been a great hit but it didn't work out that way. I think his fine was less than is usual for those hits so they took some of that into account. I don't think anyone has said it was an intentional hit though so I don't know where that is coming from.
Offline Zero2Cool  
#26 Posted : Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:07:45 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2015Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

Rank: Premier Member
United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,055
Applause Received: 2,531
There are millions of Packers fans, young, old, boy, girl, man, woman, hetero, homo, smart, stupid, etc ... there's always going to be a portion that fits any statement.


The hit was illegal and should have been flagged, per the rules according to former head of officiating, Mike Pereira.

Here's a break down of the play. I was surprised taunting wasn't called.
http://msn.foxsports.com...reira-week-3-live-092213
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error


Recent Topics
4m / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

25m / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Wade

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Wade

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / OlHoss1884

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Dulak

16-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

16-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

16-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

15-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

15-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

15-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower


Tweeter