I don't know about you sir, but when I fall to the ground, I make it a point to watch how my legs are swinging so not to trip anyone else.

Did he swing his legs at the defender? Yes. Did his legs create a whipping effect? Yes. Should it be a penalty? Yes.

He got called for tripping.. IMO, it was the incorrect but lighter call for a piss poor block attempt in which he whiffed and did the only thing he could do because he left his feet.. take him out with his legs regardless if Harrison was airborne or planted on the ground.

Rules.. you most certainly can't use your legs to trip or force a player to the ground.. again would he have done a ton of damage without a plant leg.. probably not.. but you can't allow it because he sold out on the cut and missed.

Again.. find me other consistent evidence of it being let go?

Edit.. NFL rule book.. since your asking..

I guess I'll pay more attention to the blocking part of the game.

I'll make sure to bring up every time I see a defender trip over an offensive lineman's fat ass legs. It happens in EVERY game.

They call it when it's obviously intentional. Dugan was in the air.. how could it be intentional when he's already in motion, in mid air.

ESPECIALLY when initial contact was made with his ass?

You can't joke about Favre with Favre fans.

I agree about Pittsburgh and Minnesota being very even.

To state that Minnesota looked better than Pittsburgh would be like Packer fans stating well our offense matched your offense in the first game against the Vikings. It really did too. Look at the stats. GB moved the ball up and down the field, but still loss. Why? Turnovers and sacks.

Favre was sacked four times and turned the ball over two times. Not all his fault, but Pittsburgh needs to be credit here too.

The way some prole are talking is kind of mindblowing. I mean now there is talk of the Saints going unbeaten and before I think some Favre fans (Viking fans know better) felt Minnesota would run the table. People need to slow down.

For the record, he did hold the ball too long. I think the point needs to be made though that he really had to and to be fair, he held the ball too long on the throw to AP, but he had too. His line also allowed him to get one of those throws off. This 1-2-3 crap is a joke. It's not that easy.

While I agree with Rule One "if it hits your hands you should catch it", the pass was more than "slightly high".
Watch the replay again. Taylor jumps a little bit, his arms are extended about as far as they can go, (keep in mind with shoulder pads on football players don't have the same range of motion as they would without pads and running backs pads are usually bigger than a receivers pads are.) and the ball is still more than a foot over his head.
Both players share in the blame for the int but this is Brett's fault more than Taylor's.

Look at Brett's face after the TD. He is smiling. It is as if he is saying, "well ya got me this time." He knows that was his fault. He loves the competition. He can take the hit. He has said so many times over the years that he is not afraid of the interceptions that he has thrown. He is not bothered by mistakes. Watch him when one of the other players screws up. He chews them out. He tells them to "get their head in the game."

And I see no "whipping" motion whatsoever. It is a tangle of 2 players feet.

I missed this one. Well written, IronMan.

What did Mike Pereira say about the play?

He has been fairly honest from what I've seen and I would take what he has to say pretty seriously about the play.

From that picture it's clearly a trip despite the fact that it's obvious he's attempting a cut-block. He took him out with his legs, a tripping penalty. A cut block properly executed involves your upper body against the opponent players lower body. Dugan clearly rotated and put the backside of his legs against James Harrison's which is technically a trip. At least from that picture.

Here is how the NFL Rulebook defines the penalty: "Tripping is the use of the leg or foot in obstructing any opponent (including a runner)."

It says nothing about intent, body position, what part of the leg, or in what kind of play it occurs. If the opponent's forward progress is obstructed by one's leg, it's tripping. By that standard (that is, by the letter of the law), it was a good call, because at least one part of his leg did indeed touch the defender.

Exactly. You don't do a cut block by throwing yourself backwards leg-first at an opponent--you're just asking for some kind of penalty.

Agreed. If you never saw the play and only the photo a person could say it looks like he is falling to the ground and his right leg hasn't gotten there yet. And in the words of the announcer "their legs just got tangled up". But when you watch the whole replay you can see that as he falls, he is falling on his right side with his LEFT leg held up. He hit the ground and had not brought down the defender so he spun over to his left side holding his RIGHT leg in the air in the process. That clearly indicates his attempt to his leg to obstruct the Pitt defender.
The announcer was wrong. Imagine that. The only ones who get blast more than the officials during a game are the guys in the booth. And yet the Viking fans have been faithfully quoting them all week long.

Yes.

But the initial CONTACT was with his ass/lower back. The defender made a move that caused him to go over the blockers legs. No, the rule doesn't state anything about intent.. But I wonder how many times a defender trips over a leg of an OL or blocker and it doesn't get called.

Again, I can see how that could have been seen in real time as a trip. But watching the replay, I don't see it. And obviously neither do the objective announcers.

When they share the same opinion as you, their objective.
When their opinion differs from yours, well, then they are "just" announcers after all and they know nothing.

It's Thursday. The Vikings won't be so lucky come Sunday. You should really be worrying about the upcoming game and not some accurate call last week. Hopefully your team shares the same lack of focus you do. :) (hopefully)

That announcer comment was a jab at WPR's announcer comment. =)

It don't matter to me. I was simply saying that sporting fans routinely b!tch and moan about the announcers for every kind of sport. This past week Viking fans kept pointing to the comment made by the color dude as if he could do no wrong simply because it supports their position. Well he was wrong. I don't know who it was but what position did he play in the NFL? If he was an offensive lineman don't you think he would say that there was no foul? If he had been a DL I bet he would have gone on and on about how dangerous tripping can be. If the crew were CBS announcers I bet they would have been more supportive of the call as well.

And as to the comment you made about other guys leg whipping and not getting called, so what. The refs are wrong when they ignore it. You know the old saying that there is a holding penalty on every play. It doesn't mean they have to call every single one.
If he would have tried to catch him with the left leg and let it go at that he may well not have been called. But when he flipped and stuck that right leg up there too he was just asking for it.

I still don't see what you said he 'missed' his block thus his leg being kicked out for the trip. He made contact before his legs even touched the defender. That's my arguement.

It doesn't matter if he touched him with his upper body 1st, second, third or not at all. He still stuck both legs into the air to try and trip up the defender.
We can look at the same video and same still shots and we will never see the same thing. That's fine with me. I am very comfortable with the thought that the ref made the correct call even if other players do the same thing and don't get called for it. I am fine with the idea that it was the correct call even if the color commentator didn't think so. I am fine with the call even if Mike Pereira says it was a poor call.

Lord forbid any blocker falls down and a defender trips over said blocker.

Would be piss poor calls on that, too.