Periera: Edwards Hit Not a Penalty
by Christopher Gates on Nov 16, 2009 5:28 PM CST
in Vikings 2009 Season
58 comments
According to the good folks at SI.com, immediately after Minnesota's 27-10 victory over the Detroit Lions yesterday, Vikings' coach Brad Childress was on the phone with the NFL's VP of Officiating, Mike Periera. Chilly was apparently livid over the helmet-to-helmet hit call against defensive end Ray Edwards that led directly to the lone Detroit touchdown of the afternoon, particularly considering that it didn't appear that Edwards hit Lions' quarterback Matthew Stafford's helmet at all.
And in response, Periera. . .agreed?
Edwards was flagged for unnecessary roughness after hurdling a cut block with a Superman-style leap to take down Stafford and force an incompletion on third down at the 13, leading to Detroit's only TD. Childress called NFL officiating VP Mike Pereira after the game to complain about that call, and he said Pereira agreed with him that it wasn't a penalty.
Well, yeah. . .after seeing the replay, it was pretty clear that it wasn't a penalty. For starters, Edwards didn't "launch" himself at Stafford. . .he was leaping over an attempted cut block by a Detroit running back. It didn't appear that Edwards had any sort of malicious intent towards Stafford on the play. Secondly, it appeared that Edwards hit Stafford with his shoulder, not with his helmet.
I'm sure that Edwards will still get fined for this. . .but he shouldn't. It was an outstanding play from a guy that had a monster game yesterday. The Lions were bound and determined to not let Jared Allen beat them on Sunday, and to their credit, he didn't. Ray Edwards, on the other hand, certainly beat them and helped administer a beating to Matthew Stafford and company that certainly left the rookie from Georgia a little sore this morning.
0 recs |
58 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
After this story I doubt a fine happens
It was a judgment call on the field to call the penalty, though I wouldn’t have called it and apparently Periera wouldn’t call it either. Edwards contorted his body in the air to hit Stafford primarily in the shoulder and protect Stafford’s health. While I’m willing to accept a penalty in that case (even if not really deserved), it would be outrageous to fine Edwards for that play.
i def would would have called the penalty live
Lurking since 2006
by boyonthedock on Nov 17, 2009 3:28 PM CST up reply actions
This is good to hear, although after the fact does not help. At least it did not affect the outcome. I hope Childress also mentioned the terrible non-call on the fumble recovery. Speaking of non-calls, does anyone else feel that the Packers should have been flagged for “delay of game” when McCarthy threw the red flag with no challenges left? This should be the same as a team calling time-out with none left.
"Skol pa fiskande"
Man I guess I was pretty into the Packer game as well
The non-call on the fumble recovery was during the Packer game, not the Viking game. I was really rooting for the Boys that game.
"Skol pa fiskande"
there was a missed fumble recovery by Vikes
Jared Allen recovered a fumble near the sideline, but officials thought he was out of bounds
"We Szekelys have a right to be proud, for in our veins flows the blood of many brave races who fought as the lion fights for lordship. Here, in the whirlpool of European races, the Ugric tribe bore down from Iceland the fighting spirit which Thor and Odin gave them, which their Berserkers displayed to such fell intent on the seaboards of Europe, ay, and of Asia and Africa too, till the peoples thought that the werewolves themselves had come."
-Bram Stoker
Should have challenged that one
They didnt show many replays of that play, but Chilly should have challenged that one. He had two challenges all his time outs and it was a turnover in their zone. The lions drove down the field on that posession, but I cant remembered if they scored..
Not Jared who was out of bounds
Another player, Percy Harvin I believe, was the first to touch the ball. A Detroit player was also there and out of bounds and may have touched it before Jared. Just a bad bounce for the Vikes, but the refs blew plenty of other calls.
by BigSkyViking on Nov 17, 2009 1:43 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah I think
the ref said that the Lion player was out of bounds and touched the ball first.
"Skol pa fiskande"
The Referee was 'right there' too.
He was on top of that play, so I’d bet he made the right call on that one.
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Nov 17, 2009 2:46 PM CST up reply actions
Got to agree
That’s exactly what I was thinking. They are going to have to do something because it will be used at the end of games to stall.
Look at the replay
it wasn’t even helmet to helmet!
Ray-ed barely even hit his helmet at all!
I understand the idea of protecting the QB because of their position, you know, they’re looking downfield and are vulnerable, but it’s getting taken to far
From the only TRUE North division
by thewild_viking_twins on Nov 16, 2009 7:38 PM CST reply actions
REPLAY USE IT
What is the sense of having replay if they don’t use it. They have things that you can challenge & things you can’t. WHY. Everything is a judgement call. Pass interferance, Holding, In bounds or out, fumbles, the spot of the ball, you name it. Their should not be anything that can’t be challenged. Once the whistle blows I understand that. The coaches only get so many challenges so it won’t delay the game. Why couldn’t they have looked at the replay & seen that Edwards hit was legal. If you saw the play you also saw that flag come flying immediately. The angles at which some of the refs see these things can fool you. The refs are trying to do a good job but they make mistakes. If that play was challenged he could have looked under the hood & seen it was legal & picked up the flag. It doesn’t make any sense about what you can challenge or not. If that play was against a quality team it could have effected the outcome of the game. What should have been a great play on defense ends up being a TD for the other team. I’m sorry but thats just wrong.
I think that coach reviews wouldn’t be feasible for penalty calls.
But calls should be able to be booth reviewed in certain circumstances, such as negated TD’s or turnovers.
by Bjorno on Nov 17, 2009 7:35 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
If it keeps going like this.....
it won’t be long until you can’t even tackle the QB. Hmm-mm I wonder how they will implement that….
I believe all Viking fans must be masochistic!!
Here is the rough draft for 2010
Rule 1 (Applies only to the Patriots): Under no circumstances, even in huddle are you to even look at Tom Brady or you will be penalized an automatic TD and 2 point conversion and have to punt the ball back to the Patriots.
Rule 2 (All Other teams): You can only use the flags to tackle the QB and if he scrambles out of the pocket, all Defensive players must immediately lay down to allow the QB unabated to the Endzone to ensure the QB’s safety.
"If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk."
"That is the craziest sonofabitch I ever saw, how many more like him do you think are up there?"
"We have clearance Clearance. Roger Rodger, what's our vector Victor?"
by VikesFaninNM on Nov 18, 2009 9:53 PM CST up reply actions
I’m surprised that it wasn’t some sort of penalty, even if the call on the field was wrong.
I would want an overhead cam view to determine whether the helmets hit or not. Edwards’s helmet clearly would have hit Stafford’s if it didn’t had it not been for the tackler coming from the other side.
It still could have been a high hit on the QB. It also could have been hands to the helmet, which has been illegal for a matter of decades since the Deacon Jones rule.
Someone else in another thread said it best: I’m not positive that that would have been a legal hit on a running back!
Was there helmet to helmet contact? Were there hands to the helmet? I don’t think they should call penalties because those might have happened.
Agreed.
From the angle and tape speed I got to see, I couldn’t tell, but I saw at least 3 things that could have been penalties, at least 1 of which DID happen (high hit). YES, they should only make the call if it happened. I’m suggesting that they should have reviewed that one (and I’m sure it will be reviewed on that segment of Total Access).
High Hit?
I’m with you Salty. NFL said it was NOT an illegal hit. Childress said it was not an illegal hit. Yet even still some pee wee coach in Kansas wants it to be a penalty. What up. let it go it was a bad call by the refs hope they don’t do it too us against a better team.
Alot of people were calling for Childress to open up the play book and let see some of the tricks they are working on. Well you saw, so what did you think? I for one like the call. let them have some fun in a game we were gonna win no matter what. Now they can go back and practice the razzle dazzle some more. These complex plays take a bit of time to work to perfection, especially with players not used to them or one another. Patience people. Bring on Seattle and TJ Housasdj’asdfjgagh
by BigSkyViking on Nov 16, 2009 11:59 PM CST up reply actions
I like the odd razzle dazzle thrown in
I wonder about the basic run blocking. It seems like when they go strong to one side or the other, there is a mass of humanity and AP or CT get little or no gain or they get a good gain when they bounce off of it and run somewhere else. That and is there a 4th receiver who can step up if someone gets nicked up.
It's confusing with all the rules to protect QB's
But it’s actually low hits that refs and NFL are trying to protect the qb’s from getting. Obviously helmet to helmet contact is illegal QB or otherwise. Since there was no helmet to helmet contact, Ray Ray’s hit was legit.
"We Szekelys have a right to be proud, for in our veins flows the blood of many brave races who fought as the lion fights for lordship. Here, in the whirlpool of European races, the Ugric tribe bore down from Iceland the fighting spirit which Thor and Odin gave them, which their Berserkers displayed to such fell intent on the seaboards of Europe, ay, and of Asia and Africa too, till the peoples thought that the werewolves themselves had come."
-Bram Stoker
It seems
That in almost every game there is a questionable call,penalties are going to be called,some wrong, some right.Why cant they just add another Ref,put him in a box with screens from all angles.If a player looks like he is going to get fined,or a team is going to gain an advantage have him review it.Plus he can grade the Refs on the calls they make.
watching this at live speed, it is laughably obvious that a penalty was going to be called
it just looks ileagal as hell, and thats all that matters with humans watching. It was still awesome though
Lurking since 2006
by boyonthedock on Nov 17, 2009 3:33 PM CST up reply actions
Looked good to me
have you seen an eye doc lately?
by BigSkyViking on Nov 17, 2009 9:42 PM CST up reply actions
Redshirt the QB
At this rate the QBs might as well be wearing the red practice ‘hands off’ jerseys! That was a horrible call. We can survive that call against the Lions, but I hate to think of what it might cost the Vikes in a close playoff game where the D gets a big 3rd down stop only to have this crap happen and turns a field goal into a TD.
Thanks for Confirmation Gonzo
Can you get some clarity on the horse collar issue, as well? Seem like AD got penalized just because he was strong enough to drag the guy MAKING THE TACKLE for five yards downfield. Is that not still a tackle? And thus a horse collar?
Horsecollar
If thats a horsecollar then it came before the ball was punched out. He grabs AD by the horsecollar with his left hand & then punches the ball out with his right. All the while hanging on for the ride. Should have been Vikings ball at the spot of the horsecollar plus the penalty. That & the Edwards play were game changing plays. I guess we are lucky that is was against the Lions.
Man I only hope that we don’t lose a playoff game or the Superbowl on a horrible call or non call.
I though that horsecollar
had to involve using that grab (hand on the shoulder pads) to throw/pull the player to the turf. I thought they could grab him there and then ride him to the ground because it didn’t cause the player to hit the ground with greater force (or something like that).
by TheEvilProfessor on Nov 17, 2009 12:47 PM CST up reply actions
Horse collar tackle rule states:
“The ban states that a horse-collar tackle is an open-field tackle in which a defender uses the shoulder pads or jersey to immediately bring a ball carrier down. The term “open field” means that horse-collar tackles committed near the line of scrimmage will be allowed; in addition, the stipulation of “immediately bringing the ball carrier down” means that, if a defender begins to bring a player down by the shoulder pads but lets go before the tackle is completed, he will not be penalized."
So “apparently” it’s AP’s fault for being so strong that the defender couldn’t immediately bring him down. Bad call in my view.
Very bad call.
That kind of tackle is the exact reason the penalty was put in place.
"Skol pa fiskande"
Personally
I felt bad for Stafford at the end of that game. That kid was getting abused back there. The impressive thing is that for all the pressure that was on him he only got sacked 2-3 times. I think Rodgers needs to watch some tape from this game on how to get rid of the ball in pressure situations.
Actually, I think their helmets did hit...
Before the play, Ray’s helmet was a solid purple. Right after the play, there was a nice silver paint streak along the top-side of his head right where the helmet to helmet would have taken place. I think it was incidental and not at malicious, but paint transfer like that only happens when helmets contact.
by Krotz the Wall on Nov 17, 2009 12:13 PM CST reply actions
While you are right that there is a paint mark on Ray’s helmet, if you watch in slow motion, if there was contact it would have been the left side of his helmet that would have made contact with Stafford’s, but the mark in question is on the right side.
It was a reaction call by the ref and at full speed it in his mind he made the correct call, but he really should have talked to the other officials on the field to see what they were able to see from their view point.
Who Cares?
Bad call. So what? You see a big D End torpeedo over RB at the QBs head and you throw a flag. Its really not that horrible. Wrong call, but at a glance i guess its understandable…ive seen worse…like that damn tripping call against Pitt.
Anyway, there has got to be something more productive to talk about rather than officiating.
Anybody get a good look at Asher Allen? I saw him make a great play when he blew up that bubble screen for a 2 yard loss. Notice anything else?
Rookies
When you see plays like that from our rookies, you can’t help but believe this is one of the Vikings best drafts in years.
Pioneer Press
They got an article quoting Chilly about the Horse Collar. After watching the tape he thought it was a horse collar. I reckon a Head Coach knows the rules better than any of us, so I will leave it at that. Two blown calls in one game. Bring on Seattle and TJ Houlshdadq[wibmvpwejhg
Like I posted in the game thread on Sunday...
by Eric J. Thompson on Nov 17, 2009 3:49 PM CST reply actions
Question for the class
Hey, does anybody know why Favre takes a whiff of what appears to be smelling salts before every game? The cameras always seem to catch this. My 7th-grader asked me what he was doing and why, and I couldn’t come up with a good answer for the “why” part.
Is it a superstitious thing? Or does he do it to get himself all amped up for the games?
I’ve never heard this addressed on air, and inquiring minds want to know.
Smelling Salts.
for the same reason it’s used to bring someone out of a faint!
from Wikipedia:
Physiological action:
Smelling salts release ammonia (NH3) gas, which irritates the mucous membranes of the nose and lungs,2 and thereby triggers an inhalation reflex9 (that is, it causes the muscles that control breathing to work faster9).
Oxygen, my friend… Oxygen.
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Nov 18, 2009 5:16 PM CST up reply actions
I don't know about you guys
but the refs have been absolutely horrible this year- see last bucs game.
Why do you kill threads????
by Some other guy who does not care on Nov 17, 2009 7:38 PM CST reply actions
No Matter What The Intent...
No matter what the intent and no matter if he tried to avoid it, Edwards still made contact with Stafford’s head (possibly even helmet-to-helmet contact). In the interest of player safety that is something that just cannot be allowed. If you do, you’ll have players doing it on purpose and making it look accidental. In my opinion, contact with a player’s head is one of those things where it has to be a penalty even if there is no intent.
So Now a DLineman
who is being cut blocked not only had to hurdle the running back but make sure that he angles himself while in the air so the he only hits the quarterback (which he did, amazingly enough) with his shoulder. When is enough enough. It’s contact not flag. I was there live and it was a horrible call. One of many. If a player gets pushed into the quarterback than he is not at fault. If he is attempting to hurdle a player and make a play, this also has to be taken into consideration. One of the best plays I have ever seen by a D lineman and it isn’t even on sportscenter because it was a penalty.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Daily Norseman
Related FanShots on Daily Norseman
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
