Thank You Aaron Rodgers' Foot

dogpoo32 · January 10th, 2010, 05:21 PM

If he didn't kick the ball to Dansby, I think it's an incomplete pass. No clue what could have happened after that, and in all reality it doesn't matter.

How crappy must it feel to be a Packers fan right now!

legend · January 10th, 2010, 05:24 PM

Well...they'll be back. They are a very good team on the rise.

Russ Smith · January 10th, 2010, 05:41 PM

The kick(which I believe is illegal) was huge to let Dansby catch it in the air but I thought it was a fumble. Adams hit the ball and knocked it loose before he hit Rodgers head and then caught the facemask which ESPN is now whining about to no end. The ball was out and I don't think the arm was coming forward.

DeAnna · January 11th, 2010, 07:22 AM

Peter King explained it pretty well:

Quote:

1. Regarding the non-facemask call on the last play of Arizona-Green Bay: I've watched the TiVoed combination of replays six times now. Arizona's Michael Adams blitzes, dislodges the ball from Green Bay quarterback Aaron Rodgers, rakes his hands over the facemask of Rodgers, then appears to grab the facemask, and the ball is inadvertently kicked by Rodgers.

The ball flies briefly into the air and is grabbed by Arizona linebacker Karlos Dansby, who secures it and runs into the end zone for the winning touchdown. Adams keeps his hands on the mask as he plows into Rodgers and brings him to the ground. Adams didn't tackle him by the mask, but his hand did stay secured on the mask as Rodgers fell to the ground. (I say it that way because from the mountain of e-mails and Tweets last night, most of you think he got yanked to the ground by the facemask. It didn't appear that way to me.)
For a facemask penalty to be called, there has to be evidence not just of a hand on the mask, but of twisting and pulling of the facemask. And there is a slight pulling of it, but not in a flagrant way. To me, it's a close call. But what complicates matters is this: The referee, Scott Green, is the official on the crew with the responsibility of watching plays involving the quarterback. Once the ball has been dislodged, Green has to watch the ball, not the contact on the quarterback. He has to see if the ball hits the ground and judge if it's a forward pass or a fumble, then he has to follow the live ball until the end of the play. So Green could not -- at least, he should not -- have seen the contact on the mask of Rodgers.

Of course, the reason this is a big concern is if a facemask had been called, Green Bay would have had a first down at its 32 in a game where defense was optional. I don't see how the call could have been made any differently with the current rules and officiating assignments the way they are.

2. Re the non-tuck-rule call on the last play of Arizona-Green Bay: the ball, once it somehow became dislodged from Rodgers, never hit the ground. If the ball doesn't hit the ground, it's live, and the tuck rule doesn't apply.

JeffGollin · January 11th, 2010, 07:46 AM

I was concerned about both the face mask and the kick.

It did look as though Adams got his pinky hooked around Rodgers face-mask after the ball came out - but it didn't seem intentional or consequential to the play or its outcome - it looked like the accidental outcome of Adams' follow thru. But had the zebras decided to throw a flag on it, we'd find that decision hard to dispute. (Fortunately, they didn't throw the flag).

I thought it was illegal for a player to kick a ball that's in play. Couldn't Rodgers have been flagged for it?

Either way, I believe it still would have been Cardinals ball - with the possibility (or risk) of giving Rackers a second chance to redeem himself.

Note - someone ripped Aikmann and Buck for not mentioning that the "clutch rule" (or whatever they call it) could have been invoked and the ball considered a "forward pass" instead of a fumble. Had that happened and Dansby not caught it in mid-air, it would have been judged an imcompletion and still GB's ball.

Lots to ponder. (But not for long - the only thing that matters now is that we won and now move on).

It was bizarre though.

mrbyte · January 11th, 2010, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogpoo32

If he didn't kick the ball to Dansby, I think it's an incomplete pass. No clue what could have happened after that, and in all reality it doesn't matter.

How crappy must it feel to be a Packers fan right now!

Yep the dreaded tuck rule. its not an empty hand coming forward so it would have been an incomplete pass if it hit the ground but good old Rodgers kicked it and the rest is history

as for the facemask I couldn't give a ..... they got away with a hands to the face of Fitz so alls equal to me, anyway you can only deal with whats called not whats not.

football karma · January 11th, 2010, 08:06 AM

it has officially been ruled a fumble -- given that Dansby caught it in the air, it kinda makes review moot. Had they reviewed it -- they could have called tuck rule, made it a pass, and then an interception.

The missed call theory is two fold:

1. They should have called blow to the head personal foul -- and cite the earlier foul on Cullen Jenkins (which ironically, they also think was a bad call -- but as it turned out, a harmless one).

2. Facemask. By the letter of the law -- its a facemask. Now the question is if the refs simply didnt see it (for reasons outlined by Peter King) or simply didn't consider it central to the play. Adams hit Rogers, dislodged the ball and had his hand end up on the mask on the follow through. He had his index finger over the bar but didnt tackle him by grabbing the mask -- Rogers was fumbling and going down regardless. The fact that the mask didnt get twisted or pulled worked in Adams favor. Its a tough one -- and it would have equally been controversial had a game winning td been overturned.

chickenhead · January 11th, 2010, 08:13 AM

If Rodgers doesn't kick it, in today's NFL it seems likely that the play is whistled dead for better or for worse. Then they begin the job of deducing what actually happened after the fact. The ball never touching the ground is the best thing that could have happened to the Cards, because it made the action seamless.

IAWarnerFan · January 11th, 2010, 07:55 PM

It was on 3rd down? 4th down and they would have had to punt or go for it. Cardinals still would have likely win the game with another stop and a pass down the middle like they did all game long.