MyFox
 

romofan's Blog

by romofan from Garland

Last Post 51 days, 4 hours Ago


Don't get me wrong. I know I'm a Cowboy fan true and true, but was that really pass interference on that game? I've heard people say yes and no.

Now I don't know all the rules, but if you ask me, I don't think it was.

Anybody??
12 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 12
Page 1 of 1
PACKERBACKER read my blog view my photos
Dec 3, 2007 | 11:35 PM

Hey Romofan! It's me packerbacker with a not so packerbacker avie. LOL! Which game are you refering to?

moankie82 read my blog
Dec 4, 2007 | 8:52 AM

I dont think it really matters. I don't like it when someone places a game on a win or lose plane over one play. If a team plays lousy for 59 minutes, that one play is not what won or lost the game.

scottythecomic read my blog view my photos
Dec 4, 2007 | 10:40 AM

It was indeed pass interference. If you watch the replay, the Green bay defender was NOT looking for the ball when he impeded the receiver. That is pass interference every time. Now, had he been looking back it would have been a no call situation. The Packers will likely have yet another shot at the Cowboys in the playoffs - in Dallas.

texan2007 read my blog view my photos
Dec 4, 2007 | 12:45 PM

What game are you referring too. It would help.

scottythecomic read my blog view my photos
Dec 4, 2007 | 1:03 PM

It is obvious to me that he is speaking of the Thursday game of Green Bay at Dallas.

PACKERBACKER read my blog view my photos
Dec 4, 2007 | 7:53 PM

Probably refering to the Packers game. I keep rewinding that play over and over, it's really a debatable call. Just about all the commentators agree that it wasn't pass interference cause he did look back. This is refering to the second penalty.

scottythecomic read my blog view my photos
Dec 4, 2007 | 8:11 PM

Watch it again, my friend. When the Packer trips him he is NOT looking back.

PACKERBACKER read my blog view my photos
Dec 4, 2007 | 8:38 PM

The reciever slowed down a bit to adjust to the ball while the defender looked back for just a sec to see where the ball was. I'm not the only one saying this. I'm a big NFL Network and Espn fan. I watch their clips too.

Either way, it's over and if they meet again, hopefully they are both at full strength, that way everyone is satisfied with the results.

scottythecomic read my blog view my photos
Dec 4, 2007 | 9:25 PM

I agree. But I am satisfied now. lol But I want the pack back at full strength! No more excuses as this is the NFL and all are professionals.

GRAYWOLF read my blog view my photos
Dec 5, 2007 | 8:38 AM

All the commentators were wrong. If you watch the field level camera angle you can see the profile of his face in the helmet...there is no way he could be looking back. He had just turned his head back to forward before the collision.

It sucks when a referee might be responsible for the final outcome (like Monday night), but it is not the referee's fault the game was close enough for one or two bad calls to decide the game.

It would have been nice if Favre had stayed in the game, it looked like it was going to be a much bigger win for the Cowboys. It was like they didn't know how to defend against the back up QB.

scottythecomic read my blog view my photos
Dec 5, 2007 | 8:50 AM

Exactly, Graywolf. I wonder if the NFL will ever have a check system on called penalties? I highly doubt it.

MartinR read my blog view my photos
Dec 7, 2007 | 11:04 AM

I agree with graywolf and scotty. That was indeed pass interference and if Favre had played, the packers would have gotten crushed worst.

Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




romofan

I'm a 100% Cowboy fan 'till I die! I also work at Home Depot as a Head Cashier.

Member Since: 11/12/2007