- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Was the Illegal forward pass a bad call???
Posted on 10/26/09 at 6:53 pm
Posted on 10/26/09 at 6:53 pm
Prisco thinks so......
Sure as hell looked like Camarillo intentionally threw the ball out of bounds.
quote:
One of the worst calls I've witnessed made by an official came at the end of the Dolphins-Saints game. With Miami down six, they were driving to a potential game-winning score. But after Henne hit Greg Camarillo for a 7-yard gain to the New Orleans 49, he was called for an illegal-forward pass as the ball came out of hands when he reached for the sideline. The ball was knocked out. It resulted in a 5-yard penalty, which made it second-and-8. Two plays later, on fourth down. Tracy Porter picked off Henne and returned it for a touchdown. Is it a different game if the penalty isn't called? We don't know for sure, but the officials blew that.
Sure as hell looked like Camarillo intentionally threw the ball out of bounds.
7
Posted on 10/26/09 at 6:56 pm to steelreign
whether he intentionally did it or not its still against the rules. The refs can't make that call based on his intentions or else everyone else will claim it was an accident when it happens
Posted on 10/26/09 at 6:59 pm to steelreign
i think he was trying to reach out and put the ball on the sideline to stop the clock. but the hit made it look like he was throwing it forward. either way, porter took one back to the house and i don't think it really changed their play calling
Posted on 10/26/09 at 7:00 pm to BilJ
He was obviously trying to throw the ball out of bounds to stop the clock....so No, it was not a bad call. At the least it could have been delay of game - similar to the ball spike that we were penalized for earlier in the game.
Posted on 10/26/09 at 7:01 pm to BilJ
Prisco's fricking blind if he thinks that ball was knocked out, slow mo showed both his arms tossing it toward the sideline.
He just hates the saints and/or likes to stir up shite.
He just hates the saints and/or likes to stir up shite.
This post was edited on 10/26/09 at 7:03 pm
Posted on 10/26/09 at 7:10 pm to Hullabaloo
I think he was reaching for the sidelines and the ball started to come out so to avoid losing a fumble he pushed it out.
It was the correct call.
I do no think he went down intending to throw it out, but he felt it coming loose, brought his other hand up to push the ball out of bounds.
I don't see how you can not see that he PUSHES the ball to the sidelines.
Correct call.
It was the correct call.
I do no think he went down intending to throw it out, but he felt it coming loose, brought his other hand up to push the ball out of bounds.
I don't see how you can not see that he PUSHES the ball to the sidelines.
Correct call.
Posted on 10/26/09 at 7:30 pm to TigerMyth36
Pretty obvious call...Charles Davis knew what the call was going to be before it was made
Posted on 10/26/09 at 7:33 pm to EmperorGout
quote:I think Davis is one of the best out there
Charles Davis knew what the call was going to be before it was made
Posted on 10/26/09 at 8:44 pm to BilJ
quote:
whether he intentionally did it or not its still against the rules
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your post, but if it was NOT intentional, then isn't it a fumble?
Posted on 10/26/09 at 9:02 pm to steelreign
It looked intentional to me. I think they got the call right.
Posted on 10/26/09 at 9:05 pm to steelreign
it deserved a penalty, but all i could really think that was wrong with the call was the terminology. Thought it may be ruled as something else, a delay of game or personal foul of some sort.
but im sure the refs know better than i
but im sure the refs know better than i
Posted on 10/26/09 at 9:06 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
Thought it may be ruled as something else, a delay of game or personal foul of some sort.
This is what I was thinking too. I thought unsportsman-like conduct or something of that nature.
At any other point in the game, I doubt that play gets a flag though.
Posted on 10/26/09 at 9:07 pm to shel311
quote:
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your post, but if it was NOT intentional, then isn't it a fumble?
Yeah, if he had just fumbled it and it rolled forward and out of bounds it would have been returned to the spot where he fumbled it.
He threw it though, so it was an illegal pass.
Posted on 10/26/09 at 9:22 pm to TigerBait45
It was obvious to me he knew he was being tackled in bounds and the clock was going to run. He thought if he could toss it out of bounds it would stop the clock.
It's an illegal play and the refs got it right. No questions asked.
It's an illegal play and the refs got it right. No questions asked.
Posted on 10/26/09 at 9:52 pm to The Cable Guy
I'm just glad they didnt have to rely on the broken replay cam, cuz we all knew what the call would have been then...that call just made up for the 1st bad call of the game...no doubt about it,both arms moving forward towards the sidelines, ball comes free results in a penalty, read it and weep... 
Posted on 10/26/09 at 10:04 pm to steelreign
Good call. The Dave Casper rule.
Posted on 10/27/09 at 12:51 am to steelreign
Sorry Prisco, wrong again. The sequence of events should make it obvious what happened. When he caught the ball he was turned inside toward the middle of the field. The receiver immediatly turned and began running for the sideline, even though he obviously would have gained more yards staying inside. At that point, it's clear he is trying to stop the clock. Then, he gets tackled and realizes that he will not make the sideline. Only then do the arms come forward, a move that would never be made while being tackled because of fear of a fumble, and the ball clearly is pushed toward the sideline by the reciever. It does not take a rocket scientist to see that his only objective in that whole sequence was to get the clock stopped.
Posted on 10/27/09 at 10:03 am to GeauxBayouBengals
I was reading an article in one of the Florida papers and Camarillo said he intentionally threw the ball and he'd probably do it the same if was in the same position (dumb).
Can't remember where I got the article so no link.
Can't remember where I got the article so no link.
Posted on 10/27/09 at 10:39 am to GeauxBayouBengals
quote:
Sorry Prisco, wrong again. The sequence of events should make it obvious what happened. When he caught the ball he was turned inside toward the middle of the field. The receiver immediatly turned and began running for the sideline, even though he obviously would have gained more yards staying inside. At that point, it's clear he is trying to stop the clock. Then, he gets tackled and realizes that he will not make the sideline. Only then do the arms come forward, a move that would never be made while being tackled because of fear of a fumble, and the ball clearly is pushed toward the sideline by the reciever. It does not take a rocket scientist to see that his only objective in that whole sequence was to get the clock stopped.
Exactly
Posted on 10/27/09 at 11:27 am to steelreign
(no message)
This post was edited on 11/15/23 at 10:06 am
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News