No comment!!!???"I'm not going to comment". Mike pierra has gone on record before saying we got it wrong, but this time around he was not willing to say anything as far as whether he believed whether baker would have come down in bounds. He never used the words it was the right call, he did say "It's a judgment call?. So there you have it guy's we are all just whining babies, we need to let it go and get ready for all the bad call's to come during the rest of the season. Also he added that Wiggins catch wasn?t a catch even toe he takes three steps and pivots his body. He doesn?t see any football movements in what Wiggins displayed while running with the ball and he's directed all his officials to call incomplete if they see more play's like this. It was like listening to George Bush last night .
doesnt surprise me at all. the officiating has been questionable since the playoffs last year. and Prierra (sp?) always has excuses for his refs botched calls. "Oh i could understand why, but due to the interpretation of the rule it could have gone either way" we all know about this and its been talked to death, I dont get to watch NFL Network in the morning anymore, but I'm not surprised one bit and can pretty much visualize that douche choking on his own words with nothing left to say.
Hoo boy. . . who'd have EVER predicted that?!!. http://forums.theganggreen.com/showpost.php?p=337439&postcount=129 That's almost a wasted segment on the Network. If all Pereira is ever going to do is defer to the referees on the field in cases involving clearly incorrect calls, they may as well have a segment with my neighbor and ask HIS thoughts. They'd at least have more entertainment value.
Im a Rookie not an amateur! Im just reporting the news from last night. I too figured he say that but I have heard him say before that he felt his officals have gotten calls wrong before.But after hearing him say the jermaine wiggins catch was corrcectly ruled incomplete I now know that he is not permitted to say anything anymore about calls he knows are bad ones.:jets:
the league needs to change their policy. Instead of trying to protect the refs they need to focus more on trying to get the right calls as much as they can. Penalties dont need to be reviewed and I think that goes under judgement calls as well but plays in which can change an entire outcome needs to be reviewed wether its a judgement call or not. If they reviewed the baker play and the play wasn't overturn then it would of been a lot more acceptable for us fans to accept rather then not even giving us a shot at the play.
I'm guessing Eisen - even though he is supposedly a Jets fan - didn't exactly hold his feet to the fire, as I predicted here: http://forums.theganggreen.com/showthread.php?p=339315#post339315 TBTF
I expeted nothing from the NFL as far as the call went. Mangini has said that it was an internal thing and he wouldn't discuss it, so they may have commented to him in private under confidence. They should apologize.
That is a very true statement. I saw the interview last night and I notice that the video of Rich Eisen and Mike Pereira last night is on the front page of nfl.com. He tip-toed around everything Rich was pointing out. He wouldn't accept if it was a good call or not ... he simply defended the refs saying it is a tough call. Which is not what is important ... it would be nice to know that "if" the same play ever happened again would that be the same call. Or, should it be a touchdown?? There is no way Baker doesn't catch that ball if there are no defenders (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW7_OHJ-zTY) he is about 3 feet from the sideline. Even the Wiggins play he defended saying that he didn't want cheap fumbles in the league, even though it is a catch. To me that is retarded. A catch is a catch, and a fumble is a fumble. If a coach can challenge the play he should, and it should be broken down to make sure it is the right call given the rules in the NFL. Of course, if the refs can't determine in his minute during the game - then that is understandable. Also, Rich asked if the Baker TD should be reviewed in the future. Mike Pereira didn't want to start challenging judgement calls. So he mentioned that pass interference is a judgement call and we can't be reviewing all judgement calls - which wasn't what Rich was really commenting on. I think everyone simply wants to have plays that impact the game, mainly scoring to be ruled correctly. So the NFL should allow such a play to be challenged, in my opinion. There aren't alot of force outs in the game, so it wouldn't be a huge deal. I agree that penalties should never be reviewable. However, one would think that the head of officiating would want to get all calls as correct as possible by definition of the rules?? Or, at least open minded and open about the situation that it "might" be a problem area that needs discussion later on, to improve any problematic situations from occuring in the future. Well I guess the only positive that can come out of this is that it doesn't look like we going to be winning the SuperBowl, so I guess it will give us a better draft pick in April.
Congrats to SJ and TBTF for correctly predicting what would happen. If you opened TBTF's link, you saw that he said "The NFL Network covers up for the NFL." This is not quite true, I think - the point is that the NFL Network IS the NFL. This is the inevitable result of leagues taking control of their own broadcasting rights - they control access, and they also control content. Don't forget the flack that Bryant Gumbel took in August when he criticized Gene Upshaw - many people were speculating that he would lose his job with NFL Network as a result. Get used to this, folks - it's only going to become more common.
Give MP some credit. He didnt throw the crew under the Bus, but all but admitted that Baker got a blown call, when Eisen asked him why theplay shouldnt be reviewable.
We'll never know if Baker could have come down with both feet in-bounds, which is precisely why it's a bad call. Baker was never given the opportunity to come down on the playing field because he was being shoved out of bounds. Be that as it may, we played the game poorly and it should never have come down to that call anyway. We were a day late and a dollar short all afternoon.
That's exactly why they created that rule and its mind numbing to hear their answer, but as you stated we played extremely poorly, so that detracts from the bad call.
Well he's certainly one of the nicest bosses around. And one that leaves me questioning how on earth he got to that position.
I watched the video on nfl.com. If you read between the lines, you know he knows its the wrong call. If he felt it was the right call, he would give specific reasons why it was the right call. Since he didn't want to specifically offer a judgement on the BAker play, it's pretty obvious!
