You make the call!!
- Thread starter paul from philly
- Start date
The TEP pick against Wood at end, I still don't think it was in bounds. He caught ball in bounds but his body was elevated and didn't hit ground in bounds. Bad call, just happened to be on TEP's sidelines go figure. Replay would have overturned, lol
who gives a rats a.., evidently looking at the empty stands the Lasalle faithful don't either.
Brutal call. Honestly makes me want to see the breakdown of calls that the side judge on LaSalle sidelines all day. That's how bad that call is. Ball was pretty much over his head when contact was made and the contact doesnt appear being very intrusive. Just my take.
I have said it before and Ill say it again. I left more games this year saying "wow that was a really bad call" or "those officials really butchered that game." Hope Im not saying the same thing at this time next year!
I have said it before and Ill say it again. I left more games this year saying "wow that was a really bad call" or "those officials really butchered that game." Hope Im not saying the same thing at this time next year!
Yes, and they went from 5 to 7 officials this season. Biggest problem I see is so many officials are so far out of condition, it is embarrassing.
Was this the same Paul criticizing someone for "dedicating a whole thread and weeks time to " we lost"? Wha... Wha... What happened? Get over yourselves?? " Seems a bit hypocritical to now be wallowing on a judgement call during REGULATION, of this fine overtime game. Might be time to heed some of your own advise.
I’ve been an interested observer in the banter regarding the interference call in the La Salle-Parkland game.
It was a most critical fourth down call, since La Salle would have had the opportunity to run out the clock and win the game, so it was not just another penalty.
La Salle has been in the State Quarterfinal game five times, and there has been a history of lopsided penalty calls against the Explorers. This is documented in newspaper articles in the Easton game in 2009 and the Nazareth game in 2012, a game where the penalties ran 12 to 2 against La Salle. And La Salle was called for many more penalties than Parkland last Saturday,many deserved.
The key question to ask about the interference call is: would the same call have been made if the player uniforms were reversed? That can only be answered by one person, the official who made the call. If he honestly says “Yes” to that question, then the La Salle faithful can only gripe at best about poor officiating for both sides.
But the La Salle faithful feel that the call wouldn’t have been made if the uniforms were reversed. And that leads to an uncomfortable theory that some form of prejudice is being demonstrated in these games by the officials. The penalty statistics for the 5 La Salle State Quarterfinal games weigh heavily against La Salle, and reinforce the concern that they are being jobbed.
That perceived prejudice could be against Philadelphia schools, private schools, or Catholic schools, but certainly, injustice has been sensed by the admittedly partisan La Salle fans in these Quarterfinal games over the years.
It is best for the La Salle faithful to take the high road and instead celebrate the Catholic League and City Champions that have made us so proud this year. And let's enjoy a good game between Parkland and Upper Dublin this Saturday.
It was a most critical fourth down call, since La Salle would have had the opportunity to run out the clock and win the game, so it was not just another penalty.
La Salle has been in the State Quarterfinal game five times, and there has been a history of lopsided penalty calls against the Explorers. This is documented in newspaper articles in the Easton game in 2009 and the Nazareth game in 2012, a game where the penalties ran 12 to 2 against La Salle. And La Salle was called for many more penalties than Parkland last Saturday,many deserved.
The key question to ask about the interference call is: would the same call have been made if the player uniforms were reversed? That can only be answered by one person, the official who made the call. If he honestly says “Yes” to that question, then the La Salle faithful can only gripe at best about poor officiating for both sides.
But the La Salle faithful feel that the call wouldn’t have been made if the uniforms were reversed. And that leads to an uncomfortable theory that some form of prejudice is being demonstrated in these games by the officials. The penalty statistics for the 5 La Salle State Quarterfinal games weigh heavily against La Salle, and reinforce the concern that they are being jobbed.
That perceived prejudice could be against Philadelphia schools, private schools, or Catholic schools, but certainly, injustice has been sensed by the admittedly partisan La Salle fans in these Quarterfinal games over the years.
It is best for the La Salle faithful to take the high road and instead celebrate the Catholic League and City Champions that have made us so proud this year. And let's enjoy a good game between Parkland and Upper Dublin this Saturday.
Sorry ftblphan, not the same thing at all. Discussing one critical play is not the same as "wha...wha... What happened!" about an entire game! Plus the film adds to the discussion, a piece that not everyone had seen! Hence the title of the thread, "YOU make the call!!" So no, it's not the same at all. Thanks though!!
Last edited:
Is the prejudice just against LaSalle and just in one specific round of the playoffs? So just a pro-D11, anti-LaSalle bias? Goes away in other rounds of the playoffs or if other PCL teams are there? And it's only in 4A?
Do they teach Occam's Razor at LaSalle? I didn't like the call either, but my word.
Do they teach Occam's Razor at LaSalle? I didn't like the call either, but my word.
Rover it seems to be that round of games which are covered by D3 officials each year. So yes mostly LaSalle as they played in most. I joked about the D3 officials a couple of weeks ago on this site.
I did not see the play with the Prep last year so not sure where on the field it was. But if the line judge in front of the Prep bench missed the call that could probably tell you why. Overall Prep had way more penalties called.
You guys are still talking, or more appropriately whining about last week? Let it go, there are bad calls at all levels - heck the NFL is the worst. Last year the District 11 crowd bitched about St Joe Prep getting calls if I remember, next year someone else undoubtedly will bitch too. If you really clearly deserve to move on, it shouldn't come down to one call. Time to act like adults.
Let me offer an opposing view here. Maybe its the District 12/PCL officiating that is the issue. Maybe these crews see Lasalle( or any other team) 5-6 times a year, know the coaching staff, the administration, style of play, etc or maybe they are just more inclined to let things go or are not good officials. I seem to recall many ST Joe faithful bemoaning the fact that Lasalle held on every play a few years back during Lasalles title run.
So when Lasalle ventures outside of D12, the games are just being officiated by refs who are going to call it as they see it and are less likely to let anything go.
You see this a lot in basketball when quick, physical pressing teams that use the hand check, clutch and grab kind of game and they venture out to the boondocks of Upstate PA and now every hand check, clutch, grab etc is called a foul.
So when Lasalle ventures outside of D12, the games are just being officiated by refs who are going to call it as they see it and are less likely to let anything go.
You see this a lot in basketball when quick, physical pressing teams that use the hand check, clutch and grab kind of game and they venture out to the boondocks of Upstate PA and now every hand check, clutch, grab etc is called a foul.
Speed,
It was only one SJP fan who said LaSalle held on every play and he repeated that over and over.
As for the call last year and the call last week, there were some crucial differences. Last year SJP had a 4th and 2 near midfield with, as I recall,3-4 minutes left. The motion call was not made and SJP picked up the first down. It might be significant that it was a call not made instead of made, i.e. the official may simply have missed it. Though I wasn't there I have seen it on tape and it was a missed call for sure. But the point is that SJP may well have made a first down on the 4th and 7 and even if they didn't there was still time for them to get the ball back. So: a big call certainly but no one can say with confidence that it determined the winner.
The PI call we know was made by an official who seemed to be well-positioned. He clearly made a decision to throw the flag, i.e. it was a deliberate decision which may not have been the case the year before. And perhaps most crucially, if the call hadn't been made, LaSalle wins, given the time left. I've looked at the videos several times and it seems clear to me that the call was a terrible one.
I can't say there's an anti-PCL or anti-LaSalle bias--I've said on here that I thought the officiating in the SJP-LaSalle regular season game was terrible and seemed weighted against SJP--but I would say that given all the talk, especially outside of D 12 about the unfair advantage teams like SJP and LaSalle have, it's certainly possible some officials have absorbed that point of view.
But you have to ignore it when it's irrelevant to the issue. As well, I think "getting mugged" is a huge overstatement.
As for "obvious contact," there seemed to be very little and it looked to me to be initiated by Parkland's receiver.
What I don't get is the reluctance or sheer unwillingness of some to acknowledge that it was at least a questionable call. Increasingly I have a sense that Parkland had a sense that the call was a kind of just payback for the non-call last year. I don't think payback calls are ever justified and as I indicate above, the situations were very different anyway.
Vucat,
Seriously? Are you sure you watched the correct play? The ball was already well over his head and still sailing and the contact was almost non existent. If the ball were catchable, #15 would have made it and whatever contact that was made would not have prevented him from doing so. You can't make that call. As for the holding that occurred on the slot receiver, that is another officials call. It appears that official should have made a call but for whatever reason chose not to do so
Seriously? Are you sure you watched the correct play? The ball was already well over his head and still sailing and the contact was almost non existent. If the ball were catchable, #15 would have made it and whatever contact that was made would not have prevented him from doing so. You can't make that call. As for the holding that occurred on the slot receiver, that is another officials call. It appears that official should have made a call but for whatever reason chose not to do so
Do I think he should have gotten involved in the outcome of the game? Never. But to label it no contact is a stretch.
And to say one no-call infraction is irrelevant when an obvious defensive hold went uncalled is selectively creating your own narrative. And in no way is it irrelevant. There should have been a defensive penalty on that snap. When compared, the hold is much more egregious than the PI, no doubt. But it is still a penalty.
I think officials should never get involved late in games. But that's the way the cookie crumbles.
And to say one no-call infraction is irrelevant when an obvious defensive hold went uncalled is selectively creating your own narrative. And in no way is it irrelevant. There should have been a defensive penalty on that snap. When compared, the hold is much more egregious than the PI, no doubt. But it is still a penalty.
I think officials should never get involved late in games. But that's the way the cookie crumbles.
What if.??? What it the ball was thrown "perfectly".... at the high point of receivers jump, back shoulder, etc... Is it PI then??? We could do what if's all day long. No question it was a questionable call.
But the non-call on the defensive holding--and it was not close to a "mugging"--truly is irrelevant to the question of whether the PI call was appropriate.
If defensive holding and not PI had been called, Parkland would have got a first down but would not have gained nearly as many yards.
It's also interesting that the flag was thrown not when the contact was made but a bit after the play was over, and I think it is interesting that #15's reaction to the flag seemed one of surprise. Unlike many receivers who think they've been interfered with, he didn't seem to appeal immediately for a PI penalty.
Now that I watch the video, I don't think it's an outrages call. The defender just stopped and screened him from making a play. especially with parklands tall athletic receivers. U have to at least give him the opportunity to make a play. I'm from the western part of the state so I'm neutral to both team. I thought it was a good call.
