You’re right; that’s a different angle and looks completely different.
Oh well. Having seen the Packers be the beneficiaries of so many horrible non-calls through the year, I can only say: How do you like it? Doesn’t it suck?
Speaking as a Packer fan here:
Yes, I think Rodgers got facemasked on that play. How hard Adams pulled on the facemask, it’s hard to say. But, given that the referee’s eyes were very likely on the loose ball at that point, I can understand why he missed it.
(FWIW, that’s pretty much Peter King’s view of it, as well: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/01/10/mmqb/index.html?eref=sihp)
But, I don’t think that the “missed call” is what doomed the Packers. Honestly, it was turning the ball over twice on their first three offensive plays…and being completely unable to stop Warner.
We had our chances. Fortune smiled when Rackers yanked that kick to the left. But, Rodgers couldn’t connect with Jennings on the first play of overtime.
A great comeback, and a heartbreaking loss. But, I think it’s incredibly unfair to call Rodgers a “choker” over it. He had a very good game…but, given everything else that went on during it, he needed to be perfect in order to win.
Why are you under the impression that anyone who isn’t anti-Packers is a Packers’ fan? Like Ellis Dee, I root for a team that laid down like pitiful dogs in the last two games of the season, emabrassing themselves and all their fans. And yes, it sucks. 
You’re wrong…in the video StoryTeller posted, from 0:27 to 0:35 you can clearly see that Adams was latched onto his facemask.
What’s funny is almost every Packer fan here has said the same thing. It’s the haters who have built this strawman that we’re blaming the loss on a non call rather than shoddy pass defense, two early turnovers, and an outstanding game by Warner.
I’ve constructed no such strawman. I didn’t say anyone was blaming the loss on the call, but it is kind of denial to say that it was both a facemask that should have negated the winning defensive TD and that it didn’t change the game. I don’t really get this whole ethic that you can’t attribute wins and losses to bad calls. That’s like Sarah Palin claiming man can’t hurt the environment. Refs can and do change games all the time. Saying so is just looking at the facts. I don’t think it’s a testament to sportsmanship or manhood as long as you aren’t making stuff up or attributing a 20 point loss to one call.
And your definition of “hater” is someone who doesn’t root for the Packers?
'Twasn’t you. 'Twas Dio:
I think that what Ellis is talking about is Rule 12, Section 2, Article 13(3) which, according to Pro Football Talk, states that defenders may not “hit the passer, or use hands, arms, or other parts of the body to hit the passer in the head, neck, or face.”
Disclaimer for the terminally stupid: I am not saying the non-call cost the Packers the game, or whining about it.
Yes, but, is the passer still the passer after the passer has fumbled the ball?
That rule is irrelevant to whether Adrian Peterson got facemasked.
No. My definition of hater is someone who roots against a team, enjoys watching them fail, and enjoys taunting fans. I’m certainly a hater of many teams and people. The Yankees. Al Davis. Notre Dame football.
But it is one thing to be a hater. It’s another to make blatantly false assertions to support that hate.
I don’t care how good both these teams offenses were. Fact is both teams defenses were absolutely awful. On both sides of the ball they each gave up 45 points, in a freakin playoff game! And they want to try to ride that to the superbowl?
Warner and Rodgers both had great games. The Packers AND the Cardinals defenses should be ashamed of themselves.
I know you’re still butthurt about this from a couple weeks ago, but I think I know what the difference is. It is unmanly to complain about bad calls adversely affecting your team. When it’s another team that you don’t care about, it’s perfectly fine. Instead of “they’re screwing over my guys!”, it’s more about screweing up the integrity of the league.
I hate the rule about not being allowed to touch a QB above the neck or below the thigh. As a fan of defensive football I think they hurt the game in a real and meaningful way. However, they were extremely consistent on calling those rules all season, and to then not call that heavily-enforced rule on the game-deciding play of an overtime playoff game is simply uncool.
I also hate the non-contact after five yards emphasis on the same grounds. For example, what the officials did to Revis on Saturday was a joke. The difference there was that the Jets were clearly good enough to overcome bad calls while the Packers were not.
You can’t tell me that the perception that Packer fans are blaming the loss on a non-call on an incidental facemask is a dishonest one. I didn’t make up the carping.
Dunno. Adams’ hand hits the ball first, then contacts Rodger’s head. But I’ve seen the blow to the head called after the passer has thrown the ball downfield or away. I’m not sure if the passer stops being a passer for the purposes of the rule, once it leaves his hand or if it leaves his hand as a fumble. Maybe the NFL will clarify, because I don’t know.
Sure, but running backs will never get the same sort of protection that quarterbacks do.
But none of them are in this thread.
That’s the illogical, ad hominem nonsense I don’t get. And leave my butt out of it. I don’t see why I get censured and you can prattle off with your junior high locker room rules of masculinity and pseudo-swears unchecked.
I was the one who brought it up, and only as a question 'cause I missed the play. I’m neither a Packer fan nor blaming their loss on it. In a game where the defenses gave up 40+ points each, neither team can blame anything on a bad call, no matter how egregious - if you had forced a goddamn punt one time, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
That goes extra for the Packers, who got to play a Cardinals team that was missing one of the five best wide receivers in the league.