Sunday, September 30, 2007

Oh Happy Day

What a day to be a Cardinals fan!

Sure, there was some early fear when Pittsburgh jumped out to a 7-0 lead, but that was such a brief period, it hardly rates mentioning.

I've been a fan of this team ever since they moved to Arizona. Never, during that period, have I spent virtually an entire game on my feet. The crowd was charged from start to finish, and they were personally responsible for three false starts by the Steelers.

This is a Steelers team that was favored by 6 points over the Cardinals (heck, the Cards have not yet been favored this year: will a visit to St. Louis fix that?). The only people who expected this result are the Arizona fans who have seen just how good this team is.

And quarterback controversy? What quarterback controversy? Yes, the team appeared to be more productive under Warner, but the plays called for him were designed to stretch the field more. Both of them looked good.

This team has been 2-2 before, but they didn't look this good getting there. Bring on the Rams!


Anonymous said...

(Sorry, I posted the following in the wrong place. I'm re-posting it here. My apologies for the double posting.)

I have a question about the play before Rothlesberger's final play interception. Arizona sacked Rothlesberger, and the Steelers were also called for holding (a Steelers offensive lineman esstentially tackled a Cardinals' pass rusher). Arizona declined the penalty. There were 19 seconds left when the officials stopped the clock to announce the penalty call and announce that Arizona had declined the penalty.

Now ... shouldn't the clock have started once the ball was ready for play? It didn't. It only started when Pittsburgh snapped the ball. I thought I saw the Cardinal coaches and Warner yelling at the officials on the sidelines to start the clock. The clock wasn't started, however, until, as I say, Pittsburgh snapped the ball (I'm certain that this is what occurred and that there were at least five seconds between when the ball was ready for play and when it was snapped).

Am I mistaken about this? What is the rule? It seems to me this sort of thing could encourage a team to take a penalty in order to stop the clock. Any thoughts?

Lloydian said...

And I went and replied where you originally posted.

As I stated in another post, I'm starting to worry about conspiracy theories, and at the game, I chalked that one up to "the officials hate us."

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Lloydian. I read your response. But I still wonder. You mentioned "snap related penalties" and whatnot. The problem is that the penalty was DECLINED. The clock still stays stopped?

I understand that the clock has to sort things out to determine if the penalty is accepted or declined, and, if accepted, the clock will stay stopped. But you're saying that's the rule even when, as here, it was declined?

Well, then, hold away, I guess.

Lloydian said...

Well, there is still some good logic to it. Remember that when a lineman is holding, he has no idea whether or not he's negating a big play, so committing the foul would never be a smart move for clock management purposes.

But yes, the rule states that the clock stops on all penalties and makes timing exceptions for those line of scrimmage penalties.

By the way, if the team called for a false start is ahead in the score, there is no 10 second runoff as that might encourage teams to work the play clock down to just a couple of seconds and then jump to get another 10 added on.