Did the Rams take a time out with 2:53 to go?
I am seriously assuming they meant Arizona when the said St. Louis? (especially since the cards used to play in STL, it could have been an honest mistake.) Additionally, I was thinking the Rams had already lost a challenge earlier in the second half, which would have explained that they had only 2 TO's left??
Please tell me this is the case, or I will go balistic.
OK, also, Mike Martz didn't question the Faulk play, which was CLEARLY a first down in the RED ZONE where a TOUCHDOWN could have sealed this game up, in retrospect?
Then, before they even replay the catch, he throws the flag on that trap type catch up the middle? After watching the replay, you could tell that, at best, you couldn't tell what happened.
ARE YOU TELLING ME THE RAMS DON'T REFER TO SOMEONE UP IN THE BOOTH FOR THESE CALLS? Sometimes they don't show a reply very quickly, but in these 2 cases, they showed them. You at least should always wait until just prior to the next snap to throw the flag so that you can try to see the reply as many times as possible before making your decision.......
I mean, I agree with "use 'em or lose 'em", but C'mon Mike. WHY DID YOU FINALLY DECIDE NOT TO USE ONE WHEN IT ACTUALLY WAS THE RIGHT TIME??????
Re: Couple questions...
1. Yes, that was Arizona who took the time out, not the Rams.
2. If the Rams have someone in the booth reviewing this stuff, they should be fired. Apparently the booth people agreed with challenging Johnson's kick return last week, but didn't catch the Faulk thing this week, which sounded like it was a first down.