The Dallas Cowboys have reportedly added an insurance quarterback in case starter Tony Romo is, in fact, unable to play in Sundays critical NFC East showdown against the Philadelphia Eagles. Sead Kolasinac Arsenal Jersey . Jon Kitna, who last played in the NFL with the Cowboys two seasons ago, has agreed to return to Dallas, according to the Dallas Morning News. Reports earlier Tuesday indicated Romo received an epidural injection to relieve pain on the herniated disc in his back, an injury he suffered in last Sundays win over the Redskins. The injection is a standard procedure in treating a herniated disc and the Cowboys hope to know by Wednesday or Thursday if the shot had a positive effect. Still, Kitna has apparently been added as a potential backup for Kyle Orton if Romo doesnt dress. Kitna, 41, has played 15 seasons in the NFL and started nine games for Dallas in 2010. He appeared in three games in relief the next season before retiring at the end of the year. He has a career quarterback rating of 77.4 and has thrown 169 touchdown passes and 165 interceptions in 141 games. Matteo Guendouzi Jersey . The third baseman whipped the ball across the diamond to second baseman Aaron Hill. He quickly tossed it to shortstop Chris Owings, who flipped over his shoulder to left fielder Cody Ross. Mesut Ozil Jersey . LOUIS -- The St. http://www.footballarsenalstore.com/Women-Petr-Cech-Arsenal-Fc-Jersey/ . -- During a players meeting following the All-Star break, Jermaine ONeal promised his teammates to play the rest of the regular season like he would never play again -- because he very well might not.Got a question on rule clarification, comments on rule enforcements or some memorable NHL stories? Kerry wants to answer your emails at cmonref@tsn.ca. Hey Kerry, Im watching the Avalanche at Flames game on Thursday night. Ive noticed multiple times where one team will clearly win a faceoff, but the play is then blow dead only for the centreman who lost the draw to be tossed out. In most cases, the second puck drop is not won as cleanly as the first, which benefits the team that had the first faceoff infraction. My question is that if a faceoff is done unfairly but the team causing the infraction clearly looses the draw, why does the play have to be stopped and the draw have to be redone? In my thinking, if a team wins a draw cleanly even though the opponent cheated, why not let the clean win benefit the team that won the faceoff? Like Cmon Ref! Brett Moose Jaw, Sk ----- Brett, Before I answer your question, I want to do a quick recap of Thursdays column with some additional information I received that came in after the posting. I went back and forth yesterday with our TSN Libero expert technician, Andrew Fitzpatrick while he was tied up in studio on a football project. We updated the column once Andrew had the time to provide Libero calculations on the height that Jason Pominville contacted the puck with the shaft of his stick. Based on different replay angles he was provided, the system calculated the contact height between 42 to 46 - both of which are above the four foot height of the crossbar. Andrew admitted there is still some judgment required by the technician to calibrate the system, whereas if chips were placed in the pucks and sensors added in the rink if would provide very accurate data. Anyone remember the FoxTrax, the glowing puck that ranged in color depending upon the speed it travelled? If that puck-tracking data software from the mid-90s was reinstated, this would be a relatively easy problem to rectify. Not only could a high-stick of the puck be detected but also when the puck entered the net undetected. Pass the chips, please. Brett, I did a quick scan of the game and saw a couple of examples of the linesman bllowing the play down for a do-over, even though the cheating centre lost the draw. Hector Bellerin Jersey. As you correctly pointed out, the previous offending team won the second face-off attempt which might not seem fair. The linesmen do their very best to maintain a consistent standard as much as possible throughout a game. They arent looking for perfection but fairness. They apply common sense with good judgment to execute a fair face-off and keep the game moving. Every linesman recognizes the importance of end zone face-offs and none of them want to show up on the highlight reel for a poor drop that results in a goal. They are also judged on their face-offs for rating purposes. In the situations I witnessed, one player utilized a timed, hard swing of his stick while in the other draw, the centre made contact with his helmet on the opposing centre with a spin move. In these more aggressive cases, it was apparent to me that the linesman was not comfortable allowing play to continue but instead chose to maintain an acceptable standard by letting the offending player know his actions were not acceptable. Your point is well taken, Brett. Generally speaking, common sense should be applied to allow play to continue when the non-offending team gains possession of the puck off a face-off. Most of the linesmen I worked with throughout my career, and those I still remain in contact with, attempt to do as you suggest wherever possible. There is perhaps even some value to allowing play to continue and then advising the offending centre at the first opportunity that if he didnt try to cheat, he just might have won the draw. At the very least, the player should be informed that any recurrence would not be tolerated. I remember veteran linesmen telling me that Jean Beliveau and Stan Mikita were two of the most cooperative centres they ever dealt with. These two great players just put their stick down straight on the ice and proceeded to win most of their draws, no matter how much their opponent attempted to cheat. Mikita once told Ray Scapinello, I dont care what you let the other guy do because Im going to win the draw regardless. Kita often did just that. ' ' '