It is currently Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:16 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James was more of a TD than Ertz
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:22 pm
Posts: 2527
Zeke5123 wrote:
I've explained it numerous times. I've posted the language of the rule. All you have done is say "Nope." Care to post the rule and explain how it wasn't a catch? I know you won't but Ill be waiting.


He does not maintain possession of the ball because it hit the fucking ground.

EDIT:

TB answered this for me...

Quote:
From page 31 of the official NFL rulebook:

Item 1. Player Going to the Ground. A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long
enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without
contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of
play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is
incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 2376
TB wrote:
From page 31 of the official NFL rulebook:

Quote:
Item 1. Player Going to the Ground. A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long
enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without
contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of
play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is
incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.


James didn't stay upright enough to demonstrate he was a runner, was considered a "player going to the ground," lost control of the ball with it touching the ground before he regained control.

By rule, it was incomplete.

Now, whether the rule should be changed is a completely different argument.


You missed the key word initial. James had a push off from his knee. That should satisfy the rule. You also forgot the issue of burden of proof. The question isn't whether you think it is a catch, or that James did not make enough of a move to establish being runner. The burden is irrefutable evidence. Given that the rule is subjective, unless it is clear cut (i.e., the player hits the ground on initial contact and the ball pops out), presumably you must go with the subjective judgment on the field. That is to say, you respect the burden of proof.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 10:48 am
Posts: 1251
People somehow don't see james make a move after his initial contact with the ground it's hilarious how they tow the party line bc that's what Romo said or whatever.

Anyway the sound of Pats fans complaining about calls in a loss for once is going to sound like sweet music.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James was more of a TD than Ertz
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 2376
fortythree wrote:
Zeke5123 wrote:
I've explained it numerous times. I've posted the language of the rule. All you have done is say "Nope." Care to post the rule and explain how it wasn't a catch? I know you won't but Ill be waiting.


He does not maintain possession of the ball because it hit the fucking ground.

EDIT:

TB answered this for me...

Quote:
From page 31 of the official NFL rulebook:

Item 1. Player Going to the Ground. A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long
enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without
contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of
play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is
incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.


Yeah read my post above and my response to TB. He is wrong and isn't parsing the language well or accounting for the burden of proof.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 24611
Miter Saw wrote:
People somehow don't see james make a move after his initial contact with the ground it's hilarious how they tow the party line bc that's what Romo said or whatever.

Anyway the sound of Pats fans complaining about calls in a loss for once is going to sound like sweet music.


I’ve already said I believe what James did WAS a catch.

But that the NFL Has NEVER RULED that a player that did what James did was establishing himself as a runner.

_________________
“A set of several simple rules leads to complex, intelligent behavior. While a set of complex rules often leads to dumb and primitive behavior.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 2376
Miter Saw wrote:
People somehow don't see james make a move after his initial contact with the ground it's hilarious how they tow the party line bc that's what Romo said or whatever.

Anyway the sound of Pats fans complaining about calls in a loss for once is going to sound like sweet music.


Yeah. It is truly amazing. On top of that, they completely ignore the burden of proof. 43 hates Jesse James for...reasons...so his argument here is largely agenda driven. I think everyone else was just toeing the line of NFL reporters, even though the NFL reporters also failed to parse the language or the video.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 11:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 2376
Jeemie wrote:
Miter Saw wrote:
People somehow don't see james make a move after his initial contact with the ground it's hilarious how they tow the party line bc that's what Romo said or whatever.

Anyway the sound of Pats fans complaining about calls in a loss for once is going to sound like sweet music.


I’ve already said I believe what James did WAS a catch.

But that the NFL Has NEVER RULED that a player that did what James did was establishing himself as a runner.


You have at least been consistent that you believe by letter it was a catch, but that the NFL has ruling precedent. Of course, you've acknowledged that precedent may not be as strong as you state. Nevertheless, I think you have been rather honest in the debate and haven't ignored comments. I've enjoyed the debate with you as a result.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 11:10 am
Posts: 1895
The James call is still complete horseshit. We got rooked. Made a catch, made a football move, survived the initial contact with the ground. Broke the plane.

The big difference between James and Ertz’s catch was Ertz caught the bobble too. The ball is allowed to hit the ground if you have full control which Ertz did. Then it popped up and he still caught it.

You could argue they are different from that aspect too, if you want to go down the rabbit hole of he didn’t survive the ground.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:22 pm
Posts: 2527
Zeke5123 wrote:
Miter Saw wrote:
People somehow don't see james make a move after his initial contact with the ground it's hilarious how they tow the party line bc that's what Romo said or whatever.

Anyway the sound of Pats fans complaining about calls in a loss for once is going to sound like sweet music.


Yeah. It is truly amazing. On top of that, they completely ignore the burden of proof. 43 hates Jesse James for...reasons...so his argument here is largely agenda driven. I think everyone else was just toeing the line of NFL reporters, even though the NFL reporters also failed to parse the language or the video.


My agenda is reality driven. James stumbles all over himself and doesn't make a football move. The Ertz play tonight was not even remotely similar.

This is a fucking stupid thread.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 2376
fortythree wrote:
Zeke5123 wrote:
Miter Saw wrote:
People somehow don't see james make a move after his initial contact with the ground it's hilarious how they tow the party line bc that's what Romo said or whatever.

Anyway the sound of Pats fans complaining about calls in a loss for once is going to sound like sweet music.


Yeah. It is truly amazing. On top of that, they completely ignore the burden of proof. 43 hates Jesse James for...reasons...so his argument here is largely agenda driven. I think everyone else was just toeing the line of NFL reporters, even though the NFL reporters also failed to parse the language or the video.


My agenda is reality driven. James stumbles all over himself and doesn't make a football move. The Ertz play tonight was not even remotely similar.

This is a fucking stupid thread.


It is stupid mostly due to your contributions...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:22 pm
Posts: 2527
Zeke5123 wrote:
It is stupid mostly due to your contributions...


Says the guy who was already proven wrong and is now refusing to admit it.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 2376
fortythree wrote:
Zeke5123 wrote:
It is stupid mostly due to your contributions...


Says the guy who was already proven wrong and is now refusing to admit it.


You don't understand words. Like, for example the word "proven" or "wrong." It likely explains why you couldn't follow the words posted above. One again, feel free to make a cogent argument to the contrary, but making good arguments is outside your ability. Being snarky, on the other hand...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 11:10 am
Posts: 1895
https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2018/2/4/1 ... super-bowl

Don’t agree, but thought I’d post to jar the memory of the video.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James was more of a TD than Ertz
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:52 pm
Posts: 7788
Jeemie wrote:
Ertz took three steps.

James didn’t.

They haven’t counted what James did as a football move since the rule was changed.


That's exactly right.

_________________
#NoMoTomlin!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2014 2:34 pm
Posts: 585
fortythree wrote:
Zeke5123 wrote:
It is stupid mostly due to your contributions...


Says the guy who was already proven wrong and is now refusing to admit it.



Listening to a former NFL Receiver (Colinsworth) and QB (Romo) plus Al Michaels who has watched more sporting events than maybe anyone get confused about how a catch is called should tell you that really nothing is “proven”.

That’s why there continues to be a debate...

_________________
FIRE MIKE TOMLIN


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James was more of a TD than Ertz
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 6:13 pm
Posts: 4271
Zeke5123 wrote:
Jackie Chiles wrote:
Louis Lipps Service wrote:

Not at all. James was going down as he made the catch, which is exactly the case the rule was written for.

Ertz was freely running after the catch.

Yes. As dumb as the rule is James was not a runner and did not survive the ground as a catch. Ertz was a runner plain and simple.


Once again, far from clear that he was not a runner. The rule for becoming a runner is:

Quote:
A player has the ball long enough to become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps


He both tucked and turned up field. Therefore, James completed this part of this catch rule.

The only thing added by going to the ground is, that in addition to the above, the receiver going to the ground

Quote:
... must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.



The initial contact was James' knee. James then pushed off that knee as he tried to go into the EZ. Thus, James survived initial contact.

Remember -- the replay booth must determine that James either did not (i) tuck it or turn up field OR (ii) not maintain control of the ball after his initial contact with the ground BASED ON IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE. I don't see how that was satisfied in the James' catch.


Zeke, you're completely misinterpreting this and missing the point.

To be considered a "runner" you actually have to be taking steps. The key part of the bolded above that you quoted is "taking additional steps." You can only take additional steps if you've taken steps to begin with. That is the intent. Catch, one step, two step, and then making what we call a football move (tucking the ball away, warding off a defender, turning upfield, or taking additional steps). You do that, you're a runner.

James took zero steps. He was falling to the ground onto his knees as he was attempting to make the catch. He was literally falling to the ground while the ball was still in the air. It doesn't matter if he tried to tuck it as he was going to the ground, or was lunging out with the football, by rule, he was going to the ground. He was not a runner. As such, he had to maintain control of the ball through the contact with the ground. He didn't control it, it hit the ground, it was not a catch by NFL rule. End of story.

_________________
Baltostiller wrote:
I can agree to disagree without calling another post "assholic" Maybe you should do the same.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch was a TD as was Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2014 9:26 pm
Posts: 4819
ChippedHamSandwich wrote:
You guys seem to have all the answers when it comes to this.

You should apply with the NFL offices tomorrow morning, they could use some brainiacs.

Those two plays are incredibly similar, James even brought the ball into his chest before he extended.


not really similar. James never ran with the ball.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:22 am
Posts: 10812
I’ll never forgive JJ for that play. He wasn’t touched. The doofus tripped over his own feet and still lost control of the ball going over the goal line in a must win game.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2014 1:23 pm
Posts: 3665
I started this thread because I'm a proud Homer sometimes. I grew up in the 70s and 80s when Jesse James Catch was undisputed, Before they started fucking with the rules. I think there is an argument to be made on both sides of Jesse James Catch, with the current rules. Also, I thought Ertz did not have as solid a hold on the ball as James did through the catch.

Whichever side you fall on, most of us agree that the rules about what make a Catch are fucked up. Roger Goodell himself talked directly about the Jesse James Catch recently:

Here's the full article:
https://247sports.com/nfl/pittsburgh-st ... -114369943


Last edited by Stallworth16 on Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:49 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:06 am
Posts: 9760
Didnt read the entire thread, i thought it was obvious live..Ertz easily established himself as a runner, then dove and broke the plane while JJ the idiot didnt establish himself as a runner..

_________________
#CdnSteelerFanStrong


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James was more of a TD than Ertz
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 2376
TB wrote:

Zeke, you're completely misinterpreting this and missing the point.

To be considered a "runner" you actually have to be taking steps. The key part of the bolded above that you quoted is "taking additional steps." You can only take additional steps if you've taken steps to begin with. That is the intent. Catch, one step, two step, and then making what we call a football move (tucking the ball away, warding off a defender, turning upfield, or taking additional steps). You do that, you're a runner.

James took zero steps. He was falling to the ground onto his knees as he was attempting to make the catch. He was literally falling to the ground while the ball was still in the air. It doesn't matter if he tried to tuck it as he was going to the ground, or was lunging out with the football, by rule, he was going to the ground. He was not a runner. As such, he had to maintain control of the ball through the contact with the ground. He didn't control it, it hit the ground, it was not a catch by NFL rule. End of story.


A more reasonable point, but still not a winning one. Words have to be interpreted within the context of the surrounding words. Here, there is a three part rule for a catch. The bolded above is part three. In part two, the rule provides that two feet or any other body part. Therefore, it would not be unreasonable to substitute "any other body part" for second foot (i.e., once part two was complete).

The rejoinder to this is that second foot was written into the rule; not completion of part two. But there are problems with this reading. Principally, this rule is a general rule for a catch. If we really believe that the third condition can only be satisfied by the ability to make a football move after a second step has been taken, then it would seem that no sliding catches could ever be catches unless the receiver steps up to take a step. But that is absurd! We understand that the receiver can make a football move after "any other body part" touches the ground, and therefore the receiver satisfies part three.

With all of that said, the NFL rule book is poorly drafted. It is unclear what circumstances Part III would apply to that would not render going to the ground rule superfluous.

Finally, you seem to be strawmannirg (likely unintentionally) my argument. James didn't just tuck the ball as he was going to the ground. My argument is that James (a) went to the ground on one knee to make the catch, and then (b) changed his body, and extended the ball. Thus, his initial contact is separated from part (b). Based on the modifier "initial" in the NFL rulebook, the existence of (b) in the James' fact pattern should lead to the conclusion that he did in fact survive the ground.

Once more, none of the rules are clearly written. But it appears on balance that the (i) the League got it wrong and (ii) there is enough subjective integration that the standard of review should've controlled this particular case.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 7:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2017 11:22 pm
Posts: 411
James fell to one knee, Ertz had two feet down.

By rule both did what was needed to establish themselves as a runner. Ertz tucked, took steps and reached for the end zone, James tucked and then reached for the endzone - completing one of the designated tasks to fully be a runner.

Both were catches... the only difference is the NFL incorrectly attempts to invoke this going to the ground rule section which is not needed - considering they already establish a clear ruling on what becomes of a runner... I mean why put into the first part of the ruling about one knee, or one body part if you are just going to remove them later with "going to the ground"...

It's over lawyered nonsense, and the NFL looks stupid time and time again because of it.


Last edited by ToddHaleysNineIron on Mon Feb 05, 2018 7:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James Catch vs Ertz Catch
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 7:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2017 11:22 pm
Posts: 411
And just so we have the first part before Item 1. Here it is

Quote:
A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
maintains control of the ball after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, until he has the ball long enough to clearly become a runner. A player has the ball long enough to become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps (see 3-2-7-Item 2).
Note: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.

If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch.


The part "touches the ground inbounds with both feet, or any part of his body" is simply not needed if you are going to always trump it with "GOING TO THE GROUND". The only way going to the ground is invoked is if the above is not fulfilled.

As written - James fulfilled all of this. His knee went down and he had possession... and if you don't think so - see the sideline catches AB pulls off when he's got about a millisecond of control as both toes touch to see the standard given for "control". To determine if he has the ball long enough to become a runner, they don't use "time" or even "steps" but they clearly define what a player must do - one of which is tuck the ball away, or turn up field. James clearly turns up field because that's the only way to get the end zone.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James was more of a TD than Ertz
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 8:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 10803
Zeke5123 wrote:
TB wrote:

Zeke, you're completely misinterpreting this and missing the point.

To be considered a "runner" you actually have to be taking steps. The key part of the bolded above that you quoted is "taking additional steps." You can only take additional steps if you've taken steps to begin with. That is the intent. Catch, one step, two step, and then making what we call a football move (tucking the ball away, warding off a defender, turning upfield, or taking additional steps). You do that, you're a runner.

James took zero steps. He was falling to the ground onto his knees as he was attempting to make the catch. He was literally falling to the ground while the ball was still in the air. It doesn't matter if he tried to tuck it as he was going to the ground, or was lunging out with the football, by rule, he was going to the ground. He was not a runner. As such, he had to maintain control of the ball through the contact with the ground. He didn't control it, it hit the ground, it was not a catch by NFL rule. End of story.


A more reasonable point, but still not a winning one. Words have to be interpreted within the context of the surrounding words. Here, there is a three part rule for a catch. The bolded above is part three. In part two, the rule provides that two feet or any other body part. Therefore, it would not be unreasonable to substitute "any other body part" for second foot (i.e., once part two was complete).

The rejoinder to this is that second foot was written into the rule; not completion of part two. But there are problems with this reading. Principally, this rule is a general rule for a catch. If we really believe that the third condition can only be satisfied by the ability to make a football move after a second step has been taken, then it would seem that no sliding catches could ever be catches unless the receiver steps up to take a step. But that is absurd! We understand that the receiver can make a football move after "any other body part" touches the ground, and therefore the receiver satisfies part three.

With all of that said, the NFL rule book is poorly drafted. It is unclear what circumstances Part III would apply to that would not render going to the ground rule superfluous.

Finally, you seem to be strawmannirg (likely unintentionally) my argument. James didn't just tuck the ball as he was going to the ground. My argument is that James (a) went to the ground on one knee to make the catch, and then (b) changed his body, and extended the ball. Thus, his initial contact is separated from part (b). Based on the modifier "initial" in the NFL rulebook, the existence of (b) in the James' fact pattern should lead to the conclusion that he did in fact survive the ground.

Once more, none of the rules are clearly written. But it appears on balance that the (i) the League got it wrong and (ii) there is enough subjective integration that the standard of review should've controlled this particular case.


James catch could have been ruled a TD, but is reasonably not ruled a TD according to language. Only move he made was twisting and lunging for the goal. Problem
Is that it is possible to argue that the lunge and going to the ground could not be separated from one another bc he "swiveled" on his knees.

Ertz took three running steps and so unlike James it is impossible to argue otherwise.

_________________
#CdnSteelerFanStrong
Orangesteel wrote:
We could have ended the game there and Tomlin’s band of assholes let them back in.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Jesse James was more of a TD than Ertz
PostPosted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 8:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2014 4:50 pm
Posts: 4983
fortythree wrote:
Jeemie wrote:
Ertz took three steps.

James didn’t.

They haven’t counted what James did as a football move since the rule was changed.


This.

Just because Michaels and Collinsworth are fucking morons and don't know the rule doesn't mean Jesse's drop is suddenly a catch.

Is their anyone in sports media that wasn’t personally nice to you that you do like?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
FORUM RULES --- PRIVACY POLICY




Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group