It is currently Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:56 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 5:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
SP wrote:
It's like they want to piss off fans to the point of tuning out games. Catch, two feet down, football move, knees hits ground. The play should be over. This was the biggest bullshit call I've ever seen.

Some members here call me crazy for saying they're fixing it to their liking

Some have seen the light amid many years of proof positive vs not believing

As long as they let Ben get over the mountain one more time.......I'll allow it.

That call today should wake up all the non believers

And Jeemie always calling me a nutter...... Any day of the week boy.

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:35 pm
Posts: 7809
I still say incompetence rather than fix.

_________________
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
--Voltaire


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:23 pm
Posts: 2666
If that was called an int to begin with, I would have challenged with absolute certainty that it gets overturned.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:45 pm
Posts: 13736
Poltargyst wrote:
I still say incompetence rather than fix.

I still say accidentally on purpose too. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:20 am
Posts: 3778
Review in itself is bullshit, it allows them to make up shit as they go, whether it's on purpose or not.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 6974
Nick79 wrote:
Review in itself is bullshit...

I could not agree more!

_________________
"They're standing around, Butz!" - Kevin O'Shea


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 9:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 1:55 pm
Posts: 4479
Nick79 wrote:
Review in itself is bullshit, it allows them to make up shit as they go, whether it's on purpose or not.


I think it's more the point spreads more than anything else


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:52 pm
Posts: 143
Indeed I would say it was the worst call I ever saw but I also saw Troys non-interception against colts in the playoffs of 05.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:20 am
Posts: 3778
Strom Detmer wrote:
Indeed I would say it was the worst call I ever saw but I also saw Troys non-interception against colts in the playoffs of 05.

They just made something up! AB caught the ball ran a few steps in possession, went down and THE GROUND CAUSED A FUMBLE! This "complete the process" stuff is bullshit! It means a ball carrier running with the ball after catching a pass plays by different rules than a runner carrying the ball... Ben completed a pass, AB caught a pass and ran several steps, then the ground caused a fumble, then Ben is charged with throwing an interception? Replay is bullshit, I'd rather live with horrible mistakes, rather than wait 5 minutes for the refs to create horrible mistakes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 12:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 11:10 am
Posts: 1328
I am fine with the call either way.

Don’t conflate the reception with the interception though. It was a tough call in real speed.

The mistake was made in the review. There was Absolutely no way there was enough evidence to over turn the reception; conversely not enough to overturn an interception had that been called.

There were many things wrong with that call. I thought Tomlin should have immediately thrown the red flag to challenge the reception just to be obnoxious. .

That is one of my favorite traits of Tomlin. The refs never cause Tomlin to go off the rails, and hence the team stays focused and in control. Cowher was famous for blowing up, and you could argue the players followed suit and got distracted and dejected from the task at hand too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 1:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:33 pm
Posts: 16523
In the entire history of bullshit calls and bullshit interceptions, that was one giant bullshit call/INT.

_________________
VASteelerGuy wrote:
These refs suck


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 1:43 pm 
bradshaw2ben wrote:
In the entire history of bullshit calls and bullshit interceptions, that was one giant bullshit call/INT.


Yep. Easily the worst i ever saw. And that was WITH replay

There are several moves id make in regards to rules/refs/replay etc if i was king

I still cant believe a trillion dollar entity like the nfl still has part time refs. Thats a big issue imo


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 2:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 5538
Shouldn't the call on the field stand unless it's a blatantly obvious mistake that is scene without a doubt on replay? Or is that just a college rule? Because if you have to rewind the damn thing 10 times and bring out a protractor, the call on the field should stand!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 2:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:57 am
Posts: 1055
But Troy's INT vs. the Colts in the 2006 Divisional Game didn't count...



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 2:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 6974
Of all the things that is destroying the NFL game, replay review is at the top of the list.

_________________
"They're standing around, Butz!" - Kevin O'Shea


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 2:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 11612
Poltargyst wrote:
I still say incompetence rather than fix.


The thing is, now that the league office is in on every review, you don't need any grand conspiracy just a couple guys in a NY office putting their thumb on the scale to keep games close.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 2:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 11612
SteelerChef wrote:
Yep. Easily the worst i ever saw. And that was WITH replay


I asked this in the game thread - was that call REALLY worse than the one that gave us a fumble last week in CHI?

Those are the two worst replay results I've seen, and they happened in consecutive weeks in Steeler games.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 3:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:55 pm
Posts: 704
The whole premise around requiring a receiver complete the catch while going to the ground never sat well with me. Even worse, the concept Mike Pereira used in his explanation that the receiver has to have it a certain amount of time is just crazy.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... klah7aLyLl

Brown had total control and took three steps before he went down and maintained control until he hit the ground and hitting the ground jarred the ball lose. If he never had control I could understand it but the reply showed that he did.

I also think there should be a 60-second “overturn clock” - once the reply review starts, so does the 60 seconds. If you don’t have definitive proof to overturn by the time it gets down to zero then they play stands.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 4:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 11612
Stillerz Bar wrote:
Brown had total control and took three steps before he went down and maintained control until he hit the ground and hitting the ground jarred the ball lose.


I thought he had control, actually changed hands and tucked it. It was while tucking it that the defensive guy batted it and it started moving, still moving to the ground (but not coming out). Sure looked to me like he established possession.

By the way, Harbaugh has someone wicked good and wicked quick....because they didn't challenge it was a fumble (which they lose), but that it was an interception.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AB Int. Now you have to account for something called "Ti
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 4:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23377
Stillerz Bar wrote:
The whole premise around requiring a receiver complete the catch while going to the ground never sat well with me. Even worse, the concept Mike Pereira used in his explanation that the receiver has to have it a certain amount of time is just crazy.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... klah7aLyLl

Brown had total control and took three steps before he went down and maintained control until he hit the ground and hitting the ground jarred the ball lose. If he never had control I could understand it but the reply showed that he did.

I also think there should be a 60-second “overturn clock” - once the reply review starts, so does the 60 seconds. If you don’t have definitive proof to overturn by the time it gets down to zero then they play stands.


We likely never go to Super Bowl XXX if a) that rule had been in effect and b) replay had been in effect in 1995.

Not only because Kordell Stewart stepped OOB on his fumble, but because Ernie Mills dropped the ball when he went to ground following his spectacular grab at the one.

_________________
“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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], SteelPowerful and 23 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