Holding the NFL Officials accountable

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from mnp3a. Show mnp3a's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    Brady said he made the decision to go to Faulk before the snap: wouldn't have time to survey the field.

    underdogg:
    lots and lots of calls are not made on every game: officials can't see everything and everybody is ok with that. BUT the Colts are a different thing altogheter: they seem to get a HUGE amount of game-altering calls in big games.

    I've watched the Pats lose lots of games, many times i don't like the calls but they always seem to be part of the flow of the game. Not against the colts, sorry: they always get those phantom PI calls on deep balls that change the game. I can't say that about any other team that the pats play, doesn't matter how much i might hate that team.

    Yeah, Pats lost because of their own mistakes. That doesn't mean that every game against indy  the officiating seems to be oddly skewed.

    Also, i'm pretty sure the colts practice the phantom PI the same way that soccer players practice flopping. I hate flopping in the NBA, i hate it twice as much in the NFL.
    Indy fans like to talk about how much more Manning forces his receivers to practice their routes. That's because they must also master the art of flopping while running them to get those free yds on uncatchable throws. =)

    Anyway: The Colts still played a great comeback, and the Patriots couldn't close the game. No way around it.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]Brady said he made the decision to go to Faulk before the snap: wouldn't have time to survey the field. underdogg : lots and lots of calls are not made on every game: officials can't see everything and everybody is ok with that. BUT the Colts are a different thing altogheter: they seem to get a HUGE amount of game-altering calls in big games. I've watched the Pats lose lots of games, many times i don't like the calls but they always seem to be part of the flow of the game. Not against the colts, sorry: they always get those phantom PI calls on deep balls that change the game. I can't say that about any other team that the pats play, doesn't matter how much i might hate that team. Yeah, Pats lost because of their own mistakes. That doesn't mean that every game against indy  the officiating seems to be oddly skewed. Also, i'm pretty sure the colts practice the phantom PI the same way that soccer players practice flopping. I hate flopping in the NBA, i hate it twice as much in the NFL. Indy fans like to talk about how much more Manning forces his receivers to practice their routes. That's because they must also master the art of flopping while running them to get those free yds on uncatchable throws. =) Anyway: The Colts still played a great comeback, and the Patriots choked. No way around it.
    Posted by mnp3a[/QUOTE]

    Here si the thing about choking. They didn't. They made the line of gain on 4th and 2. That isn't a choke. You can talk about earlier missed opportunities, but the same could be said about the Colts. There are generally missed opportunities in every game. But, when the chips were down and it was one shot for glory, they made the play. They just got jobbed by a Head Linesman who doesn't even work with the referee crew that was calling the game.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from mnp3a. Show mnp3a's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable : Here si the thing about choking. They didn't. They made the line of gain on 4th and 2. That isn't a choke. You can talk about earlier missed opportunities (...)
    Posted by EnochRoot[/QUOTE]

    yeah, you're right, i'm still angry for that game. i actually edited my post but you got the first version.

    one thing i like about this is:
    if I am still mad... ...  BB and the team... how do you think they will take this loss?.

    in my view, the season started sunday.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable : yeah, you're right, i'm still angry for that game. i actually edited my post but you got the first version. one thing i like about this is: if I am still mad... ...  BB and the team... how do you think they will take this loss?. in my view, the season started sunday.
    Posted by mnp3a[/QUOTE]

    I hope. I have been a Boston fan long enough to know that certainties aren't.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from mnp3a. Show mnp3a's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable : I hope. I have been a Boston fan long enough to know that certainties aren't.
    Posted by EnochRoot[/QUOTE]

    hey! that's the beauty of it!
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from NickC1188. Show NickC1188's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    I liked this post so much, that I'm recycling it from the "flopping" board:
    (do note that I'm not saying it cost them the game; I'm simply saying that the call was UNDENIABLY wrong, and the NFL's own rulebook website backs up my claim)

    Collie got BOTH HANDS ON THE BALL.  AND DROPPED IT.

    The contact was to go for the football.  Butler was PLAYING THE FOOTBALL.  Butler WENT FOR THE FOOTBALL.

    My concept of the SPIRIT of the interference rule is that the defender can't play the receiver simply to prevent the receiver from getting to the ball.  In this case, the receiver got to the ball and got both hands on it.  Furthermore, Butler didn't push Collie prior to the ball hitting Collie in the hands.  Butler didn't grab Collie, or hold his arms down.  He simply moved towards the ball because HE WAS PLAYING THE BALL.

    Just in case, I'll suggest the following reading:

    Aside from my comments on how Butler didn't wrap his arm around Collie, push him, or bar his arms, here are the key passages:

    Note 1: If there is any question whether player contact is incidental, the ruling should be no interference. 

    Note 2: Defensive players have as much right to the path of the ball as eligible offensive players.  

    I rest my case.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]I liked this post so much, that I'm recycling it from the "flopping" board: (do note that I'm not saying it cost them the game; I'm simply saying that the call was UNDENIABLY wrong, and the NFL's own rulebook website backs up my claim) Collie got BOTH HANDS ON THE BALL.  AND DROPPED IT. The contact was to go for the football.  Butler was PLAYING THE FOOTBALL.  Butler WENT FOR THE FOOTBALL. My concept of the SPIRIT of the interference rule is that the defender can't play the receiver simply to prevent the receiver from getting to the ball.  In this case, the receiver got to the ball and got both hands on it.  Furthermore, Butler didn't push Collie prior to the ball hitting Collie in the hands.  Butler didn't grab Collie, or hold his arms down.  He simply moved towards the ball because HE WAS PLAYING THE BALL. Just in case, I'll suggest the following reading: http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/passinterference Aside from my comments on how Butler didn't wrap his arm around Collie, push him, or bar his arms, here are the key passages: Note 1:  If there is any question whether player contact is incidental, the ruling should be no interference.  Note 2:  Defensive players have as much right to the path of the ball as eligible offensive players.    I rest my case.
    Posted by NickC1188[/QUOTE]

    Nick,

    I posted the rules about three or four times already. I have a copy of the 2006 Rulebook. It is far better than the NFL.com site. I can send you a copy if you want.

    Of course, for any added rules or clarifications, you need to look those up. They are  pretty easy as they are done yearly. I haven't been able to find a copy of a more recent book and the NFL doesn't publish them for public consumption as far as I am aware.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable : Encinitas - whoops to the 1 TD in the first half.  Thanks for the correction.  As for the other thing.  I am sick of talking about calls.  Everyone is focusing on the calls that screwed the pats but no one wants to accept that the pats got away with calls, too.  Until that happens, there really can be no rational discussion.  The masses here seek objectivity from colts fans while demonstrating none of their own.  Irony? Addressing your specific points: 1.  Lined up in the neutral zone?  Come on.  Again the location of the camera appears to be 8 to 10 yards (maybe more) behind the spot of the ball and not at the line of scrimmage.  This creates a skewed perspective very different from that of the field judge who, at the actual line of scrimmage, has the ability to both see whether or not players are lined up in the neutral zone and exactly where he believes faulk was when he actually possessed the ball.  I don't care whether you have frame by frame dvr or pats colored glasses, you don't have the same angle as the ref.  2.  Feel free to call Faulk ball adjustment whatever you want.  Don't call it a bobble.  That's fine.  Just don't call it possession until he actually possesses it.  Take off your pats colored glasses and use your HD DVR and watch as the ball hits Faulks hands and then bounces/separates/leaves (choose your word) from Faulks hands until it is actually secured the second time it touch his hands.  3.  your snarky conclusion that Belichick could be the intended focus instead of the correct call demonstrates a clear lack of objectivity on your part.  BTW, the nfl network ref is actually the head of all refs in the NFL and apparently called out a number of poor decisions by refs in other games.  Whatever makes you feel better is no skin off of my back.  Continue to believe what you need to in order to wake up tomorrow for another day.  On my end, I saw 2 calls that went the colts way and could have gone the other way.  Neither is conclusive and neither would be overturned.  If you are upset that the colts got the close calls, I am fine with that.  But don't assume that the colts get all the calls/non-calls.  I've got plenty in my head that merit question from the NFL and can easily be construed as slanting toward the pats. 
    Posted by underdoggg[/QUOTE]

    Yes, regarding Ron Pereira, the Head of Referees. NFL.com posted the "Official Review" segment for week 10 yesterday. There are some things that are very interesting about it.

    1. Ron's wording. When asked by Eisen what his take on the play was, Pereira does not say it was the correct call. In fact he never says that. He uses deflective statements so that he never does have to directly answer that. He states a few times that the thing he liked about the play was that Tom Stabile made a "quick, decisive decision" when he signaled the bobble. Otherwise, that is really the most he says specifically about the call itself. Deflection and avoidance are signs that he is not saying everything. By his choice of words and actions, he is hiding something.

    2. Pereira defines forward progress as being when the receiver has control and is in contact with the defender. He does not mention anything about having to have the feet down. There have been several discussions about what a catch is and where he should get forward progress after a catch, but Pereira states that forward progress is given when the receiver has control and is in contact with the defender. So this would render any arguments about when he had his feet down moot.

    3. He does indicate it was a tough call and that it was hard to tell from replay just where control occurred. He then says from another angle he still can't tell, but he shows the very same angle. He never shows the angle from the Pats endzone that shows clear control. Why? I am not sure. It isn't like he had three days to set up the video clips, is it? I am sure they wouldn't triple check this segment to make sure they had everything right as it was one of the most controversial calls this season. I am left to wonder why they don't show the endzone angle.

    4. He also does say that he does not think the play would have been overturned on a challenge. However, he also doesn't show the clip where Faulk is clearly in control. This makes me think that overturning it was more of a possibility than has been discussed on this board.

    5. Also with regards to the spot being overturned, he does mention, as I have mentioned to you a few times, that had the spot been in the Pats favor (the correct spot), a Colts challenge would not have overturned the correct spot, either.


     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    Root,

    The point you are trying to make here is that the call could have gone either way.  I agree with this, and have said as much.  No Pats fan wants to agree with this other than Brookline Rob, because it admits that the spot could be correct and giving up that point ends the arguement. 

    The endzone replay cannot determine the spot of the ball.  Would you want the referee spotting the ball from 20 yards behind the play?  All the endzone replay does, as you note, is confirm that he caught the ball.  It can't be used to spot the ball.

    Frankly, admitting that the call would not have been overturned, either way, protects Belichick a little bit.  If Pereira definitively says that the ball was spotted incorrectly then it would have been incumbent upon Belichick to challenge which he couldn't because the team wasted all of their timeouts. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]Root, The point you are trying to make here is that the call could have gone either way.  I agree with this, and have said as much.  No Pats fan wants to agree with this other than Brookline Rob, because it admits that the spot could be correct and giving up that point ends the arguement.  The endzone replay cannot determine the spot of the ball.  Would you want the referee spotting the ball from 20 yards behind the play?  All the endzone replay does, as you note, is confirm that he caught the ball.  It can't be used to spot the ball. Frankly, admitting that the call would not have been overturned, either way, protects Belichick a little bit.  If Pereira definitively says that the ball was spotted incorrectly then it would have been incumbent upon Belichick to challenge which he couldn't because the team wasted all of their timeouts. 
    Posted by underdoggg[/QUOTE]

    No. That is not the point I am trying to make. The spot was dead wrong. And Pereira knows that.

    Are you actually trying to say that Pereira is covering Belichick's azz? Please.

    The Colts got a gift from the bad spot. Stop pretending they earned the W.



     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    None of the calls to which you refer scored a Colts Touchdown.  Not one.  Pats had essentially a 20 pt lead in the 4th, since the colts had to score 3 tds in the quarter to win. 

    If I apply the hold on the Welker return, then we take the ball back 40 yards.  The pats proved by not scoring on the Manning Int in the 4th that they could not go 40 yds for a TD.  I could suggest that if that holding call had been made, it would have removed a TD from the Pats side of the ledger. 

    I can counter everything you put out there.  And I find it quite convenient that your reading into the words of Pereira results in the answer that you want. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]None of the calls to which you refer scored a Colts Touchdown.  Not one.  Pats had essentially a 20 pt lead in the 4th, since the colts had to score 3 tds in the quarter to win.  If I apply the hold on the Welker return, then we take the ball back 40 yards.  The pats proved by not scoring on the Manning Int in the 4th that they could not go 40 yds for a TD.  I could suggest that if that holding call had been made, it would have removed a TD from the Pats side of the ledger.  I can counter everything you put out there.  And I find it quite convenient that your reading into the words of Pereira results in the answer that you want. 
    Posted by underdoggg[/QUOTE]

    Basically, what you are saying is that there are missed opportunities by the Pats earlier in the game. I agree. There were also missed opportunities by the Colts. But none of them are relevant here. We are talking about a play that the Pats made. Not a missed opportunity.

    If the ball is spotted correctly, the Pats win.

    They made the play. They gained the yardage. They didn't miss the opportunity. It was taken from them by a bad spot. The media knows this and are saying it. The NFL knows it and aren't admitting it. Even you know it.

    Again, if the ball is spotted correctly, the Pats win.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    Root,

    The NFL never said Faulk made the play.  The NFL never said the ball was spotted incorrectly. 

    Some of the media are saying it, and I could say they are biased against the colts.  This is a common refrain used on this board to rationalize pats transgressions and shortcomings.  But I don't buy any of it.  Taking the controversial view in the media is the easy way to keep stories alive.  Any pats fan should know this.   

    Here's the fall back position.  If Pereira is lying to protect his Ref on this play, then this play would have obviously been overturned by replay.  Its EXACTLY what replay is for.  The NFL admits that due to the speed of the game and other circumstances that its refs get plays wrong.  And for this very reason, they give the teams a minimum of 2 challenge opportunities related to the team's availability of timeouts.  The Pats blew their last challenge opportunity due to poor timeout management.  You can't blame that on the refs, the media, George Bush, or Miss Piggy. 

    The pats have NO position to complain.  Given the speed of the game, the bobble of the ball, the closing speed and hit of the defender, and the very small margin of error allowed due to the very short route, it is more than understandable how the ref made the call he made.  The pats lost their opportunity to complain when they wasted their last timeout.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]Root, The NFL never said Faulk made the play.  The NFL never said the ball was spotted incorrectly.  [/QUOTE]

    Exactly what I said. They aren't saying it. When asked about it directly, Pereira did not answer directly. He said he liked the "quick decisive decision" and he never said that decision was right. If you watch his other reviews, he has always said the ref made the right call when he felt the ref made the right call. Not this time.

    [QUOTE]Some of the media are saying it, and I could say they are biased against the colts.  This is a common refrain used on this board to rationalize pats transgressions and shortcomings.  But I don't buy any of it.  Taking the controversial view in the media is the easy way to keep stories alive.  Any pats fan should know this.    [/QUOTE]

    Really? Bias AGAINST the Colts. That one just made my day. Has that ever even happened in the Dungy/Manning era?

    [QUOTE]Here's the fall back position.  If Pereira is lying to protect his Ref on this play, then this play would have obviously been overturned by replay.  [/QUOTE]

    That isn't true. If he is lying to protect his ref, it could just as easily mean the play could not be overturned. Also, I never said he was protecting his ref.

    [QUOTE]Its EXACTLY what replay is for.  The NFL admits that due to the speed of the game and other circumstances that its refs get plays wrong.  And for this very reason, they give the teams a minimum of 2 challenge opportunities related to the team's availability of timeouts.  The Pats blew their last challenge opportunity due to poor timeout management.  You can't blame that on the refs, the media, George Bush, or Miss Piggy.  [/QUOTE]

    True, but irrelevant as it is used to back up a logical fallacy. Not to mention, I never said anything about it. The fact is the ref gave the game to the Colts.

    [QUOTE]The pats have NO position to complain. [/QUOTE] 

    Are the Pats complaining?

    [QUOTE]Given the speed of the game, the bobble of the ball, the closing speed and hit of the defender, and the very small margin of error allowed due to the very short route, it is more than understandable how the ref made the call he made.  The pats lost their opportunity to complain when they wasted their last timeout. Posted by underdoggg[/QUOTE]

    Exactly. The spot was wrong. That wasn't so hard was it?



     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    Well, I guess my original post created some good discussion. 

    Thanks for all the great posts guys. I know we can't turn the clock back, but I think we won this game and got the 4th down conversion bottomline. The NFL messed up and the Pats got the short end of the stick. 

    My issue is this...The refs were so quick to make the call, and if the call could have went either way, why go in favor of the Colts? The Colts could have as easily challenged the 4th down play as the Pats (if we had a timeout). The Refs did not provide any flexibility in terms of looking at the play again. If it was really that close, then why make a call that cannot be looked at again. Why not make the call that can be challenged and looked at again. 

    I'll get off my soapbox....Looking ahead, I hope we face the Colts again in the playoffs. I want another crack at these guys and I think we will see a motivated Pats defense that has something to prove. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    Root - give up the debate team tactics.  Its making you look petty.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]My issue is this...The refs were so quick to make the call, and if the call could have went either way, why go in favor of the Colts? The Colts could have as easily challenged the 4th down play as the Pats (if we had a timeout). The Refs did not provide any flexibility in terms of looking at the play again. If it was really that close, then why make a call that cannot be looked at again. Why not make the call that can be challenged and looked at again.  I'll get off my soapbox....Posted by PatsLifer[/QUOTE]

    Lifer - the only problem with your post here is that you seem to suggest a predetermined outcome before the play.  The ref made a definitive call.  If any other ref had seen it differently, then it would be expected that a refs discussion of the spot would have ensued and a community decision made.  Not one challenged the spot of the call. 

    Additionally, then you suggest that maybe the colts should have had to challenge since maybe they had the timeouts available to do so as opposed to the pats who did not. 

    I know that I will not change a pats fans opinion here, but I will defend the decision on the field because it is understandable.  The pats gave away their opportunities and their lead (including 2 2nd half manning ints) and that's the real reason they lost.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]Root - give up the debate team tactics.  Its making you look petty.
    Posted by underdoggg[/QUOTE]

    Interesting. You know you are wrong and yet you say it makes me look petty by indicating that your argument is fallacious. You are grasping at straws. And it isn't working. Don't blame me for seeing through your bad arguments. Simply make better, well actually correct, ones.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable : Lifer - the only problem with your post here is that you seem to suggest a predetermined outcome before the play.  The ref made a definitive call.  If any other ref had seen it differently, then it would be expected that a refs discussion of the spot would have ensued and a community decision made.  Not one challenged the spot of the call.  [/QUOTE]

    But yesterday you said they did discuss the spot of the ball. Interesting how you are slowly rolling down the slope to the truth.

    [QUOTE]Additionally, then you suggest that maybe the colts should have had to challenge since maybe they had the timeouts available to do so as opposed to the pats who did not.  I know that I will not change a pats fans opinion here, but I will defend the decision on the field because it is understandable.  [/QUOTE]

    Once again, soft language. The call was "understandable"? means you can rationalize that the call was made correctly means you know it was wrong. Good job.

    [QUOTE]The pats gave away their opportunities and their lead (including 2 2nd half manning ints) and that's the real reason they lost. Posted by underdoggg[/QUOTE]

    Wrong again. They didn't make every opportunity. It is fair to say that this is the truth about any t team in most games. They made the one they needed to when it counted. They were robbed. 

    Pretend all you want on the outside. I know that you know the Colts were given a gift by the refs. 



     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from rocher. Show rocher's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    Remember when the Pats beat the Ravens and the Ravens fans complained about the officiating.
    Pats fans told the Ravens fans to quit making excuses and deal with your loss like men (no whining).
    Now the Pats fans are blaming ther officials when they are hurt by calls.
     Pats fans are just like any other fans..when calls go against you ..whine about them and blame them for the loss.. and when they go in your favor..tell the other team to grow  up and deal with it.
    Human nature. Just don't get on other fans when they complain about calls.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    No - I do not know that I am wrong.  We are arguing differing opinions.   

    Yours is unwilling to accept any other determination (spot of the ball) other than what you believe to be true although the the actual result was determined to be something different. Which is curious in the least.  But I suppose that it does make for an easy arguement on your behalf.  If you play only from a black and white perspective then you have only one path you may take in your arguement. BTW, did you know the some people believe the world is round?  Weird, huh?

    But just because you play black and white doesn't mean that I have to.  At the very least, I am willing to accept that the spot of the ball is argueable which allows for additional things to be considered. 

    Work your debate magic all you like.  Its not going to change the spot of the ball which even if argueable is not black and white.  And if argueable then at least the pats could challenge if they hadn't wasted their timeouts, which is no ones fault but their own. 

    To take this discussion in a new direction, what this all really means is that Manning has gotten into the head of Belichick.  As the genius turns.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]No - I do not know that I am wrong.  We are arguing differing opinions.    Yours is unwilling to accept any other determination (spot of the ball) other than what you believe to be true although the the actual result was determined to be something different. Which is curious in the least?  But I suppose that it does make for an easy arguement on your behalf.  If you play only from a black and white perspective then you have only one path you may take in your arguement. BTW, did you know the some people believe the world is round?  Weird, huh? But just because you play black and white doesn't mean that I have to.  At the very least, I am willing to accept that the spot of the ball is argueable which allows for additional things to be considered.  Work your debate magic all you like.  Its not going to change the spot of the ball which even if argueable is not black and white.  And if argueable then at least the pats could challenge if they hadn't wasted their timeouts, which is no ones fault but their own.  To take this discussion in a new direction, what this all really means is that Manning has gotten into the head of Belichick.  As the genius turns.
    Posted by underdoggg[/QUOTE]

    Not even you believe the spot of the ball was correct. The rest is just flailing so that you don't have to admit it outright. You really have nothing and we both know it. 

    The incorrect spot took the game from the Pats. Otherwise, they would have won. No ifs, ands or buts.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    But yesterday you said they did discuss the spot of the ball. Interesting how you are slowly rolling down the slope to the truth.
    AND I ADMITTED MY MISTAKE IMMEDIATELY, DIDN'T I?  NICE ATTEMPT TO DISTRACT. 

    Once again, soft language. The call was "understandable"? means you can rationalize that the call was made correctly means you know it was wrong.
    HUH??  NOT REAL SURE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING HERE, BUT YOU ARE TAKING LIBERTIES WITH DEDUCTIVE REASONING THAT WOULDN'T HOLD UP IN KINDERGARTEN.  SHAME ON YOU DEBATOR. 

    Good job. Wrong again. They didn't make every opportunity. It is fair to say that this is the truth about any t team in most games. They made the one they needed to when it counted.
    THEY MAY HAVE MADE THE PLAYS THEY NEEDED TO MAKE BUT THEY DID NOT MAKE ENOUGH OF THEM TO WIN THE GAME.  I HAVE THE SCORE TO PROVE IT.  WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO ATTACH A LINK TO THE SCORE?

    They were robbed. 
    OPINION, AND BAD OPINION, IN MY OPINION.

    Pretend all you want on the outside. I know that you know the Colts were given a gift by the refs. 
    THERE YOU GO MAKING ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT ME FOR WHICH YOU HAVE NO BASIS.  

    ROOT, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO BETTER THAN THAT.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdoggg. Show underdoggg's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable : Not even you believe the spot of the ball was correct. The rest is just flailing so that you don't have to admit it outright. You really have nothing and we both know it.  The incorrect spot took the game from the Pats. Otherwise, they would have won. No ifs, ands or buts.
    Posted by EnochRoot[/QUOTE]

    I THINK THE SPOT WAS JUST FINE AND UNDERSTANDABLE.  YOUR ONLY OPPORTUNITY IN THIS DEBATE IS TO TRY AND TURN MY OPINION TO WHAT YOU WANT IT TO BE BY MAKING ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT WHAT I BELIEVE. 

    OH, AND YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN.  IT WASN'T THE SPOT OF THE BALL THAT TOOK THE GAME FROM THE PATS.  IT WAS FEWER POINTS FOR THE PATS ON THE SCOREBOARD AT THE END OF THE GAME THAT DID. 

    YOU FAILED.  GO CHASE YOUR TAIL.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable

    In Response to Re: Holding the NFL Officials accountable:
    [QUOTE]Remember when the Pats beat the Ravens and the Ravens fans complained about the officiating. Pats fans told the Ravens fans to quit making excuses and deal with your loss like men (no whining). Now the Pats fans are blaming ther officials when they are hurt by calls.  Pats fans are just like any other fans..when calls go against you ..whine about them and blame them for the loss.. and when they go in your favor..tell the other team to grow  up and deal with it. Human nature. Just don't get on other fans when they complain about calls.
    Posted by rocher[/QUOTE]

    Actually, that was the Ravens themselves that complained. 

     

Share