Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: These refs
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Pages: 1, 2
mcnabbulous
are fucking terrible. Anyone defending this shit is out of their fucking mind.
mcnabbulous
I'm pretty sure the ref that called a touchdown to end that game realized it was the last call he'll be making as an NFL referee.
make_it_rain
Ok, maybe its like a recency bias or something, but tonight's game was probably the worst officiated game I've ever seen for as long as I've watched the NFL. They literally stole a game from the Packers. This officiating has now been a significant factor in several games each week of the season. The season is not nearly long enough to have a game taken from you because of this shit. It's a complete joke. Sadly, it's also a very entertaining joke and people will still watch and go to games, and the NFL will continue to print money, but honestly after a disaster like tonight I think people will finally start to realize there are serious issues with the current product they're putting out.

If I'm the actual NFL refs I'm taking my offer off the table asap. Then I double it, paid up front and in cash.
Bez
From what they were saying about the Ravens last night , they have redone their playing scheme to accommodate the refs performance. Strange days.
make_it_rain
yeah, but you can't really gameplan around the referees declaring the other team the winner of the game, which is what happened to the Packers tonight
D Rock
You sumbitches dunno diddley.

It's all Vick's fault. He sux.

ac6.gif
Phits
It was a TD. The refs got it right. All the bitching and moaning is exaggerated. Players and coaches are looking for excuses. The refs are doing their jobs and are being the scapegoats for millionaire babies. Every year the officiating is questionable. the fact that these are 'replacement referees' just gives the loud mouths more reason to flap their gums.

More importantly, the review officials are the same as they always were. They are not striking. Keep in mind we wouldn't need instant replays and reviews if the "real officials" made the right call all of the time.
D Rock
I kinda agree. My question is this....

Is it like in baseball where a tie goes to the base runner? I believe it is and if so, they got the call right. They both caught it.

ETA: okay. Read the rule. It wasn't a simultaneous catch by the rule. Bad call.
Bez
QUOTE (make_it_rain @ Sep 24 2012, 11:46 PM) *
yeah, but you can't really gameplan around the referees declaring the other team the winner of the game, which is what happened to the Packers tonight
. I suppose on a basic level its probably best to enjoy each game that is reasonably handled by the refs and that are in fact good games. It will be kind of tough to legitimize the road to the SB and hype the contest up this season I reckon.
Pbfan
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 25 2012, 01:32 AM) *
It was a TD. The refs got it right. All the bitching and moaning is exaggerated. Players and coaches are looking for excuses. The refs are doing their jobs and are being the scapegoats for millionaire babies. Every year the officiating is questionable. the fact that these are 'replacement referees' just gives the loud mouths more reason to flap their gums.

More importantly, the review officials are the same as they always were. They are not striking. Keep in mind we wouldn't need instant replays and reviews if the "real officials" made the right call all of the time.


Not a chance the refs got it right. Only 1 player possessed it. Clawing it away of course doesn't count
make_it_rain
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 25 2012, 01:32 AM) *
It was a TD. The refs got it right. All the bitching and moaning is exaggerated. Players and coaches are looking for excuses. The refs are doing their jobs and are being the scapegoats for millionaire babies. Every year the officiating is questionable. the fact that these are 'replacement referees' just gives the loud mouths more reason to flap their gums.

More importantly, the review officials are the same as they always were. They are not striking. Keep in mind we wouldn't need instant replays and reviews if the "real officials" made the right call all of the time.


Uh, no. Just no.




I mean, a game was literally taken from the Packers and you're going to try to defend this shit? Are you seriously trying to say that the officiating isn't substantially more questionable this year, where we're seeing it affect multiple games each week?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (make_it_rain @ Sep 25 2012, 08:24 AM) *
I mean, a game was literally taken from the Packers and you're going to try to defend this shit? Are you seriously trying to say that the officiating isn't substantially more questionable this year, where we're seeing it affect multiple games each week?

Don't even bother. No rational person would try to defend that call, in the face of such obvious evidence.

The real refs were imperfect. The replacements are awful.
Phits
QUOTE (make_it_rain @ Sep 25 2012, 09:24 AM) *
Uh, no. Just no.




I mean, a game was literally taken from the Packers and you're going to try to defend this shit? Are you seriously trying to say that the officiating isn't substantially more questionable this year, where we're seeing it affect multiple games each week?


The review team are NFL employees and are NOT on strike. They are not replacements. If the call was so obvious, why did they get it wrong? You're falling for the propaganda being spewed by the media. Officiating always affects games. How many times have we witnessed blown calls against the Eagles, in the past? Late calls...No calls...challenged calls that appeared obvious?

Don't be a sheep and follow the flock. They are far from perfect, but any time you include the human element things will have the chance of being flawed.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 25 2012, 09:02 AM) *
The review team are NFL employees and are NOT on strike. They are not replacements. If the call was so obvious, why did they get it wrong?

Are you positive they could reverse that call? I've heard mixed reports, but from my perspective, I don't know how they could reverse the call.
GQSmooth
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 25 2012, 10:02 AM) *
The review team are NFL employees and are NOT on strike. They are not replacements. If the call was so obvious, why did they get it wrong? You're falling for the propaganda being spewed by the media. Officiating always affects games. How many times have we witnessed blown calls against the Eagles, in the past? Late calls...No calls...challenged calls that appeared obvious?

Don't be a sheep and follow the flock. They are far from perfect, but any time you include the human element things will have the chance of being flawed.

They couldn't rule the GB player intercepted the ball because of the call on the field was a TD, the booth could only rule TD or incompletion. That said the ruling on the field was flat wrong and unfortunately confirms the replacement refs they brought in are way over their heads.

But the worst part is this crew is scheduled to call the Giants vs Eagles game on Sunday night. Hope something gets settled before then.
make_it_rain
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 25 2012, 10:02 AM) *
The review team are NFL employees and are NOT on strike. They are not replacements. If the call was so obvious, why did they get it wrong?


So you're STILL going to try to say that they actually got the call right, despite all of the video/photos out there, and literally the entire planet saying Jennings came down with it? I'm just going to give you a pass and say you're trolling here, because no one this ignorant could be capable of operating a PC.

QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 25 2012, 10:02 AM) *
Officiating always affects games. How many times have we witnessed blown calls against the Eagles, in the past? Late calls...No calls...challenged calls that appeared obvious?


Again, as I said, I agree blown calls/bad calls are going to happen every week. But are you seriously going to try to say that the replacement officials have not made a dramatic impact on several games each week (substantially moreso than in previous years), culminating with them stealing a game from Green Bay?

  • When was the last time you saw a crew award a team an extra time-out (Seattle vs. Arz)?
  • When was the last time you saw a crew allow a coach to challenge a play with no timeouts, then after the challenge is successful, award the team a FOURTH timeout? (San Fran vs. Minn)
  • When was the last time you saw commentators and analysts literally exasperated at how much the shitty officiating has ruined the games (Did you see Steve Young's outburst last night? It was a thing of beauty)
  • When was the last time a coach was ALLOWED to challenge a play they were not allowed to challenge(which is usually a 15yd penalty, StL vs. Wash)
  • When was the last time officials FORGOT to stop the clock after an incomplete pass, letting 29 seconds run off the clock at the end of the half? (Cin vs. Cle)
  • When was the last time an official awarded an EXTRA 12 yards on a 15 yard penalty, turning it into a 27 yard penalty?(Det vs. Ten)

QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 25 2012, 10:02 AM) *
Don't be a sheep and follow the flock. They are far from perfect, but any time you include the human element things will have the chance of being flawed.


You're right, I'm the sheep, these kind of gaffes happen all the time, replacement refs or not. It's the human element.
Reality Fan
having read the rule it is hard to determine because Tate has both arms around the ball also.....it did look like an interception but the WR does have 2 arms around the ball as well so simultaneous possession is a possibility.......that being said, GB got sacked 8 times in the first half and were the benefactors of a terrible pass interference call on one of there scoring drives which helped them convert a 3rd down........it goes both ways and they are the reason they lost that game, not the refs.....
xsv
He doesn't have two arms around the ball. He's got two arms around the guy that has two arms around the ball.
Phits
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Sep 25 2012, 11:50 AM) *
having read the rule it is hard to determine because Tate has both arms around the ball also.....it did look like an interception but the WR does have 2 arms around the ball as well so simultaneous possession is a possibility.......that being said, GB got sacked 8 times in the first half and were the benefactors of a terrible pass interference call on one of there scoring drives which helped them convert a 3rd down........it goes both ways and they are the reason they lost that game, not the refs.....

Bingo.
JeeQ
If you've ever watched any game in the NBA then you know the golden rule "If you let the end of the game come down to the referee's decision prepare to live with the consequences". You're in another team's stadium, you're completely aware what the officiating is going to be like. If you let it come down to a final play and you lose that's your fault for getting into that situation.
Phits
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Sep 25 2012, 12:42 PM) *
If you've ever watched any game in the NBA then you know the golden rule "If you let the end of the game come down to the referee's decision prepare to live with the consequences". You're in another team's stadium, you're completely aware what the officiating is going to be like. If you let it come down to a final play and you lose that's your fault for getting into that situation.

That's what you get when a player goes for the stats instead of the play. Last second Hail Mary, you knock the god-damn ball down
D Rock
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 25 2012, 03:02 PM) *
The review team are NFL employees and are NOT on strike. They are not replacements. If the call was so obvious, why did they get it wrong? You're falling for the propaganda being spewed by the media. Officiating always affects games. How many times have we witnessed blown calls against the Eagles, in the past? Late calls...No calls...challenged calls that appeared obvious?

Don't be a sheep and follow the flock. They are far from perfect, but any time you include the human element things will have the chance of being flawed.

perhaps the "review official" felt the film didn't show "conclusive" evidence to overturn the ruling on the field. But the ruling on the field was wrong. It wouldn't be the first time an incorrect ruling on the field was upheld on review not because the evidence supported the call, but because it fell short of over ruling it.

In my mind, there is little doubt the defender had "more" and "earlier" control of the ball.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 25 2012, 11:54 AM) *
He doesn't have two arms around the ball. He's got two arms around the guy that has two arms around the ball.



why? you just love to be wrong I guess......watch it again...first, he is in front of Jennings who reaches over him to get the ball...see how that works? is he elastic man? and contrary to the idiot announcers, he had 2 hands on the ball......now you can argue that Jennings pulled the ball to his chest but there is no question that Tate has both hands on the ball and none around Jennings.....in the end he is facing Jennings while they struggle for the ball....at no time, no time are his arms around Jennings.....are you drinking this morning?
D Rock
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Sep 25 2012, 04:50 PM) *
having read the rule it is hard to determine because Tate has both arms around the ball also.....it did look like an interception but the WR does have 2 arms around the ball as well so simultaneous possession is a possibility.......that being said, GB got sacked 8 times in the first half and were the benefactors of a terrible pass interference call on one of there scoring drives which helped them convert a 3rd down........it goes both ways and they are the reason they lost that game, not the refs.....

I initially felt it was simultaneous possession, but Tate only gets the left hand on the ball initially, while the defender has it cradled by both arms to the chest. Tate's left is between defender's chest and the ball, but the right hand is late getting around the ball. By the letter of the rule, it's not simultaneous because of Tate's repositioning of the right hand.

Reality Fan
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 25 2012, 01:14 PM) *
In my mind, there is little doubt the defender had "more" and "earlier" control of the ball.


I agree but.....it is not the possession in the air that matters, it is the landing and control post landing as pointed out by the NFL on their site.......it is still debatable......very difficult call.....I think what hurt is that Jennings ultimately let Tate rip the ball away...that may have influenced the replay guy
Eyrie
I've only seen the footage posted earlier in this thread but it does look like #81 has at least one hand on the ball at the same time as the defender clearly has two. The big question is where #81's other hand is, and that angle doesn't show it.

Based on that though I can understand why Phits and RF agree with the officials that it was simultaneous possession.
D Rock
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Sep 25 2012, 06:18 PM) *
I agree but.....it is not the possession in the air that matters, it is the landing and control post landing as pointed out by the NFL on their site.......it is still debatable......very difficult call.....I think what hurt is that Jennings ultimately let Tate rip the ball away...that may have influenced the replay guy

Agreed. But the rule states that if one player gets control of the ball and a second gets subsequent control, it's not simultaneous. I don't think the gaffe is as glaring and severe as the media is making it, but the ruling on the field was wrong IMO.

In the end, a Packers loss is good for us. Seattle, with a rookie QB is going to lose more in the end and keeping potential Wild Card teams from other divisions' win totals down helps us. So I love the call. But it was wrong and we'd all be pissing bullets if it went against our birds.

Phits
QUOTE (GQSmooth @ Sep 25 2012, 10:48 AM) *
They couldn't rule the GB player intercepted the ball because of the call on the field was a TD, the booth could only rule TD or incompletion. That said the ruling on the field was flat wrong and unfortunately confirms the replacement refs they brought in are way over their heads.

The league clarified that in the end zone, possession of a simultaneous catch is reviewable, but anywhere else on the field it isn't. The replay officials could have overturned the call.

QUOTE
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3 of the NFL Rule Book defines a catch:

A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:

a: secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

b: touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (cool.gif have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).


The defender did not have complete control nor did he have both feet on the ground to have secured the catch. The offensive player made sure to wrap up tight so when the dust settled both players had possession

QUOTE
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 5 states:

Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.
xsv
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Sep 25 2012, 01:16 PM) *
why? you just love to be wrong I guess......watch it again...first, he is in front of Jennings who reaches over him to get the ball...see how that works? is he elastic man? and contrary to the idiot announcers, he had 2 hands on the ball......now you can argue that Jennings pulled the ball to his chest but there is no question that Tate has both hands on the ball and none around Jennings.....in the end he is facing Jennings while they struggle for the ball....at no time, no time are his arms around Jennings.....are you drinking this morning?



I think you need to check your contacts prescription. It really would explain why you always see things incorrectly.

First of all, at no point is Tate in front of Jennings. At best he is beside him. When they are in the air, Jennings is clearly in front of him, and when they land Jennings is clearly in front of him.

Second, Tate's right hand was no where near the football when Jennings hit the ground with both feet. This isn't a good image, but the image they showed last night, over and over, it was clear that Jennings had the ball in his hands, Tate was searching for it. IN this image, Jenning's left foot is still in the air, but his right foot is almost hitting the ground, and his left foot hit an instant later.

In this image, look where Tate's right hand is. It's in front of the other defender's facemask, not on the football. He doesn't get his hands on the ball until after Tate is laying on the ground, in front of Tate. Tate has to actually reach around him, after they are laying on the ground, in order to put his hands on the ball.

Also, all of this is ignoring the fact that Tate blatantly committed PI by pushing #37 in the back and knocking him to the ground before the ball arrived.


Click to view attachment
D Rock
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 25 2012, 06:29 PM) *
The league clarified that in the end zone, possession of a simultaneous catch is reviewable, but anywhere else on the field it isn't. The replay officials could have overturned the call.

The league also said there was no "indisputable" evidence to overturn the on field ruling. That's not the same as saying the onfield ruling is accurate.
HOUSEoPAIN
It seems we've all picked a side and won't budge. Only 14 more weeks to go!!!!!

On a side note - the fact that there was a catch at all is pretty shocking - one would think one of the 4 Packers around the play would've just swatted it away, ensuring victory.....
Phits
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 25 2012, 01:53 PM) *
In this image, look where Tate's right hand is. It's in front of the other defender's facemask, not on the football. He doesn't get his hands on the ball until after Tate is laying on the ground, in front of Tate. Tate has to actually reach around him, after they are laying on the ground, in order to put his hands on the ball.

Possession wasn't determined at that point. Jennings hadn't established control or landed with both feet.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 25 2012, 01:53 PM) *
I think you need to check your contacts prescription. It really would explain why you always see things incorrectly.

First of all, at no point is Tate in front of Jennings. At best he is beside him. When they are in the air, Jennings is clearly in front of him, and when they land Jennings is clearly in front of him.

Second, Tate's right hand was no where near the football when Jennings hit the ground with both feet. This isn't a good image, but the image they showed last night, over and over, it was clear that Jennings had the ball in his hands, Tate was searching for it. IN this image, Jenning's left foot is still in the air, but his right foot is almost hitting the ground, and his left foot hit an instant later.

In this image, look where Tate's right hand is. It's in front of the other defender's facemask, not on the football.

Also, all of this is ignoring the fact that Tate blatantly committed PI by pushing a guy to the ground before the ball arrived.


Click to view attachment


ok....now you scare me.....I suggest you go and watch the entire play before saying something so silly.....Jennings is behind him and Tate shoves Shields who is in front of him...the snapshot you included is as they go to the ground......Tate was clearly in front of him and twisted as they wrestled to the ground.....here you go....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_69zsC08cxg...pay attention around 15 second mark....

I am not saying the call was a good one....but it was not black and white

you must like to make me feel good
mcnabbulous
Lets not forget about the egregious offensive pass interference non-call that also transpired on that play.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 25 2012, 02:08 PM) *
Lets not forget about the egregious offensive pass interference non-call that also transpired on that play.

....or the roughing the passer call, on the same play, that hasn't been talked about.

Not that the regular officials ever make those kind of mistakes....
xsv
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Sep 25 2012, 02:03 PM) *
ok....now you scare me.....I suggest you go and watch the entire play before saying something so silly.....Jennings is behind him and Tate shoves Shields who is in front of him...the snapshot you included is as they go to the ground......Tate was clearly in front of him and twisted as they wrestled to the ground.....here you go....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_69zsC08cxg...pay attention around 15 second mark....

I am not saying the call was a good one....but it was not black and white

you must like to make me feel good


I think you might be erroneously (in this case) confusing which player is closer to the LOS form which player is faced in which direction. Clearly Jennings is in front of Tate, as evidenced by the fact that he landed with his back on Tate's fucking chest.

Jennings was using his body to shield Tate from the ball. It doesn't matter who was closer to the LOS.

The only thing you really can't see clearly is if the ball hit the ground or not when Jennings brings it in. [Edit: After watching this frame by frame, I don't think this is possible. Clearly INT for Jennings.]

QUOTE
you must like to make me feel good

You must like to be wrong.
xsv
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 24 2012, 11:47 PM) *
are fucking terrible. Anyone defending this shit is out of their fucking mind.


This image is hilarious. Two refs side by side. One signals TD, one signals INT.

Click to view attachment
xsv
By the way, how stupid is Jennings for not just batting the ball away instead of trying to catch it?
Reality Fan
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 25 2012, 02:29 PM) *
I think you might be erroneously (in this case) confusing which player is closer to the LOS form which player is faced in which direction. Clearly Jennings is in front of Tate, as evidenced by the fact that he landed with his back on Tate's fucking chest.

Jennings was using his body to shield Tate from the ball. It doesn't matter who was closer to the LOS.

The only thing you really can't see clearly is if the ball hit the ground or not when Jennings brings it in.


You must like to be wrong.



if you watched the clip I attached and still think that then you are blind.......Shields was in front of Tate and that is what others posting here are saying was offensive pass interference.....Tate goes straight up and Jennings gets the ball above and behind him and Tate twists to fight for possession as they both go to the ground....

here is the play again...watch the last few seconds in particular.....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXDs1YQO04k

your stubbornness is amazing....
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 25 2012, 02:40 PM) *
By the way, how stupid is Jennings for not just batting the ball away instead of trying to catch it?


Finally someone notices this other than me! jumpclap.gif Not to mention the other 3 Packers nearby!
xsv
QUOTE
....Shields was in front of Tate and that is what others posting here are saying was offensive pass interference....

I specifically mentioned this in my post, but I'm not surprised you missed it. You seem to miss quite a lot of things.

After Jennings knocks Shield to the ground, Jennings and Tate both go up for the ball, Jennings catches the ball before, above and slightly in front of Tate. Jennings then twists to try to shield Tate from the ball. They land with Jennings on Tate's chest and head. I don't see how you can say that Tate was in front from any point after Jennings caught the ball, and certainly not after they were coming back down, and especially not after they hit the ground when Jennings was on his chest with the ball and Tate had to reach around him to locate it.

Tate then reaches his right arm around Jennings right shoulder, and gets his right hand on the ball and the wrestle ensues.

There might be some question to where Tate's left hand is as they were going to the ground. It could have been on the ball the whole time, which is the only possible thing that could make this a close call, but there doesn't seem to be any visual evidence of it.

What is perfect clear was that Jennings caught the ball and Tate had to reach around Jennings as they were hitting the ground or shortly after, to locate the ball with his right hand.
xsv
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 25 2012, 02:19 PM) *
....or the roughing the passer call, on the same play, that hasn't been talked about.

Not that the regular officials ever make those kind of mistakes....


Just out of curiosity, I don't see evidence of that. Did you see something specific?

He did get hit hard, but as far as I can tell, not in the head, and not late.
D Rock
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Sep 25 2012, 07:01 PM) *
It seems we've all picked a side and won't budge.

Welcome to Wingheads.com

xsv
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 25 2012, 03:08 PM) *
Welcome to Wingheads.com


What'd you expect? It's an election year.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Sep 25 2012, 01:48 PM) *
Finally someone notices this other than me! jumpclap.gif Not to mention the other 3 Packers nearby!

Did you see the end of the Lions/Titans regulation?

I'm not saying it was the right move, just that it's not guaranteed to succeed.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 25 2012, 03:24 PM) *
Did you see the end of the Lions/Titans regulation?

I'm not saying it was the right move, just that it's not guaranteed to succeed.


Nothing is guaranteed to succeed. However, I'm referring to 'batting' the ball, as in knocking it directly to the ground with force - as opposed to lightly poofing it towards an opposing receiver as the Titans did. Oh well.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 25 2012, 02:58 PM) *
I specifically mentioned this in my post, but I'm not surprised you missed it. You seem to miss quite a lot of things.

After Jennings knocks Shield to the ground, Jennings and Tate both go up for the ball, Jennings catches the ball before, above and slightly in front of Tate. Jennings then twists to try to shield Tate from the ball. They land with Jennings on Tate's chest and head. I don't see how you can say that Tate was in front from any point after Jennings caught the ball, and certainly not after they were coming back down, and especially not after they hit the ground when Jennings was on his chest with the ball and Tate had to reach around him to locate it.

Tate then reaches his right arm around Jennings right shoulder, and gets his right hand on the ball and the wrestle ensues.

There might be some question to where Tate's left hand is as they were going to the ground. It could have been on the ball the whole time, which is the only possible thing that could make this a close call, but there doesn't seem to be any visual evidence of it.

What is perfect clear was that Jennings caught the ball and Tate had to reach around Jennings as they were hitting the ground or shortly after, to locate the ball with his right hand.


you are seriously high....Jennings reaches over the shoulder of Tate(because he was much higher).but you see him in front of Tate...amazing.......and I didn't miss anything in your posts regarding Shields, I merely was describing the play and watching the game live they showed multiple angles of the play.......and yet you put not one but 2 Packers in front of Tate which is clearly wrong....

I have shown you 2 replays...I give up......
iggleslover49
The refs don't see anything going on in the secondary. Secondary guys are getting away with just about everything and alot of uncalled pass interference and defensive holding calls are killing the passing game.(not to mention creating alot of tension between players) The key to winning this season is to run the ball and take advantage of teams that try to pass.
Pbfan
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 25 2012, 01:54 PM) *
The league also said there was no "indisputable" evidence to overturn the on field ruling. That's not the same as saying the onfield ruling is accurate.


I think that it is clear gb possessed the ball. He could have made a football move with the control he had over it. Tate could not. The control clearly belonged to GB. The call was that obvious and the replacement refs screwed it up big time
Dreagon
I think the problem is starting to snowball. The players have realized these refs miss a lot of stuff, and are now pushing the envelope as hard as they can in certain situations. This just results in the refs losing more control of the game as the season goes on. Strident pronouncements from the league office aren't going to change this, and may end up even making things worse.

I'm starting to worry there is nobody over on the owners side who dares to tell Goodall and the other owners, "Hey, this has gotten out of hand and we need to end this thing."
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.