• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Nfl 2017 [W:1941,2227]

RetiredUSN said:
It's too bad Mike Tomlin has more class than you do.

"Spilt milk"
Click to expand...
What part of my post showed a lack of class? You seem to be venting in the direction of the wrong person. Perhaps you should "check yourself before you wreck yourself".
 
justabubba said:
and this is how the NFL could have ruled the play a touchdown

from that above ESPN cite:

they could/should have ruled that the receiver had completed the catch prior to his subsequent football move to advance the ball after the catch. then the breaking the plane provision for ball carriers would have been the criterion to use to rule the play a TD
Click to expand...

Bingo.
 
calamity said:
Yes, after it crossed the plane. What I don't remember is if it was loose before it crossed the plane. But, apparently it matters not, because "surviving the ground" is what the play lacked.
Click to expand...

In my view that had already happened.
 
Jack Hays said:
Sorry but no. He was already on the ground before he stretched out to break the plane.
Click to expand...

What I saw was a good catch gone bad. He clearly had the ball before hitting the ground, held it after hitting the ground and then lost control of it while reaching for the end one. That last part is probably the only reason I was holding out hope that it would not be reversed. He probably had the ball for a full second and only lost control because of his "football move." The refs disagreed.
 
Jerry Richardson will put Carolina Panthers up for sale

richardson letter selling panthers.jpg

have been hearing that peyton and eli and their dad, archie were looking to buy a team. timing is probably not right for them, with eli still playing

area mogul, bruton smith (NASCAR multi track owner, sonic autos, etc) is supposedly wanting to buy a team. this one would be local to him
 
Jack Hays said:
I would argue the catch was already completed when he was on the ground with complete control, before he stretched out and broke the plane.
Click to expand...
5 years ago we probably all would have agreed.
 
The Man said:
If that were the Patriots the TD would have stood.
Click to expand...
Riiiiiiiiiiiight. because the NFL and Roger Goodell LOOOOOOOOOVES the Patriots.

clowndetail.jpg
 
I like that sports occassionally requires a close examination of the rules like legislators and aides combing through a bill.

The next week will be filled with tax bill analysis and the Steelers/Pats game. The tone of both will be exactly the same.
Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
NFL Comms Office on Twitter:

Dude completes the pass, but the dude didn't complete the pass.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Where all the comments complaining about the fact they folded some paper to determine a 1st down. If that happened during a pats game some of you would crash the site.
 
VanceMack said:
View attachment 67226233
Click to expand...

Thank you for posting the above. As I have been saying, an accurate interpretation of the rules could and should have confirmed the ruling on the field of a catch and a touchdown. As per 3 (c) above, James had secured the ball long enough with his feet on the ground - his knees at a minimum - on the one yard line - and as per Item 1 above, James "maintained control of the ball until his INITIAL contact with the ground". The rules provide completely for the call on the field to be confirmed. The rules also provide that the ruling on the field has to stand unless there is irrefutable proof that the ruling on the field was wrong. The replay booth in NYC substituted their own interpretation of the rules over the legitimate interpretation of the rules of the officials on the field and that should never happen, particularly in such a situation.

Irrespective of the gross incompetence of the officials who reversed the call, the rule in an of itself is an ass. If you have every person who watches the game of football and intuitively knows what is right and what isn't right believing that the play resulted in a touchdown and you need someone away from the game to reinterpret the rules to make what everyone knows to be true to somehow be false, the you make a mockery of the sport and the NFL deserves any and all scorn they receive as a result.
 
Regardless of your feeling on the failed catch.

Ben doesn't throw the interception on the next play, they kick a field goal and it's overtime. Should it have got to that point? Probably not. But the game didn't end on that blown call, they still had chances, and they gave it away. That doesn't exonerate the call or excuse it, but neither does the call mean you should overlook their crapping of the bed afterwards that was entirely on Ben's shoulder's.
 
Zyphlin said:
Regardless of your feeling on the failed catch.

Ben doesn't throw the interception on the next play, they kick a field goal and it's overtime. Should it have got to that point? Probably not. But the game didn't end on that blown call, they still had chances, and they gave it away. That doesn't exonerate the call or excuse it, but neither does the call mean you should overlook their crapping of the bed afterwards that was entirely on Ben's shoulder's.
Click to expand...

The whole end of the game was a mess. Seems like the Refs screwed up, especially the ones in NYC. Then the Steelers didn't seem to know what the hell to do, which is surprising considering they had forever to figure it out during the review/replay time out. I thought they were going to simply take the FG and tie and go to OT. Maybe they thought if they lost the OT toss Brady would waltz down the field again shredding the Steeler D like he did a few minutes earlier.

But 3rd down with no time outs? What the Steelers ended up doing was a hell of a risk. Obviously, it didn't work.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
The whole end of the game was a mess. Seems like the Refs screwed up, especially the ones in NYC. Then the Steelers didn't seem to know what the hell to do, which is surprising considering they had forever to figure it out during the review/replay time out. I thought they were going to simply take the FG and tie and go to OT. Maybe they thought if they lost the OT toss Brady would waltz down the field again shredding the Steeler D like he did a few minutes earlier.

But 3rd down with no time outs? What the Steelers ended up doing was a hell of a risk. Obviously, it didn't work.
Click to expand...

One reason I shrugged my shoulders on what I thought was probably a silly call, even though it was within the rules, is that the Steelers gave that game away in the fourth and deserved to lose. So, yeah. I was kind of glad they didn't win on a fluke 60-plus yard pass play and a nice pass on the goal line. They could not stop Gronk. And, they could not keep the ball away from NE on their second from final possession, going three and out.

NE deserved the win---controversial call or not--Pittsburgh deserved to lose.
 
Higgins86 said:
Where all the comments complaining about the fact they folded some paper to determine a 1st down. If that happened during a pats game some of you would crash the site.
Click to expand...
That was nuts too.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
calamity said:
One reason I shrugged my shoulders on what I thought was probably a silly call, even though it was within the rules, is that the Steelers gave that game away in the fourth and deserved to lose. So, yeah. I was kind of glad they didn't win on a fluke 60-plus yard pass play and a nice pass on the goal line. They could not stop Gronk. And, they could not keep the ball away from NE on their second from final possession, going three and out.

NE deserved the win---controversial call or not--Pittsburgh deserved to lose.
Click to expand...

Last year Roethlisburger said things need to 'tighten up around here'. IMO that's never going to happen with Tomlin in charge. And yesterday's game is a perfect example, the defense just let the Pats waltz down the field in the 4th quarter, and gave up a 2 point conversion. Then during that replay TO the Steelers had forever to decide what they wanted to do, but still it was nothing but confusion. This morning Ben is saying he wanted to spike the ball, but the side-line was saying NO, they wanted to run a play, BUT the Steeler side-line didn't have the right personal on the field to run a play.

I don't know if any of that is true, but if it is it shows that things are NOT tightened up in Steelerland.

It was a mess all around.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Last year Roethlisburger said things need to 'tighten up around here'. IMO that's never going to happen with Tomlin in charge. And yesterday's game is a perfect example, the defense just let the Pats waltz down the field in the 4th quarter, and gave up a 2 point conversion. Then during that replay TO the Steelers had forever to decide what they wanted to do, but still it was nothing but confusion. This morning Ben is saying he wanted to spike the ball, but the side-line was saying NO, they wanted to run a play, BUT the Steeler side-line didn't have the right personal on the field to run a play.

I don't know if any of that is true, but if it is it shows that things are NOT tightened up in Steelerland.

It was a mess all around.
Click to expand...
To me it sounded a bit like Ben was bull****ting the press.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Zyphlin said:
Regardless of your feeling on the failed catch.

Ben doesn't throw the interception on the next play, they kick a field goal and it's overtime. Should it have got to that point? Probably not. But the game didn't end on that blown call, they still had chances, and they gave it away. That doesn't exonerate the call or excuse it, but neither does the call mean you should overlook their crapping of the bed afterwards that was entirely on Ben's shoulder's.
Click to expand...

If you look at the subsequent play and the interception in the endzone, you should note that the Pittsburgh player Ben was throwing to got mugged while the ball was in the air and there should have been a pass interference call made, but of course, the refs were calling nothing against the Patriots all game - 2 calls for a total of 4 yards.
 
CanadaJohn said:
If you look at the subsequent play and the interception in the endzone, you should note that the Pittsburgh player Ben was throwing to got mugged while the ball was in the air and there should have been a pass interference call made, but of course, the refs were calling nothing against the Patriots all game - 2 calls for a total of 4 yards.
Click to expand...
Isn't it a bit far-fetched to say this is narrative control on the part of the NFL and the referees? This isn't exactly professional wrestling.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Fiddytree said:
Isn't it a bit far-fetched to say this is narrative control on the part of the NFL and the referees? This isn't exactly professional wrestling.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Perhaps so - I only know what I observed all game. Any analyst of the sport, any sport, particularly football and basketball, will tell you that the application of the rules are so subjective that a penalty could be called on any play in the game and is entirely at the discretion of the officiating staff. It's why you hear such comments as "the refs are letting them play today" or "the refs are calling it close today". When you have a large disparity in the number and severity of the calls against one team as opposed to both teams is when you have questions of bias in the way the game was officiated.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Thank you for posting the above. As I have been saying, an accurate interpretation of the rules could and should have confirmed the ruling on the field of a catch and a touchdown. As per 3 (c) above, James had secured the ball long enough with his feet on the ground - his knees at a minimum - on the one yard line - and as per Item 1 above, James "maintained control of the ball until his INITIAL contact with the ground". The rules provide completely for the call on the field to be confirmed. The rules also provide that the ruling on the field has to stand unless there is irrefutable proof that the ruling on the field was wrong. The replay booth in NYC substituted their own interpretation of the rules over the legitimate interpretation of the rules of the officials on the field and that should never happen, particularly in such a situation.

Irrespective of the gross incompetence of the officials who reversed the call, the rule in an of itself is an ass. If you have every person who watches the game of football and intuitively knows what is right and what isn't right believing that the play resulted in a touchdown and you need someone away from the game to reinterpret the rules to make what everyone knows to be true to somehow be false, the you make a mockery of the sport and the NFL deserves any and all scorn they receive as a result.
Click to expand...
Its funny...the refs on the field...the replay booths...and all the professional refs that understand the actual rules...THEY ****ed up the call...but YOU understand the rule and got it right.

:roll:

5 years ago or so we arent having this conversation. I think most would agree we SHOULDNT be having this conversation. But since the rules are what they are, this wasnt a catch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom