The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Fri Nov 22, 2024 4:27 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 101 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 2:42 pm 
Offline
The Dancing Cat
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:21 pm
Posts: 9354
Location: Ohio
Müs wrote:
It still goes back to "Don't get yourself in a position where the refs can lose the game for you."

And THAT is the bottom line.

_________________
Quote:
In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 2:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:20 am
Posts: 1037
Müs wrote:
It still goes back to "Don't get yourself in a position where the refs can lose the game for you."


So, "always have more than an 8 point lead on your opponent". Yeah, that's great and all...

I agree that it would have been nice to see the Pack's offensive grind in the third quarter turn into more points. We should have made adjustments in the first half for the OL situation. I would have loved to see that two point conversion work. There are a lot of things that could have gone better.

But what you're saying is darn near the same as "don't play in a close game". While that's a great ideal to live up to, it rings hollow as an excuse for the shammery which was the officiation last night. Teams shouldn't have to perform extra well in order to defeat the other team plus the officiating staff. The officials should be transparent to the game, and act as a framework to allow the game to unfold as an exercise of brute force and sheer willpower.

This situation isn't analogous to "If you don't want to get caught speeding, don't speed". It's more like "always have a video camera in case the police decide to brutalize you."

It worked out well for the Seahawks this week, but next week might be a different story. The officiating situation is getting ugly, and if things continue down this same road, we'll be having this chat about another game in the upcoming weeks.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:20 am
Posts: 1037
ESPN wrote:
The NFL says Seahawks receiver Golden Tate should have been called for offensive pass interference before the catch, which would have clinched a Packers victory, but that cannot be reviewed by instant replay.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:07 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Quote:
Teams shouldn't have to perform extra well in order to defeat the other team plus the officiating staff.


A statement Seahawks fans have been saying for years ;)

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:09 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Vladimirr wrote:
ESPN wrote:
The NFL says Seahawks receiver Golden Tate should have been called for offensive pass interference before the catch, which would have clinched a Packers victory, but that cannot be reviewed by instant replay.


He absolutely should have. And Browner and Jennings should probably have been ejected. And Chancellor probably shouldn't have been flagged for PI. And Shields also probably shouldn't have been flagged for PI... and so on, and so on.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:20 am
Posts: 1037
Müs wrote:
Quote:
Teams shouldn't have to perform extra well in order to defeat the other team plus the officiating staff.


A statement Seahawks fans have been saying for years ;)


Yeah, I get that. I see that all over the place. The Seahawks got screwed on a play in the past. I feel your pain - the Packers have been on both the giving and recieving sides of that fence for a long time (like, almost a hundred years).

I'm not able to make the connection to last night though. Does it make it easier for Seahawks fans to feel better about themselves after the refs handing over a bogus win? If the situations were reversed and Seattle was on defense, I'd be laying really low today, and hoping that the NFL overturned the call. I still feel that way about the brilliant kickoff return the Bears had on us last year that got called back for a BS hold.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


Last edited by Vladimirr on Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:20 am
Posts: 1037
Müs wrote:
He absolutely should have. And Browner and Jennings should probably have been ejected. And Chancellor probably shouldn't have been flagged for PI. And Shields also probably shouldn't have been flagged for PI... and so on, and so on.


Right. The fact that we can come up with a list like that for this game, and half of the other games this season, is a serious indicator that things are broken.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:08 am
Posts: 6465
Location: The Lab
You do not need to have two hands on the ball to constitute 'possession'... See the plethora of highlights on youtube titled 'Greatest one hand catch'.

Anyway, everyone is talking about the catch. The catch is at least debatable. The real missed call is the no-call on pass interference. There is NO doubt that Tate shoved the guy. That should have been called.

We were talking in the office about it. No one can ever remember a pass interference call on a hail mary. You can say the real refs might have called that.. but they might not have... no one really knows...

Anyway, it just doesn't matter. Games over. Seahawks won. Bring on St. Louis!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:08 am
Posts: 6465
Location: The Lab
Vladimirr wrote:
Does it make it easier for Seahawks fans to feel better about themselves after the refs handing over a bogus win?


Are you being serious with this? As far as I know, no Seahawks fans were involved in the referring of the game last night, and for that matter, neither were the players.

Why would anyone have a problem with Seahawks fans enjoying the win? Why would I not feel good about myself? I didn't miss the pass interference call... I slept just fine last night...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:18 pm 
Offline
God of the IRC
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:35 pm
Posts: 3041
Location: The United States of DESU
Image

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:20 am
Posts: 1037
Midgen wrote:
You do not need to have two hands on the ball to constitute 'possession'... See the plethora of highlights on youtube titled 'Greatest one hand catch'.


No, but you have to possess the ball to have possession. Have you not seen all of the TDs called back in recent years for not maintaining possession of the ball all the way to the ground? I can think of more than a few where they had a bigger piece of the ball than this.

If you're calling this a catch, Tate catching the ball with the tips of two fingers should absolutely go the on the "greatest one-handed catch" reel.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:25 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Vladimirr wrote:
Midgen wrote:
You do not need to have two hands on the ball to constitute 'possession'... See the plethora of highlights on youtube titled 'Greatest one hand catch'.


No, but you have to possess the ball to have possession. Have you not seen all of the TDs called back in recent years for not maintaining possession of the ball all the way to the ground? I can think of more than a few where they had a bigger piece of the ball than this.

If you're calling this a catch, Tate catching the ball with the tips of two fingers should absolutely go the on the "greatest one-handed catch" reel.


Yes, ans simultaneous possession was maintained all the way down ;)

It should go down on the "greatest four handed catch ever" reel ;)

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:20 am
Posts: 1037
I think I need to take a break on this one. I'm reading my posts before I hit submit, and everything is starting to sound like something out of Hellfire.

Anyway, you guys are stupid and wrong. :D

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:08 am
Posts: 6465
Location: The Lab
The officials on the field disagree, the replay official (a full-time NFL employee) disagrees, and the league officiating office, who reviewed it this morning disagree.

It was correctly ruled a touchdown based on simultaneous possession.

The missed PI is another matter. The NFL agreed that this was a missed call.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:54 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
http://larrybrownsports.com/football/sp ... ets/155619


Also from Adam Schefter:

"So what do we call last night's game? The Inaccurate Reception? The Fail Mary?"

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:57 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Vladimirr wrote:
I think I need to take a break on this one. I'm reading my posts before I hit submit, and everything is starting to sound like something out of Hellfire.

Anyway, you guys are stupid and wrong. :D


Nuh uh! You stink and your team smells like cheese!

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:20 am
Posts: 1037
OK, one last post.

Vladimirr wrote:
I feel your pain - the Packers have been on both the giving and recieving sides of that fence for a long time (like, almost a hundred years)


Janesville Daily Gazette, Monday November 24th 1919 wrote:
November 23: Beloit Fairies 6, Green Bay (10-1) 0
RIOT THREATENED AT BELOIT-PACKERS GAME; BELOIT WINS

An off-side played called by the head linesman on a Green Bay play just as the Packers shoved across a touchdown and tied the score, gave one of the most hotly contested football games ever seen in this vicinity to Beloit at Fairbanks-Morse field yesterday afternoon by a score of 6 to 0. Cries of derision were heard all over the sidelines from the spectators when the penalty was called. For a time, with the 2,000 spectators surging over the field toward the two teams and the referee, it appeared that a riot would be In progress, but the players of both, teams forced the crowd back. The Green Bay players had carried the ball by a series of line plunges through the Beloit line, gradually worked it down the field until they reached their own five-yard line. Beloit then stiffened, threw up a stone wall, and fought back, but though they were heavier than the Bay boys, Beloit couldn't hold. Foot by foot, Green Bay pushed onward until they over the line. The joy of the Packers and their rooters were soon dampened, however, when the linesman ran onto the field to inform the referee that a Green Bay player had been offside. When the ball was taken back, Green Bay tried some running, but it was forced into a criss cross sprint and then the referee penalized the visitors again, this time for an out-of-bounds' play. A beefing match then followed with the referee and the captain of the Green Bay team, chewing the fat over the rule book, and the discovery that the referee was using a 1918 set of rules. Beloit made its points In the end of the second quarter, when after the ball had successively been carried from one sector to the other, neither team seeming to have any advantage over the other. Beloit had won its fourth down and kicked, sending the ball to the 20-yard line. Then began a series of pushes, by which the spheroid was slowly advanced. The Packers endeavored to hold; they made the Line City men fight for every gain; but with 50 seconds to go, Scheibel of Beloit just squeezed over when the gun sounded, ending the quarter. Beloit missed the kick; the ball not rising more than two feet from the ground. The balance of the game was like the first period, constant harrying from one territory to the other, neither team seeming to have much advantage over the other. The advantage, however, seemed to be with the Green Bay boys, who managed to get more chances at their goal, and especially in the final period kept the ball almost entirely within their own land. It was rumored after the game that the Green Bay Packers offered to play Beloit again on a neutral field for a side-bet of $5,000, and would get Walter

Ekersall, the famous football authority, to referee the game. About $5.000 was up in bets on the results of yesterday's game, and many Green Bay backers lost.


Stupid cheatin' Fairies.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:36 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
That's the team that later became the Bears yes?

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:08 am
Posts: 6465
Location: The Lab
This was called Defensive Pass Interference, giving Green Bay a first down. They scored 7 plays later.

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:06 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
That's a well defensed pass attempt.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:34 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
What you can't see is that he was giving him a prostate exam with his other hand.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:44 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Nitefox wrote:
What you can't see is that he was giving him a prostate exam with his other hand.


That's allowed under the rules.

Quote:
Actions that do not constitute pass interference include but are not limited to:
f. Conducting an impromptu prostate exam on the field between the hash marks as a diagnostic for veteran player health.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:51 pm 
Offline
The Dancing Cat
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:21 pm
Posts: 9354
Location: Ohio
Vladimirr wrote:
Müs wrote:
Quote:
Teams shouldn't have to perform extra well in order to defeat the other team plus the officiating staff.


A statement Seahawks fans have been saying for years ;)


Yeah, I get that. I see that all over the place. The Seahawks got screwed on a play in the past. I feel your pain - the Packers have been on both the giving and recieving sides of that fence for a long time (like, almost a hundred years).

That's the rub, this is not new or unique to this season. Tuck file bullshit; rapistberger's phantom super bowl TD; 1998 Patriots. Hell it isn't even unique to football. That Tigers pitcher had a perfect game stolen from him.

ALL plays and calls MUST be made reviewable in all sports.

_________________
Quote:
In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 9:36 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Other way around. No call should ever be reviewable in ANY sport under ANY circumstances. Bad calls are part of the game. Live with it.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 9:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:08 am
Posts: 6465
Location: The Lab
Sadly, it's only a matter of time before the human element is removed from (officiating) all sports.

This is particularly concerning for baseball


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 101 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 111 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
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group