awful

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Evil2010. Show Evil2010's posts

    Re: awful

    In Response to Re: awful:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: awful : it was a 6 yard pass route.  the first 5 the db was on him, then off then took a perfect angle to the ball.  Beautiful defense.  Pats fans think their receivers deserve a 3 yard cushion, but play defense into the chest of the receiver.  Pure hypocrisy.  Pure. 
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    It puzzles me why you feel like you have to troll this board. Could it be because your Colts for all the hype don't seem to live up to expectations while the Patriots exceed them?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BelichickforPresident. Show BelichickforPresident's posts

    Re: awful

    LOL - love that picture.  Had fun with it recently.  Lets say a ball travels 40 miles per hour.  That's 58 ft per second.  Your picture shows a ball about a foot away.  It will reach the receiver in about 2/100 of a second yet you expect a ref to call this.  The timing was perfect.

    UD6 - If you think you are an objective fan, I feel sorry for you and your delusion.  Enjoy it.  If the above isn't evidence of rationalizing, I don't know what is.  Oh, the ball travels FAST.  Wow, thanks for pointing that out.  And how fast, or slow, does an arm or body of the defender travel?  Why didn't you include those elements in your argument?  But don't bother, because I know you would find a way to rationalize anything in your favor.

    Sure, it was a close call.  But the only way to settle an argument like this is to look at truly objective numbers.  What are those numbers?  I don't know, but I'm open to finding out.

    While it seems to me that the Colts benefit from a lot of close calls, I wonder what a more objective measure would conclude.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from rtuinila. Show rtuinila's posts

    Re: awful

    In Response to Re: awful:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: awful : It puzzles me why you feel like you have to troll this board. Could it be because your Colts for all the hype don't seem to live up to expectations while the Patriots exceed them?
    Posted by Evil2010[/QUOTE]

    I figure UD6 actually works for the NY Times or the Globe or BDC. Otherwise why would someone that has been banned 5 othertimes be allowed to stay on this board for so long after logging in again?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188. Show Artist-Frmrly-Knwn-As-NickC1188's posts

    Re: awful

    In Response to Re: awful:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: awful : Haha. Yeah NE got jobbed on that one. Only a true homer would think that was anything but PI.  It is the very definition of pass interference in the rules and would have been PI 30 years ago before the rules were collectively softened.  Quite literally holding someone's arm down while they are trying to catch a pass.  Its more like tackling than pass defense. But then I suppose some people think they deserve that right and all of NE's receivers should be forced to catch with one hand.
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]

    The funny part is that even if he was playing the ball, isn't everybody "playing the ball" by not letting the receiver catch it?

    The defender DIDN'T MAKE CONTACT WITH THE BALL. 

    UD has argued for arm bars in the past to similar opposing criticisms (ironic for Pats fans and for UD).

    Only further draws attention to the idea that the players should be given as much liberty as possible to make a play on the ball without fear of flags.  PI only in the most egregious cases.  Receivers will get bigger and tougher.  Football will stay football and not turn into Arena League flag football.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from bosportfan. Show bosportfan's posts

    Re: awful

    In Response to Re: awful:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: awful : it was a 6 yard pass route.  the first 5 the db was on him, then off then took a perfect angle to the ball.  Beautiful defense.  Pats fans think their receivers deserve a 3 yard cushion, but play defense into the chest of the receiver.  Pure hypocrisy.  Pure. 
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    Question how long did he have his arm and hand wrapped around Branches arm and body? No matter what you can't impede his left arm from catching the ball period. Second question why is it all you numbnolts don't realize Peyton plays most of his games in doors with no conditions unlike Brady who has shown time and time again he can do it in blizzards or indoors while gathering rings for his team. I will give you this Peyton is a lock when it comes to throwing the INT in crucial times ha ha ha ha ha Tongue out
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: awful

    Underoos = Done

    JBolt = Done

    PhatRex/Patsman2 = Done
     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: awful

    In Response to Re: awful:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: awful : LOL - love that picture.  Had fun with it recently.  Lets say a ball travels 40 miles per hour.  That's 58 ft per second.  Your picture shows a ball about a foot away.  It will reach the receiver in about 2/100 of a second yet you expect a ref to call this.  The timing was perfect.  Further, as you can see, the defenders hand is open to the ball to bat it down (no hand on the receivers arm).  He is playing the ball.  This play will never be called in the NFL unless a defender is hooking the receiver as well or has pushed "through his back".  The picture clearly shows the colts defender has done neither.  Text book defense in that situation.  Love when pats fans beg for calls in one sentence and then suggest the league is too tight on the rules in another.  Perfect homer hypocrisy.   Finally, the play you have pictured is nothing like the colts PI today.  In the colts PI, the players were running free, with good coverage, frankly, but instead of just putting an arm out to impeded the receiver, as we frequently see uncalled, the defender actually grabbed the arm of the receiver in stride, if a ref sees that, he'll call it every time.  
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    Just re-read your brilliant analysis, UD6.  And immediately thought of a pitcher's arm.  Which must travel near 100 mph to propel a fastball.  That's 145 feet per second!  LOL.  I'm sure a DBs forearm can swing twice as fast as the football.  So you know what it means!  It was interference.  Was it within the margin of error for a ref?  Probably.  Still, by the letter of the law, it is interference.

    In real time just about every play on the field is a bit of a blur.  You don't think refs have seen enough football to be able to make a call on a "blurry" plays?  C'mon.  Ridiculous.  They do it all the time!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: awful

    First, I don't think it is PI.  By letter or intent.  And you've said the time frame is so limited that it is within a range of a margin for error (possibly 2/100 of a second or less) if it was PI.  So what we have here is the possibility that it is not PI or that it is PI within a range of a margin of error understandable for a ref not to call it. 

    Yet, you think he should make the call.  Priceless.  
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: awful

    Claiming that the game moves "too fast" for officials to be expected to accurately interpret what happens on the field -- or inventing a mythical "margin for error" -- is just another way of saying it's okay for the officials to call whatever they want. Yanking on the receiver's arm before the ball gets there is pass interference. The image is right there for everyone to see . . .   claiming it doesn't show what it shows, quite clearly, doesn't make you biased . . .   it makes your obivous bias pathetically laughable. There is no margin for error. If the official blows the call, that doesn't mean it's not a foul, it means the offical blew the call.

    This "marging for error" nonse is just that . . .   nonsense.

    Certain teams and players get the benefit of the doubt more often than not. That doesn't mean there is an acceptable "margin for error," it means -- as has been pointed out ad nauseum on this forum -- that many officials go into certain contests with preconceived ideas about what is supposed to happen.


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

    Re: awful

    UD6 -
    "Yet, you think he should make the call.  Priceless. "
    Ah, I didn't say that.  Nor do I think it.
    You've mis-read my post.  My point: technically, it was PI.  Though likely within the margin of error.
    Do you disagree with that?
    Face reality much?


     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ohyes. Show ohyes's posts

    Re: awful

    after another day of UD trying to make everyone believe his world is real.

        Here's the Kicker  

    The lights out DB that made this outstanding play. Was a backup DB that came in for Jacob Lacey who was injured on the play before this happened.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: awful

    In Response to Re: awful:
    [QUOTE]UD6 - "Yet, you think he should make the call.  Priceless. " Ah, I didn't say that.  Nor do I think it. You've mis-read my post.  My point: technically, it was PI.  Though likely within the margin of error. Do you disagree with that? Face reality much?
    Posted by BelichickforPresident[/QUOTE]

    Its possible I read into it too much, but you did say this:

    In real time just about every play on the field is a bit of a blur.  You don't think refs have seen enough football to be able to make a call on a "blurry" plays?  C'mon.  Ridiculous.  They do it all the time!

    It wasn't much of a stretch for me to believe that you were suggesting they should have made the call since "they do it all the time". 

    I don't think it was PI, so the margin of error does not matter.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: awful

    In Response to Re: awful:
    [QUOTE]after another day of UD trying to make everyone believe his world is real.     Here's the Kicker   The lights out DB that made this outstanding play. Was a backup DB that came in for Jacob Lacey who was injured on the play before this happened.
    Posted by ohyes[/QUOTE]

    so you are saying that a 3rd stringer can't make a play?  Lacey was a back up for starter, Jerraud Powers who is now on IR.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from bostatewarrior. Show bostatewarrior's posts

    Re: awful

    Boring much?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share