Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Quagmire3. Show Quagmire3's posts

    Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    Yeah yeah yeah....the game is over and the Pats did not deserve to win. But that doesn't negate the fact the Jets did the exact same thing on the Pats FG attempt yet weren't flagged! Most folks in here say over and over again how much they respect Reiss' reporting, so here it is! This flag was clearly a BS call triggered by Rex and the league. Now all you Jets trolls can take your super bowl win of the season and disappear and go back to your own teams forums! And you alleged Pats fans who are nothing more than trolls and negative nancies (yes you NAS, Hurly etc.) should go with them!

     

    1. The Patriots didn’t lose the game solely because of the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on Chris Jones in overtime. First and foremost, credit should go to the Jets for making the plays when it counts. But specific to the penalty, if umpire Tony Michalek is going to make that call on Jones, it’s hard to imagine why he wouldn’t have flagged the Jets for the same thing on Stephen Gostkowski's game-tying 44-yard field goal with 19 seconds left. Quinton Coples lined up in the same spot as Jones, looped to his right like Jones, and jammed his right arm into the back of a teammate, hurling him into the formation (the teammate flips over snapper Danny Aiken). While Coples’ action was a bit more subtle, the enforcement of the never-called-before rule was too inconsistent from this view, especially at such a critical time in the game.

    http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4751677/picked-up-pieces-from-4th-quarter-review-21?ex_cid=espnapi_public

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    so the Pats lost because of a missed call against the Jets?

    Cartoon head, the call was correct. Unusual, but correct. Let it go. The Pats lost a game they should have won. Stop bellyaching and post something of substance other than lapping up everything Harvey spits out after listening to 98.5

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ghostofjri37. Show ghostofjri37's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    so the Pats lost because of a missed call against the Jets?

    Cartoon head, the call was correct. Unusual, but correct. Let it go. The Pats lost a game they should have won. Stop bellyaching and post something of substance other than lapping up everything Harvey spits out after listening to 98.5

    [/QUOTE]

    Who said the call wasn't correct. Based on the way the rule is written it was a proper call. The bottom line is the NFL put a rule in this year and officials never once called a penalty in pre-season or regular season until week 7 in OT during a 56 yard FG where the infraction was marginal at best. Over 400 plus FG attempts/PAT"s and that is the 1st penalty for that infraction this year? The funny part was the infraction occured at least 2 times during the same game and wasn't called.

    That being said the game was lost on 2 drives. The next to last drive of the 1st half up 21-10... 1st and 10 at the 50 and they went backwards and the pick 6. The Pat's could have put the game away instead they let the Jet's hang around.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    so the Pats lost because of a missed call against the Jets?

    Cartoon head, the call was correct. Unusual, but correct. Let it go. The Pats lost a game they should have won. Stop bellyaching and post something of substance other than lapping up everything Harvey spits out after listening to 98.5

    [/QUOTE]

    Wow!  I have two issues with your post, rkarp:  

    1)  The Pats shouldn't have won that game - they were outplayed by the Jets in virtually every phase of the game.  Perhaps not in the first half, but in the second half they most assuredly were.

    2)  The point I took from Quag's post is that a new rule was enforced for the first time on the Pats and yet not called on the Jets in a similar situation that occurred just a few minutes before.  I don't consider that bellyaching; I consider that making a point.  Is the point moot? Perhaps but I think he stipulated that.

    Is it time to move on?  Of course it is.

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

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    so the Pats lost because of a missed call against the Jets?

    Cartoon head, the call was correct. Unusual, but correct. Let it go. The Pats lost a game they should have won. Stop bellyaching and post something of substance other than lapping up everything Harvey spits out after listening to 98.5

    [/QUOTE]

    Wow!  I have two issues with your post, rkarp:  

    1)  The Pats shouldn't have won that game - they were outplayed by the Jets in virtually every phase of the game.  Perhaps not in the first half, but in the second half they most assuredly were.

    The Pats heading into this game could have ended the Jets season, and built up enough cushion to rest injured players an additional week. They played this game uninspired, flat and completely out of sync with each other. All in all, a bad game for both the players and coaching staff. But make no mistake, even with the injuries, this Pats team is still the more talented, better coached team, and they left a division win on the table with their lack luster effort

    2)  The point I took from Quag's post is that a new rule was enforced for the first time on the Pats and yet not called on the Jets in a similar situation that occurred just a few minutes before.  I don't consider that bellyaching; I consider that making a point.  Is the point moot? Perhaps but I think he stipulated that.

    This same point was posted on 32 different posts between Sunday and Monday. The point cartoon head made in my opinion, was the call was made against the Pats, but not the Jets. Again, very old news, the same call wasnt made against most every other team yesterday, and the entire season, not only the Pats...repeat, old news.  

    Is it time to move on?  Of course it is.

    [/QUOTE]


     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    so the Pats lost because of a missed call against the Jets?

    Cartoon head, the call was correct. Unusual, but correct. Let it go. The Pats lost a game they should have won. Stop bellyaching and post something of substance other than lapping up everything Harvey spits out after listening to 98.5

    [/QUOTE]

    Who said the call wasn't correct. Based on the way the rule is written it was a proper call. The bottom line is the NFL put a rule in this year and officials never once called a penalty in pre-season or regular season until week 7 in OT during a 56 yard FG where the infraction was marginal at best. Over 400 plus FG attempts/PAT"s and that is the 1st penalty for that infraction this year? The funny part was the infraction occured at least 2 times during the same game and wasn't called.

    That being said the game was lost on 2 drives. The next to last drive of the 1st half up 21-10... 1st and 10 at the 50 and they went backwards and the pick 6. The Pat's could have put the game away instead they let the Jet's hang around.

    [/QUOTE]


    Thank you for putting it into words....  That IS the bottom line . 

    All the rhetoric and finger pointing distracts from this blatant  point.  This is not how major sports league of the NFL's magnitude should fairly and evenly implement a rule change.  It is a joke and should never have happened .   It only happened because a Patriot victory would have put the Jets 3 games behind in the division.  Refereeing the situation , giving the gift to the beaten down loser jets.

    And further ,  the fact that it occured after a coach (Ryan) attempted to bias the official is even worse.  Isn't that a form of cheating in itself?  Offering your interpretation of a new rule to an official to influence the call...?  And then the official obliges on the most ticky tack non egregious example....????     It stinks like a pile of you know what.  People that defend this call are complete idiots or haters,  plain and simple.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ATJ's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    so the Pats lost because of a missed call against the Jets?

    Cartoon head, the call was correct. Unusual, but correct. Let it go. The Pats lost a game they should have won. Stop bellyaching and post something of substance other than lapping up everything Harvey spits out after listening to 98.5

    [/QUOTE]

    Wow!  I have two issues with your post, rkarp:  

    1)  The Pats shouldn't have won that game - they were outplayed by the Jets in virtually every phase of the game.  Perhaps not in the first half, but in the second half they most assuredly were.

    The Pats heading into this game could have ended the Jets season, and built up enough cushion to rest injured players an additional week. They played this game uninspired, flat and completely out of sync with each other. All in all, a bad game for both the players and coaching staff. But make no mistake, even with the injuries, this Pats team is still the more talented, better coached team, and they left a division win on the table with their lack luster effort

    2)  The point I took from Quag's post is that a new rule was enforced for the first time on the Pats and yet not called on the Jets in a similar situation that occurred just a few minutes before.  I don't consider that bellyaching; I consider that making a point.  Is the point moot? Perhaps but I think he stipulated that.

    This same point was posted on 32 different posts between Sunday and Monday. The point cartoon head made in my opinion, was the call was made against the Pats, but not the Jets. Again, very old news, the same call wasnt made against most every other team yesterday, and the entire season, not only the Pats...repeat, old news.  

    Is it time to move on?  Of course it is.

    [/QUOTE]


    [/QUOTE]

    I never said the Jets were the better team nor did I say that the Pats played well.  They had their moments in both halves but, and this is what I said, the Jets outplayed them and deserved to win. I stand by that.

    And I get it - your issue with Quag's post is as much personal as it is substantive.  You've made that very clear.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    so the Pats lost because of a missed call against the Jets?

    Cartoon head, the call was correct. Unusual, but correct. Let it go. The Pats lost a game they should have won. Stop bellyaching and post something of substance other than lapping up everything Harvey spits out after listening to 98.5

    [/QUOTE]

    Who said the call wasn't correct. Based on the way the rule is written it was a proper call. The bottom line is the NFL put a rule in this year and officials never once called a penalty in pre-season or regular season until week 7 in OT during a 56 yard FG where the infraction was marginal at best. Over 400 plus FG attempts/PAT"s and that is the 1st penalty for that infraction this year? The funny part was the infraction occured at least 2 times during the same game and wasn't called.

    That being said the game was lost on 2 drives. The next to last drive of the 1st half up 21-10... 1st and 10 at the 50 and they went backwards and the pick 6. The Pat's could have put the game away instead they let the Jet's hang around.

    [/QUOTE]


    Thank you for putting it into words....  That IS the bottom line . 

    All the rhetoric and finger pointing distracts from this blatant  point.  This is not how major sports league of the NFL's magnitude should fairly and evenly implement a rule change.  It is a joke and should never have happened .   It only happened because a Patriot victory would have put the Jets 3 games behind in the division.  Refereeing the situation , giving the gift to the beaten down loser jets.

    And further ,  the fact that it occured after a coach (Ryan) attempted to bias the official is even worse.  Isn't that a form of cheating in itself?  Offering your interpretation of a new rule to an official to influence the call...?  And then the official obliges on the most ticky tack non egregious example....????     It stinks like a pile of you know what.  People that defend this call are complete idiots or haters,  plain and simple.

    [/QUOTE]


    THis is the second point for emphasis.  The official obliges Ryan and calls the flag which is what Ryan wanted.    RYAN wants the FLAG...!!!    This is where an officials obligation is to call a fair game and should have informed clearly the violation to Belichick and how it would be called before the game. 

    The referrees job and the purpose of the rule is to PREVENT THE VIOLATION ,  not oblige a coach by trying to "catch " a team at a crucial time in the game.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    THis is the second point for emphasis.  The official obliges Ryan and calls the flag which is what Ryan wanted.    RYAN wants the FLAG...!!!    This is where an officials obligation is to call a fair game and should have informed clearly the violation to Belichick and how it would be called before the game. 

    The referrees job and the purpose of the rule is to PREVENT THE VIOLATION ,  not oblige a coach by trying to "catch " a team at a crucial time in the game.

    [/QUOTE]

    Believe the source or not, the story has come out that Belichick was warned about the violation and refused to change his approach.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    THis is the second point for emphasis.  The official obliges Ryan and calls the flag which is what Ryan wanted.    RYAN wants the FLAG...!!!    This is where an officials obligation is to call a fair game and should have informed clearly the violation to Belichick and how it would be called before the game. 

    The referrees job and the purpose of the rule is to PREVENT THE VIOLATION ,  not oblige a coach by trying to "catch " a team at a crucial time in the game.

    [/QUOTE]



    Believe the source or not, the story has come out that Belichick was warned about the violation and refused to change his approach.

    [/QUOTE]

    Do you believe that...?     You think that referree went to Belichick before game and said...  "OPPOSING coach has informed us that your team has been observed vioolating push rule.  We need to clarify this with you because it is a new rule. ...  "    Yeah sure....   THat happened.   It was a trap, and the Referree FAILED in his obligation to present this information clearly to prevent the violation from happening in the game.

     

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

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    THis is the second point for emphasis.  The official obliges Ryan and calls the flag which is what Ryan wanted.    RYAN wants the FLAG...!!!    This is where an officials obligation is to call a fair game and should have informed clearly the violation to Belichick and how it would be called before the game. 

    The referrees job and the purpose of the rule is to PREVENT THE VIOLATION ,  not oblige a coach by trying to "catch " a team at a crucial time in the game.

    [/QUOTE]

    Believe the source or not, the story has come out that Belichick was warned about the violation and refused to change his approach.

    [/QUOTE]

    If Ryan reminded the back judge/referee about the rule and they then enforce it when it happens, wouldn't that be good/proactive work on his part? If it hadn't been called before that, it's not his problem, it's the officials'. Especially if a tape of that officiating could be sent to the league. CC noted that on ESPN this AM. If BB had done this, the reaction here would have been "good for you BB. You knew the rule and made sure the officials knew you knew." 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Do you believe that...?     You think that referree went to Belichick before game and said...  "OPPOSING coach has informed us that your team has been observed vioolating push rule.  We need to clarify this with you because it is a new rule. ...  "    Yeah sure....   THat happened.   It was a trap, and the Referree FAILED in his obligation to present this information clearly to prevent the violation from happening in the game.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think the refs may have said, "Hey Bill, you guys are doing this.  You have to stop it or you're going to get flagged."

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Do you believe that...?     You think that referree went to Belichick before game and said...  "OPPOSING coach has informed us that your team has been observed vioolating push rule.  We need to clarify this with you because it is a new rule. ...  "    Yeah sure....   THat happened.   It was a trap, and the Referree FAILED in his obligation to present this information clearly to prevent the violation from happening in the game.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think the refs may have said, "Hey Bill, you guys are doing this.  You have to stop it or you're going to get flagged."

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Youre speculating.  On a new rule this sort of clarification is MANDITORY.  NEVER in a million years do you want a game decided by a mistake made on a brand new rule....!!!!!   This is the supposed nightmare of a rule change.  do you hear NFL apologizing for this?   NO they are covering their azses.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeadowlandMike. Show MeadowlandMike's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    so the Pats lost because of a missed call against the Jets?

    Cartoon head, the call was correct. Unusual, but correct. Let it go. The Pats lost a game they should have won. Stop bellyaching and post something of substance other than lapping up everything Harvey spits out after listening to 98.5

    [/QUOTE]

    Who said the call wasn't correct. Based on the way the rule is written it was a proper call. The bottom line is the NFL put a rule in this year and officials never once called a penalty in pre-season or regular season until week 7 in OT during a 56 yard FG where the infraction was marginal at best. Over 400 plus FG attempts/PAT"s and that is the 1st penalty for that infraction this year? The funny part was the infraction occured at least 2 times during the same game and wasn't called.

    That being said the game was lost on 2 drives. The next to last drive of the 1st half up 21-10... 1st and 10 at the 50 and they went backwards and the pick 6. The Pat's could have put the game away instead they let the Jet's hang around.

    [/QUOTE]


    Thank you for putting it into words....  That IS the bottom line . 

    All the rhetoric and finger pointing distracts from this blatant  point.  This is not how major sports league of the NFL's magnitude should fairly and evenly implement a rule change.  It is a joke and should never have happened .   It only happened because a Patriot victory would have put the Jets 3 games behind in the division.  Refereeing the situation , giving the gift to the beaten down loser jets.

    And further ,  the fact that it occured after a coach (Ryan) attempted to bias the official is even worse.  Isn't that a form of cheating in itself?  Offering your interpretation of a new rule to an official to influence the call...?  And then the official obliges on the most ticky tack non egregious example....????     It stinks like a pile of you know what.  People that defend this call are complete idiots or haters,  plain and simple.

    [/QUOTE]


    THis is the second point for emphasis.  The official obliges Ryan and calls the flag which is what Ryan wanted.    RYAN wants the FLAG...!!!    This is where an officials obligation is to call a fair game and should have informed clearly the violation to Belichick and how it would be called before the game. 

    The referrees job and the purpose of the rule is to PREVENT THE VIOLATION ,  not oblige a coach by trying to "catch " a team at a crucial time in the game.

    [/QUOTE]


    I just read that the refs also neglected to tell Bill not to let his players jump offsides, hit players out of bounds, grab the opposing receivers before the ball arrives or have allow his olinemen to hold the Jets dlineman.  Oh, the injustice!  How are the Patriots suppose to know how to play if they are not told about each rule right before the game? 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Youre speculating.  On a new rule this sort of clarification is MANDITORY.  NEVER in a million years do you want a game decided by a mistake made on a brand new rule....!!!!!   This is the supposed nightmare of a rule change.  do you hear NFL apologizing for this?   NO they are covering their azses.

    [/QUOTE]

    Of course I am.  That's why I said "may".

    Whether the rule is 20 years old or 20 hours old, it's up to the team to know it and abide by it.  They knew the rule, they didn't abide by it, they got flagged and it ended up costing them the game.

    Blame the player or blame the coach. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeadowlandMike. Show MeadowlandMike's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Do you believe that...?     You think that referree went to Belichick before game and said...  "OPPOSING coach has informed us that your team has been observed vioolating push rule.  We need to clarify this with you because it is a new rule. ...  "    Yeah sure....   THat happened.   It was a trap, and the Referree FAILED in his obligation to present this information clearly to prevent the violation from happening in the game.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think the refs may have said, "Hey Bill, you guys are doing this.  You have to stop it or you're going to get flagged."

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Youre speculating.  On a new rule this sort of clarification is MANDITORY.  NEVER in a million years do you want a game decided by a mistake made on a brand new rule....!!!!!   This is the supposed nightmare of a rule change.  do you hear NFL apologizing for this?   NO they are covering their azses.

    [/QUOTE]

    You're speculating that the Patriots were not told and you say that he's speculating they were? Do you find anything strange about that?

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Do you believe that...?     You think that referree went to Belichick before game and said...  "OPPOSING coach has informed us that your team has been observed vioolating push rule.  We need to clarify this with you because it is a new rule. ...  "    Yeah sure....   THat happened.   It was a trap, and the Referree FAILED in his obligation to present this information clearly to prevent the violation from happening in the game.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think the refs may have said, "Hey Bill, you guys are doing this.  You have to stop it or you're going to get flagged."

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Youre speculating.  On a new rule this sort of clarification is MANDITORY.  NEVER in a million years do you want a game decided by a mistake made on a brand new rule....!!!!!   This is the supposed nightmare of a rule change.  do you hear NFL apologizing for this?   NO they are covering their azses.

    [/QUOTE]

    You're speculating that the Patriots were not told and you say that he's speculating they were? Do you find anything strange about that?

    [/QUOTE]


    not strange...  Following simple logic and common sense.  Again ...Refferres job is to create fairness... Yes?  

    NOT unfairness.   Second the purpose of this rule or any rule is to Prevent the violation... got it?     Ryan doesnt care about the violation being prevented....   He wants to get the flag and the free first down.

    Are you following...?     Since referree acted to give Jets the penalty they wanted this is patently unfair since it involves collusion with one coach and not the other.  Fairness and refferrees obligation were VIOLATED by this call and the story that Rex had prompted it. 

     

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    not strange...  Following simple logic and common sense.  Again ...Refferres job is to create fairness... Yes?  

    NOT unfairness.   Second the purpose of this rule or any rule is to Prevent the violation... got it?     Ryan doesnt care about the violation being prevented....   He wants to get the flag and the free first down.

    Are you following...?     Since referree acted to give Jets the penalty they wanted this is patently unfair since it involves collusion with one coach and not the other.  Fairness and refferrees obligation were VIOLATED by this call and the story that Rex had prompted it. 

    [/QUOTE]

    When did Ryan talk to the refs about this?

    Does the flag get thrown if the Pats aren't violating the rule?

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

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Do you believe that...?     You think that referree went to Belichick before game and said...  "OPPOSING coach has informed us that your team has been observed vioolating push rule.  We need to clarify this with you because it is a new rule. ...  "    Yeah sure....   THat happened.   It was a trap, and the Referree FAILED in his obligation to present this information clearly to prevent the violation from happening in the game.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think the refs may have said, "Hey Bill, you guys are doing this.  You have to stop it or you're going to get flagged."

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Youre speculating.  On a new rule this sort of clarification is MANDITORY.  NEVER in a million years do you want a game decided by a mistake made on a brand new rule....!!!!!   This is the supposed nightmare of a rule change.  do you hear NFL apologizing for this?   NO they are covering their azses.

    [/QUOTE]

    You're speculating that the Patriots were not told and you say that he's speculating they were? Do you find anything strange about that?

    [/QUOTE]


    not strange...  Following simple logic and common sense.  Again ...Refferres job is to create fairness... Yes?  

    NOT unfairness.   Second the purpose of this rule or any rule is to Prevent the violation... got it?     Ryan doesnt care about the violation being prevented....   He wants to get the flag and the free first down.

    Are you following...?     Since referree acted to give Jets the penalty they wanted this is patently unfair since it involves collusion with one coach and not the other.  Fairness and refferrees obligation were VIOLATED by this call and the story that Rex had prompted it. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    A refs job is to enforce the rules.  First time watching football? 

    Dude?  refferees obligation were violated?  There is so much wrong with that, I don't know where to begin.  Get over it.  The Patriots did the same thing against the Saints.  There was the freebee.  Next.

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

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to coolade2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Do you believe that...?     You think that referree went to Belichick before game and said...  "OPPOSING coach has informed us that your team has been observed vioolating push rule.  We need to clarify this with you because it is a new rule. ...  "    Yeah sure....   THat happened.   It was a trap, and the Referree FAILED in his obligation to present this information clearly to prevent the violation from happening in the game.

    [/QUOTE]

    I think the refs may have said, "Hey Bill, you guys are doing this.  You have to stop it or you're going to get flagged."

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Youre speculating.  On a new rule this sort of clarification is MANDITORY.  NEVER in a million years do you want a game decided by a mistake made on a brand new rule....!!!!!   This is the supposed nightmare of a rule change.  do you hear NFL apologizing for this?   NO they are covering their azses.

    [/QUOTE]

    You're speculating that the Patriots were not told and you say that he's speculating they were? Do you find anything strange about that?

    [/QUOTE]


    not strange...  Following simple logic and common sense.  Again ...Refferres job is to create fairness... Yes?  

    NOT unfairness.   Second the purpose of this rule or any rule is to Prevent the violation... got it?     Ryan doesnt care about the violation being prevented....   He wants to get the flag and the free first down.

    Are you following...?     Since referree acted to give Jets the penalty they wanted this is patently unfair since it involves collusion with one coach and not the other.  Fairness and refferrees obligation were VIOLATED by this call and the story that Rex had prompted it. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Your definition of logic is that it's speculaton to think that the Pats were warned because of a first hand report that it happened by a player on the field, but it's not speculation to think that they were not warned because of no reason at all?  I see.  Would you like to speculate as to what the word logic means?

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Quagmire3. Show Quagmire3's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    so the Pats lost because of a missed call against the Jets?

    Cartoon head, the call was correct. Unusual, but correct. Let it go. The Pats lost a game they should have won. Stop bellyaching and post something of substance other than lapping up everything Harvey spits out after listening to 98.5

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey RKrap you clearly didnt read my post. Never said the call wasn't correct. Just reiterated what Reiss said; that the same play was observed several times during the game by both teams but not called until OT. But your a negative nancy that spends all your time in here trying to convince folks your important! LOL Go call Reiss you worthless RKrap troll! ESPN my backside.....troll!

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    Can we move on, folks?

    How about them Dolphins!!!!

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

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to Quagmire3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    so the Pats lost because of a missed call against the Jets?

    Cartoon head, the call was correct. Unusual, but correct. Let it go. The Pats lost a game they should have won. Stop bellyaching and post something of substance other than lapping up everything Harvey spits out after listening to 98.5

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey RKrap you clearly didnt read my post. Never said the call wasn't correct. Just reiterated what Reiss said; that the same play was observed several times during the game by both teams but not called until OT. But your a negative nancy that spends all your time in here trying to convince folks your important! LOL Go call Reiss you worthless RKrap troll! ESPN my backside.....troll!

    [/QUOTE]

    Do you think that it is uncommon for teams to be warned, even more than one time, prior to the penalty being called?  I've heard refs telling DBs to knock it off or they will throw the flag many times before actually throwing the flag for PI.  If you can't call it on a play that has a serious outcome, when would you call it.  Players need to know that at crucial moments the rules are rules.  Seems that the big complaint has gone from 1) it wasn't a penalty to 2) they changed the wording to 3)they shouldn't call it at that point in the game to 4) It's Rex's fault for ratting to 5) Why didn't they call it earlier ...... 29)acceptance of got caught cheating.

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

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Can we move on, folks?

    How about them Dolphins!!!!

    [/QUOTE]

    This will live in infamy and it goes down in history as one of the many Jets shenanigans in the recent history between the two teams.

    They haven't beaten the Pats  in like 6 straight regular season games and they were desperate to find a new way to cheat to a win.

    They did.

    [/QUOTE]


    You've gone from they changed the rule to the Jets cheated?  You know it was the Pats who got caught cheating, right?

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeadowlandMike. Show MeadowlandMike's posts

    Re: Its over and done with but here is Mike Reiss' take on the penalty

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Can we move on, folks?

    How about them Dolphins!!!!

    [/QUOTE]


    Unlikley.  How many years later are folks here still crying about spygate?  This will be a hot topic here for years to come.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share