Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]


    of course

    When the ball hits a db in the back ,or the back of the helmet, and he doesnt look back. and "then" the db runs into the receiver, that is called as PI , even tho the ball is uncatchable by the wr - how stupid is that?

    in this case it was clearly uncatachable because the LB had a bear hug qround Gronk and Gronk certanly couldnt catch it = lol

    NFL has issues with its rules - the Brooks hit on Brees was an idiotic call

    btw i heaerd CC say that Face guarding is illegal - I remember in a SD playoff game - Simms said the same thing agaisnt the Pats, but I believe that rule is gonzo

     

    so we have two crapsandwich calls so far this season

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, I believe face guarding is college only now.  I take it that when the talking heads say face guarding they are talking about contact by the Db without playing the ball.  I mean the DB is not turning his head toward the ball.

    I can't believe the mean face guarding like it used to be called.

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RedSoxDOrtiz's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to sml1210's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And so much for the pass being "uncatchable." Unless, of course, you don't belive in science....

     

    http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4753554/sports-science-examines-game-ending-call

    [/QUOTE]

    Here are the results from the poll of users from that link.  With as many Pats haters that are out there, I was surprised that this was so favorable to the Patriots.  This is how the fans saw it in a very large sample size:

     

    Should a penalty have been called in the end zone on the final play of Monday's game?

    •   79% Yes ... Gronk was interfered with, the Pats were robbed of a chance to win the game.
    •   21% No ... it was the right call.

     

    Discuss (Total votes: 46,236)

     

    [/QUOTE]


    The 21% are just tools with an axe to grind.

    Any fair minded person knows that was an egregious rip-off.

    I don't even care so much that we lost. That's going to happen here and there. I'm mostly concerned that the NFL is fixed upon occasion. There are just too many of these outrageous calls happening at the very end to determine spread in these games in recent years.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That is my main concern as well.  I love football, but it takes away from the sport for me knowing that there are crooked refs messing with the outcomes of the games.  We have gotten many plays in the past and those things happen.  We played well as a team, but when the game comes down to corruption it really hurts the image of the league and the overall enjoyment.

    For the record, Jeff Fisher also thinks the final play was buullchit

    http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24250583/jeff-fisher-thinks-panthers-should-have-been-flagged-on-final-play

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to bostatewarrior's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]


    of course

    When the ball hits a db in the back ,or the back of the helmet, and he doesnt look back. and "then" the db runs into the receiver, that is called as PI , even tho the ball is uncatchable by the wr - how stupid is that?

    in this case it was clearly uncatachable because the LB had a bear hug qround Gronk and Gronk certanly couldnt catch it = lol

    NFL has issues with its rules - the Brooks hit on Brees was an idiotic call

    btw i heaerd CC say that Face guarding is illegal - I remember in a SD playoff game - Simms said the same thing agaisnt the Pats, but I believe that rule is gonzo

     

    so we have two crapsandwich calls so far this season

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, I believe face guarding is college only now.  I take it that when the talking heads say face guarding they are talking about contact by the Db without playing the ball.  I mean the DB is not turning his head toward the ball.

    I can't believe the mean face guarding like it used to be called.

    [/QUOTE]


    We well know about this issue, because they called that on Hobbs in the AFCCG in complete and total error. Thanks NFL.

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    Every online poll on yahoo, aol, etc went Pats way. If the Jets trolls were voting under all the names they use on here, the poll results would have gone the other way...

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to OneManBanned's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    "What they are going to talk about is when did the restriction occur in relation to the ball being touched, because once the ball is touched, you cannot have pass interference. This is a judgment call, the officials don't have the use of replay, they don't have slow-motion replay, and ultimately they ruled that the restriction occurred simultaneously with the ball being touched, and when you watch it at full speed, you can see why they would make that call on the field."

    [/QUOTE]
     A bunch of dodging the resposibilty pile of sh1t, that ignores the fact that ALL interference calls are about the contact occuring before the ball gets there.  Its bang-bang...!  dumbsh1it...  irrelevant that it occured near simultaneosly  .  It WASN"T simaltaneous ...!  End of your verbal diarrhea.   The fact that he used that word is a violation of integrity.

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    Former head of NFL officiating (not on the payroll these days) claims that since the rule says the ball must be CLEARLY uncatchable, the officials should have stayed with the call on the field.

     

    http://www.csnne.com/video_content_type/mike-pereira-they-should-have-stayed-call-field

     



    However, he was in favor of the pushing call vs the Jets. The PI call was far worse IMO.

     

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to wmasschilly's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to agcsbill's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wmasschilly's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What a lot of people seem to ignore is the ball actually WAS caught. 



    wmass...  absolutely like that avatar of Tijuana Brass' album cover.  Ever want to lick that "whipped cream"?

    Tongue Out[/QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]

    I wanted to ask where you picked that album up, back in the early 90's I co-owned a vinyl record and comic book shop in a small Massachusetts town in the Berkshires, that album was up on our wall and I'm wondering now if I wasn't the guy that sold it to you?

    [/QUOTE]

    I got the album from my Uncle back in the late 70s, snagged it from his collection when he wasnt  looking lol...wish I knew about your store back then,  used to go to the various record stores in NoHo quite a bit in high school, don't suppose it was there?

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    This was all about the Panthers and their super star QB selling more jersys.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to bostatewarrior's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]


    of course

    When the ball hits a db in the back ,or the back of the helmet, and he doesnt look back. and "then" the db runs into the receiver, that is called as PI , even tho the ball is uncatchable by the wr - how stupid is that?

    in this case it was clearly uncatachable because the LB had a bear hug qround Gronk and Gronk certanly couldnt catch it = lol

    NFL has issues with its rules - the Brooks hit on Brees was an idiotic call

    btw i heaerd CC say that Face guarding is illegal - I remember in a SD playoff game - Simms said the same thing agaisnt the Pats, but I believe that rule is gonzo

     

    so we have two crapsandwich calls so far this season

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, I believe face guarding is college only now.  I take it that when the talking heads say face guarding they are talking about contact by the Db without playing the ball.  I mean the DB is not turning his head toward the ball.

    I can't believe the mean face guarding like it used to be called.

    [/QUOTE]


    We well know about this issue, because they called that on Hobbs in the AFCCG in complete and total error. Thanks NFL.

    [/QUOTE]

    So cc didn't know the rule and he's telling us how to interpret this mess up, I generally like him but can all theses guys know the rules before they open theIR hole? 

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    Could you imagine if this had been a playoff game? Patriots gt the bend over job from the NFL

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to ccsjl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Every online poll on yahoo, aol, etc went Pats way. If the Jets trolls were voting under all the names they use on here, the poll results would have gone the other way...

    [/QUOTE]

    The thing is ccsji, as much as I hate the Jets (and the Giants for that matter) if it happened to them I would say they got robbed and have every right to complain all they want! Like Babe and others have said its about the integrity of the game, over the last couple of decades the league has taken steps to make sure they get calls right with challenges and automatic reivew, so to see a game end like that...

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to kansaspatriot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Could you imagine if this had been a playoff game? Patriots gt the bend over job from the NFL

    [/QUOTE]


    You mean like Seattle got a few years back?

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to kansaspatriot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Could you imagine if this had been a playoff game? Patriots gt the bend over job from the NFL

    [/QUOTE]


    You mean like Seattle got a few years back?

    [/QUOTE]


    yep

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I still want to know who told who to pick up the flag.

    I would also like to know what exactly the rules will be for this weekend.

    [/QUOTE]

    It was Rex Ryan.  He's close with the refs.

    [/QUOTE]

    Obviously not that close. What's he ever won with the jests

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to kansaspatriot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Could you imagine if this had been a playoff game? Patriots gt the bend over job from the NFL

    [/QUOTE]


    You mean like Seattle got a few years back?

    [/QUOTE]


    You talking about the phantom PI that sealed the SB win for PIT?

    That was ridiculous too.

     

     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to PatsGetScrewedFinally's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to bostatewarrior's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]


    of course

    When the ball hits a db in the back ,or the back of the helmet, and he doesnt look back. and "then" the db runs into the receiver, that is called as PI , even tho the ball is uncatchable by the wr - how stupid is that?

    in this case it was clearly uncatachable because the LB had a bear hug qround Gronk and Gronk certanly couldnt catch it = lol

    NFL has issues with its rules - the Brooks hit on Brees was an idiotic call

    btw i heaerd CC say that Face guarding is illegal - I remember in a SD playoff game - Simms said the same thing agaisnt the Pats, but I believe that rule is gonzo

     

    so we have two crapsandwich calls so far this season

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, I believe face guarding is college only now.  I take it that when the talking heads say face guarding they are talking about contact by the Db without playing the ball.  I mean the DB is not turning his head toward the ball.

    I can't believe the mean face guarding like it used to be called.

    [/QUOTE]


    We well know about this issue, because they called that on Hobbs in the AFCCG in complete and total error. Thanks NFL.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why was the Hobbs call in error?  The rules clearly state if the defender impedes the defender and doesn't play the ball (meaning have your head turned around looking for the ball) and makes contact with the receiver, its PI.  That is exactly whay he did and why he was penalized.  This is clearly stated in the first item in the rules under Probihited Acts.

    (a) Contact by a player who is not playing the ball that restricts the opponent’s opportunity to make the catch.

     

    The Hobbs situation was totally different than the Gronk situation because in the Hobb's situation the receiver had a legitimate chance to catch the ball.  In Gronk's situation it was "uncatchable".  Get it!!!!!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Dude! Hobbs NEVER made contact with the receiver, that's why Simms came up with "face guarding" and the league sent a letter of apology to Hobbs...Get it!!!!!!!

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to PatsGetScrewedFinally's comment:

     

    In Gronk's situation it was "uncatchable".

     

     



    Wrong. It has to be "clearly" uncatchable. Learn the game fool. (and the rule)

     

     

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to bostatewarrior's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]


    of course

    When the ball hits a db in the back ,or the back of the helmet, and he doesnt look back. and "then" the db runs into the receiver, that is called as PI , even tho the ball is uncatchable by the wr - how stupid is that?

    in this case it was clearly uncatachable because the LB had a bear hug qround Gronk and Gronk certanly couldnt catch it = lol

    NFL has issues with its rules - the Brooks hit on Brees was an idiotic call

    btw i heaerd CC say that Face guarding is illegal - I remember in a SD playoff game - Simms said the same thing agaisnt the Pats, but I believe that rule is gonzo

     

    so we have two crapsandwich calls so far this season

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, I believe face guarding is college only now.  I take it that when the talking heads say face guarding they are talking about contact by the Db without playing the ball.  I mean the DB is not turning his head toward the ball.

    I can't believe the mean face guarding like it used to be called.

    [/QUOTE]


    We well know about this issue, because they called that on Hobbs in the AFCCG in complete and total error. Thanks NFL.

    [/QUOTE]

    As if crying about a recent game isn't bad enough, Babedy babe babe is crying about a game freom years ago and how the refs really gave it to him hard.  Babe, how may posts today?  You're no different than Harvery.  You boys both cry about all sorts of things, now you have common ground to whine together instead of who lost the game, the D or Brady.

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsGetScrewedFinally's comment:

     

    In Gronk's situation it was "uncatchable".

     

     



    Wrong. It has to be "clearly" uncatchable. Learn the game fool. (and the rule)

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Clearly in itself is a judgement call.  For example, I think you are clearly a whining little wussy.  Others may feel that you are clearly a crying little baby.  The only thing for sure is that you've been whinging and crying since monday night.  It's just pathetic.

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsGetScrewedFinally's comment:

     

    In Gronk's situation it was "uncatchable".

     

     



    Wrong. It has to be "clearly" uncatchable. Learn the game fool. (and the rule)

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Clearly in itself is a judgement call.  For example, I think you are clearly a whining little wussy.  Others may feel that you are clearly a crying little baby.  The only thing for sure is that you've been whinging and crying since monday night.  It's just pathetic.

    [/QUOTE]

    Clearly you are a moron with nothing better to do than pester your betters on another team's board. LMAO@U

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to bostatewarrior's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]


    of course

    When the ball hits a db in the back ,or the back of the helmet, and he doesnt look back. and "then" the db runs into the receiver, that is called as PI , even tho the ball is uncatchable by the wr - how stupid is that?

    in this case it was clearly uncatachable because the LB had a bear hug qround Gronk and Gronk certanly couldnt catch it = lol

    NFL has issues with its rules - the Brooks hit on Brees was an idiotic call

    btw i heaerd CC say that Face guarding is illegal - I remember in a SD playoff game - Simms said the same thing agaisnt the Pats, but I believe that rule is gonzo

     

    so we have two crapsandwich calls so far this season



    Yeah, I believe face guarding is college only now.  I take it that when the talking heads say face guarding they are talking about contact by the Db without playing the ball.  I mean the DB is not turning his head toward the ball.

    I can't believe the mean face guarding like it used to be called.

    [/QUOTE]


    We well know about this issue, because they called that on Hobbs in the AFCCG in complete and total error. Thanks NFL.

    [/QUOTE]

    As if crying about a recent game isn't bad enough, Babedy babe babe is crying about a game freom years ago and how the refs really gave it to him hard.  Babe, how may posts today?  You're no different than Harvery.  You boys both cry about all sorts of things, now you have common ground to whine together instead of who lost the game, the D or Brady.

    [/QUOTE]


    And here you are crying like a little fairy on another team's board. You are a jest, just like your laughing stock of the NFL team.

     

    Here imbecile, something for you to really cry about...

     

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

    Re: Pereira says they should have left the flag down.

    In response to wmasschilly's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsGetScrewedFinally's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to bostatewarrior's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]


    of course

    When the ball hits a db in the back ,or the back of the helmet, and he doesnt look back. and "then" the db runs into the receiver, that is called as PI , even tho the ball is uncatchable by the wr - how stupid is that?

    in this case it was clearly uncatachable because the LB had a bear hug qround Gronk and Gronk certanly couldnt catch it = lol

    NFL has issues with its rules - the Brooks hit on Brees was an idiotic call

    btw i heaerd CC say that Face guarding is illegal - I remember in a SD playoff game - Simms said the same thing agaisnt the Pats, but I believe that rule is gonzo

     

    so we have two crapsandwich calls so far this season

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, I believe face guarding is college only now.  I take it that when the talking heads say face guarding they are talking about contact by the Db without playing the ball.  I mean the DB is not turning his head toward the ball.

    I can't believe the mean face guarding like it used to be called.

    [/QUOTE]


    We well know about this issue, because they called that on Hobbs in the AFCCG in complete and total error. Thanks NFL.

    [/QUOTE]

    Why was the Hobbs call in error?  The rules clearly state if the defender impedes the defender and doesn't play the ball (meaning have your head turned around looking for the ball) and makes contact with the receiver, its PI.  That is exactly whay he did and why he was penalized.  This is clearly stated in the first item in the rules under Probihited Acts.

    (a) Contact by a player who is not playing the ball that restricts the opponent’s opportunity to make the catch.

     

    The Hobbs situation was totally different than the Gronk situation because in the Hobb's situation the receiver had a legitimate chance to catch the ball.  In Gronk's situation it was "uncatchable".  Get it!!!!!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Dude! Hobbs NEVER made contact with the receiver, that's why Simms came up with "face guarding" and the league sent a letter of apology to Hobbs...Get it!!!!!!!

    [/QUOTE]

    I've yet to see Hobbs produce that letter for the public.  I think his comments might have been intentionally mistaken. 

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share