CaptainHook

Collie is out cold.

Recommended Posts

I'm still trying to figure out how keg posted dead space. Did he pass out? It won't let me do it.

was a board hiccup because the post was too long....it is there now because I edited it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still trying to figure out how keg posted dead space. Did he pass out? It won't let me do it.

would it have been funny if I replied and said I was posting what was between your ears if you thought that wasn't a catch :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
was a board hiccup because the post was too long....it is there now because I edited it

Sorry. I'm done with that page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hook is this just a case of you saying to yourself at some point that you are just going to continue denying the facts just to see how long us idiots are going to continue arguing with you? I find it very hard to believe that you can not see what everyone else sees at this point. This has to be a joke, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hook is this just a case of you saying to yourself at some point that you are just going to continue denying the facts just to see how long us idiots are going to continue arguing with you? I find it very hard to believe that you can not see what everyone else sees at this point. This has to be a joke, right?

Nah. I really think the NFL got this one right. Good for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not what they mean by "the right call", they mean "the right decision to throw the flag." They can't retract penalties after the game so they just won't fine the player. And your argument gets thinner by the post, maybe if you just stop....oh never mind. Anyway, the NFL said it was the right call based on the sensitivity around head shots NOT because it was a penalty. The NFL is backing up its refs saying it's the right call because the refs did what they were instructed to do, throw the flag, not because it was a penalty. Now I haven't read this entire War and Peace thread of backpeddling and stubbornness but it appears you just posted something that supports everyone elses argument, not yours. Good move. Accordingly to YOUR post the NFL says "when in doubt"(which means if you don't really know..); if the refs can't tell if it's a penalty, call one anyway. So the refs did what they were instructed to do, throw a flag.

 

This is due to players being fined even though during the game their hit wasn't viewed as a penalty. It's egg on the face of the NFL to fine a player that wasn't flagged, to avoid this the instructions are to throw flags like rice at a wedding. Now while I can't tell what your argument really is at this point, that train derailed a long time ago, IMO there was no penalty on the play but the refs did what they were asked to do to protect player safety.

 

And that judge was definitely "in doubt". He threw the bean bag first, indicating a catch and fumble, then saw Collie out cold, and threw the flag.

 

The league not issuing a fine on the play only reinforces that the correct call was not made. Had a helmet to helmet hit on a defenseless defender occurred, there is no doubt that a fine would have been handed out.

 

I'm just glad the Eagles came out on top because in then end, the incorrect call did not have an impact on the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, refs never throw bean bags in error. those are never picked up once thrown. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry. I'm done with that page.

Translation: Ok, I am wrong but no way in hel1 I am ever going to admit it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keg, if you're trying to say that two feet down = catch, then you need to get a memo out to NFL refs ASAP, cause i see them calling alot of those kind of plays incomplete . . . I'm not reading the NFL rulebook to look for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Keg, if you're trying to say that two feet down = catch, then you need to get a memo out to NFL refs ASAP, cause i see them calling alot of those kind of plays incomplete . . . I'm not reading the NFL rulebook to look for it.

i am not saying it....i bolded where the rule book says it....and I am not saying it was 2 feet down...I count FOUR in the screen shots...and I posted the rule for you and bolded the parts that mattered so you didn't have to read it...you called BS and said there were more rules....well if you THINK that then back it up...you have 146 pages to find it and show where I am wrong...and if you don't want to look thru the entire 146 pages you can use the search function on the side of the document to search for whatever words you want to (catch, possession, feet blah blah blah)

 

Article 7 A player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball inbounds

(See 3-2-3).

To gain possession of a loose ball (3-2-3) that has been caught, intercepted, or recovered,

a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet completely on the

ground inbounds or any other part of his body, other than his hands, on the ground inbounds.

If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other

part of his body to the ground or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous,

there is no possession. This rule applies in the field of play and in the end zone.

The terms catch, intercept, recover, advance, and fumble denote player possession (as

distinguished from touching or muffing).

Edited by keggerz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i am not saying it....i bolded where the rule book says it....and I am not saying it was 2 feet down...I count FOUR in the screen shots...and I posted the rule for you and bolded the parts that mattered so you didn't have to read it...you called BS and said there were more rules....well if you THINK that then back it up...you have 146 pages to find it and show where I am wrong...and if you don't want to look thru the entire 146 pages you can use the search function on the side of the document to search for whatever words you want to (catch, possession, feet blah blah blah)

I'm going by what I see called on the field every Sunday. Perhaps they need to emphasize this rule, cause that's not how it's being called.

 

and he did not have four feet down before contact.

Edited by CaptainHook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm going by what I see called on the field every Sunday. Perhaps they need to emphasize this rule, cause that's not how it's being called.

 

and he did not have four feet down before contact.

wait...so we went from what you saw with your eyes, to it was called correctly according to NFL rules but I post the rule and it doesn't jive and now your position is that is what you see every Sunday. :wacko: ok :tup:

 

Article 7 A player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball inbounds

(See 3-2-3).

To gain possession of a loose ball (3-2-3) that has been caught, intercepted, or recovered,

a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet completely on the

ground inbounds or any other part of his body, other than his hands, on the ground inbounds.

If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other

part of his body to the ground or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous,

there is no possession. This rule applies in the field of play and in the end zone.

The terms catch, intercept, recover, advance, and fumble denote player possession (as

distinguished from touching or muffing).

Edited by keggerz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wait...so we went from what you saw with your eyes, to it was called correctly according to NFL rules but I post the rule and it doesn't jive and now your position is that is what you see every Sunday. :wacko: ok :tup:

No, I'm saying I'm not sure you have the rule posted correctly. Either that or officials are calling it differently than is written there. Don't you agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, well, well. This challenge will be interesting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I'm saying I'm not sure you have the rule posted correctly. Either that or officials are calling it differently than is written there. Don't you agree?

I am 100% sure that I have the rule posted correctly. I am also sure officials make mistakes on calls. What I agree on is that the officials made a call based on real-time speed and it was a bang bang play...they called it as they saw fit...and they clarified that they threw the flag saying he hadn't completed his SECOND step yet (I think the screen shots show differently)...if you go into the non-football forum you will see that I am on record saying that I don't really like slo-mo because officials aren't afforded that look....they have to make bang bang plays but in the NFL they have replay...I have already speculated on why Reid didn't challenge (another reason could be because the flag was thrown and the fumble would have been null and void anyway so he knew he couldn't win a challenge)...what I also agree on is that you truly refuse to look at this in an unbiased manner...if you want to debate the effectiveness of the officials with regards to the rule book well that is another discussion for another day

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah, refs never throw bean bags in error. those are never picked up once thrown. :wacko:

 

They are usually picked up when, as a group, that decision is overruled.

In this case, the side judge saw the play, threw the bean bag indicating catch, hit, and fumble. That same judge saw Collie out cold, remembered the league's new crack down, and then threw the flag.

 

The call should be made based on what happened on the play itself, emotions of seeing a player out cold should not factor in 3 seconds after the hit was made. Sounds cold, but that's how the game needs to be called to keep any integrity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well, well, well. This challenge will be interesting!

 

Yep....he had 3 steps and control.....exactly like Collie. Let's see how it comes back.....should be a catch and then a fumble out of bounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well, well, well. This challenge will be interesting!

why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep....he had 3 steps and control.....exactly like Collie. Let's see how it comes back.....should be a catch and then a fumble out of bounds.

I think they got that one wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they got that one wrong.

 

:wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:tup:

:wacko: I still think it was a good call. Good job refs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.