Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 32
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Coventry RI
    Posts
    4,439
    Quote Originally Posted by turnaround3 View Post
    Agreed on the chip. This was a bad call, who knows what impact it had or didn't have but obvious bad call, could've been avoided with a chipped ball, chipped pads, etc. I too have wondered for years why this isn't a thing yet.

    But yeah GB gets another break what else is new.

    My favorite part of this latest display was as soon as the Packers looked like they were teetering on blowing it - there it was - the Rodgers limp, pronounced as could be. Next drive with game in hand? Oh would ya look at that he's fine. Remarkable. A true warrior.

    Death, taxes, and a Rodgers injury when he thinks he might be about to come up short in a large game.
    [emoji378][emoji378][emoji2962][emoji2962][emoji95][emoji95][emoji3455][emoji3455] love it

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
    One More Time

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3,929
    **** outta here, Seattle.

    #24ever

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    58,703
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    They way I look at it, yes he was short but also the Packers clearly had recovered the fumble earlier but Seahawks still got that call so it evened out.
    Honestly, I kinda lowkey hate this type of reasoning to excuse bad calls. Because not all bad calls are made the same. Do this on the first drive of the game and there's plenty of time for overcoming it. Do it with 2:00 left and effectively you ended the game because of a bad call. Sure each side 'benefited' from the bad calls, but they benefited in disproportionate ways. NFL should be striving to not have that happen.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    20,217
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    Honestly, I kinda lowkey hate this type of reasoning to excuse bad calls. Because not all bad calls are made the same. Do this on the first drive of the game and there's plenty of time for overcoming it. Do it with 2:00 left and effectively you ended the game because of a bad call. Sure each side 'benefited' from the bad calls, but they benefited in disproportionate ways. NFL should be striving to not have that happen.
    That's such ******** logic. You have no idea of the ripple effect of it happening earlier in the game. The Seahawks could have gotten rattled and led to a Packers blowout. The Packers could have scored more and gotten all fat and happy like the Texans did yesterday and ended up losing. The fact is that one way or another, if that fumble is called correctly, there is less of a chance of this call even mattering.

    A bad call is a bad call. Doesn't matter when it happens because the consequences of the bad call have a massive impact in the game regardless.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    10,301
    Quote Originally Posted by mgjohnson7851 View Post
    That's such ******** logic. You have no idea of the ripple effect of it happening earlier in the game. The Seahawks could have gotten rattled and led to a Packers blowout. The Packers could have scored more and gotten all fat and happy like the Texans did yesterday and ended up losing. The fact is that one way or another, if that fumble is called correctly, there is less of a chance of this call even mattering.

    A bad call is a bad call. Doesn't matter when it happens because the consequences of the bad call have a massive impact in the game regardless.
    Pointing out a bad call early in the game when a bad call late in the game happens is showing it is incompetence on the part of the refs, not the refs being partial to one team or the other.
    Dak: 15,778 @ 65.8%, 7.6 per att, 97+21 TD, 36 INT+31 FMB, 97.0 Rate
    Wentz: 14,191 @ 63.8%, 6.9 per att, 97+3 TD, 35 INT+48 FMB, 92.7 Rate



    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    I'll leave PSD if Foles isn't the starter in Jax (or elsewhere) next year.
    "Hater" is a term used by weak minded people in the face of legitimate criticism.
    -Scott van Pelt

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    20,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseyed View Post
    Pointing out a bad call early in the game when a bad call late in the game happens is showing it is incompetence on the part of the refs, not the refs being partial to one team or the other.
    Right

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    58,703
    Quote Originally Posted by mgjohnson7851 View Post
    That's such ******** logic. You have no idea of the ripple effect of it happening earlier in the game. The Seahawks could have gotten rattled and led to a Packers blowout. The Packers could have scored more and gotten all fat and happy like the Texans did yesterday and ended up losing. The fact is that one way or another, if that fumble is called correctly, there is less of a chance of this call even mattering.

    A bad call is a bad call. Doesn't matter when it happens because the consequences of the bad call have a massive impact in the game regardless.
    Uhhhh that’s what I was saying. I just didn’t word it great. But a bad call is a bad call and there’s no “hey both sides got one”.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    33,451
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    Honestly, I kinda lowkey hate this type of reasoning to excuse bad calls. Because not all bad calls are made the same. Do this on the first drive of the game and there's plenty of time for overcoming it. Do it with 2:00 left and effectively you ended the game because of a bad call. Sure each side 'benefited' from the bad calls, but they benefited in disproportionate ways. NFL should be striving to not have that happen.
    But they ended a game the Seahawks were very unlikely to win anyway. The play before the 1st down pass in question the Packers had a 90.2% chance of winning the game according to Gamecast, and after the pass was upheld it went to 98.5%. So they went from very probably going to win to almost certainly going to win. This didn't tip some 50/50 game.

    The play before the fumble that the Seahawks got to keep the Packers had a 75.4% chance of winning. So they were already favored at that point to win, you don't think getting the ball back from the Seahawks immediately after scoring wouldn't have been a massive momentum change?

    The bad call against the Seahawks prevented the Seahawks from having a slim chance of coming back, but the bad call against the Packers kept them from blowing the game right open from the get go.

    Yes, in this case, those bad calls even out.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    58,703
    None of that justifies a bad call though.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    111,929
    the camera line to gain is off... look at the pic in the op and also the side angle... it was off by quite a bit... where jimmy fell is legit on the actual first down marker... since when do we go by the yellow line and not the actual marker??

    again another pic

    https://twitter.com/Packers_Stuff/st...l1e8bl7p4fepr5


    the big *** orange marker is the first not the yellow line...

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    58,703
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    the camera line to gain is off... look at the pic in the op and also the side angle... it was off by quite a bit... where jimmy fell is legit on the actual first down marker... since when do we go by the yellow line and not the actual marker??

    again another pic

    https://twitter.com/Packers_Stuff/st...l1e8bl7p4fepr5


    the big *** orange marker is the first not the yellow line...
    That's not the maker attached to the chain.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    111,929
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    That's not the maker attached to the chain.
    the red line is exactly where the chain is... the yellow marker is way above the chain.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    33,451
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    None of that justifies a bad call though.
    No it isn’t. But there was no excuse for the first bad call either.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Central VA
    Posts
    12,526
    Whatever was called is what was going to stand, realized that after seeing the first replay. I personally lean toward that he was just barely short, but theres no camera angle to prove it. I do like the idea of some type of tracking on the football though, but if there is a chip of some sort put inside it, there has to be more than 1, probably 3. 2 at each end and maybe some type of circular one that runs around the inside of the widest part of the belly of the ball.
    YOU JUST MADE THE LIST!!!!!

    HAPPY RUSSEV DAY!!!

    2019 PSD Fantasy Nascar Champion

  15. #30
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bolingbrook, IL
    Posts
    6,830
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkieMark48 View Post
    Whatever was called is what was going to stand, realized that after seeing the first replay. I personally lean toward that he was just barely short, but theres no camera angle to prove it. I do like the idea of some type of tracking on the football though, but if there is a chip of some sort put inside it, there has to be more than 1, probably 3. 2 at each end and maybe some type of circular one that runs around the inside of the widest part of the belly of the ball.
    I think a chip would work for the goal line, but would still be hard to tell where someone was down on the field of play.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •