There are 158 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

I guess the NFL really want Ray Lewis to go out on top!!!!

The NFL is quite quickly becoming like the NHL.
Originally posted by Puckdaddy:
What evidence do you have to say "the better team did win Sunday" other than the score? The better team does not always prevail. I congradulate the Ravens just as much as I congradulate the Seahawks for beating the Packers in week 2. Time after time I and others have pointed out how we were not outplayed, but fell victim to a Ray Lewis "going out party", and were made to be the "villians" of the story for the entire two weeks. Think about how much they will make on their NFL Films documentary on Ray Lewis or the 2012 Ravens. Thing is, im not afraid to believe whats in front of me. Im not too nieve or cool to connect something so obvious. Then they had the nerve to change the officials (to a less competent team, for unaddressed reasons) then, three opportunities to either tie the game or win was was chalked up to "no calls".


Thats not the end. Each of the penalties that were masked by "allowing them to play" were ALL called on the opposite side of the ball within the second to last drive and led to the three points that would have given us the lead at 1:45 rather than having to go for it on 4th. Now why didnt "the super bowl" influence the refs calls in such critical late 4th quarter moments? Now please share with us how this cannot be translated to the refs costing the 9ers the game? I know its translated as a "good sport" to take it in stride or "charge it to the game", but in my book its either fear or complete stupidity. What if the Saints and their players had not "whined" about an injustice? No matter how anyone cuts it, outplayed is not something that Ravens did Sunday. They were given the win but they did not outplay the 9ers.....Im sorry.

Huh? I said the better team did not win on sunday. But the Ravens did play better. The game ended on a bad no call but it wasn't rigged for the Ravens to win. If the game was rigged for the Ravens to win there wouldn't have been only 7 flags all game. There would've been like 30 holding calls on us and everytime we got physical with a receiver we would've been flagged. The refs were scared to throw a flag on the last play of the game, stupid, but the game wasn't rigged.

The league wanted a physical SB and they got what they wanted, but it was at the expense of bad officiating all game for both teams.
Originally posted by Kaep4MVP:
Originally posted by Puckdaddy:
What evidence do you have to say "the better team did win Sunday" other than the score? The better team does not always prevail. I congradulate the Ravens just as much as I congradulate the Seahawks for beating the Packers in week 2. Time after time I and others have pointed out how we were not outplayed, but fell victim to a Ray Lewis "going out party", and were made to be the "villians" of the story for the entire two weeks. Think about how much they will make on their NFL Films documentary on Ray Lewis or the 2012 Ravens. Thing is, im not afraid to believe whats in front of me. Im not too nieve or cool to connect something so obvious. Then they had the nerve to change the officials (to a less competent team, for unaddressed reasons) then, three opportunities to either tie the game or win was was chalked up to "no calls".


Thats not the end. Each of the penalties that were masked by "allowing them to play" were ALL called on the opposite side of the ball within the second to last drive and led to the three points that would have given us the lead at 1:45 rather than having to go for it on 4th. Now why didnt "the super bowl" influence the refs calls in such critical late 4th quarter moments? Now please share with us how this cannot be translated to the refs costing the 9ers the game? I know its translated as a "good sport" to take it in stride or "charge it to the game", but in my book its either fear or complete stupidity. What if the Saints and their players had not "whined" about an injustice? No matter how anyone cuts it, outplayed is not something that Ravens did Sunday. They were given the win but they did not outplay the 9ers.....Im sorry.

Huh? I said the better team did not win on sunday. But the Ravens did play better. The game ended on a bad no call but it wasn't rigged for the Ravens to win. If the game was rigged for the Ravens to win there wouldn't have been only 7 flags all game. There would've been like 30 holding calls on us and everytime we got physical with a receiver we would've been flagged. The refs were scared to throw a flag on the last play of the game, stupid, but the game wasn't rigged.

The league wanted a physical SB and they got what they wanted, but it was at the expense of bad officiating all game for both teams.


Ok, the league wanted a physical SB and the refs were too scared to throw the flag at a critical time then why did Torrey Smith get the PI call on the Ravens second to last drive? Why the offsides on Brooks but none on Reed? Were we unfortunate for having the ball too late in the game to be afforded refs that will do their jobs? A rigged game wont have an obvious blueprint. Considering your logic I can make the arguement that allowing them to play would have equalled NO CALLS AT ALL. Think about it, there were two no calls on two Ravens TD's. Then there was a no call that allowed pressure on the 2 point conversion and left us down 2. there was a no call on a deep ball to Crabtree in the 3rd quarter I think. So a rigged game does not need many calls to dictate a game. No calls will most certainly suffice.

If your theory was the truth about the officials, then those same flags that were chalked up as "allowing them to play" when the 9ers were violated, should have been the same flags that were held on the same drive that Baltimore kicked their last field goal and went up 5 instead of 2. They called 2 HUGE calls in that drive. Now that 3 was big because instead of a FG to win, we needed a TD to win. And guess what? That put the 9ers in a terrible situation because "the refs can just let them play" and recieve a desired outcome just so long as that tactic lines up. In a game where two teams are evenly or closely matched, it wont take your standard amount of flags to ruin a game. They were succeessful in decieving you because you have a built-in expectation of a rob job or it didnt happen in your eyes.
[ Edited by Puckdaddy on Feb 6, 2013 at 3:31 AM ]
Originally posted by Kaep4MVP:
Huh? I said the better team did not win on sunday. But the Ravens did play better. The game ended on a bad no call but it wasn't rigged for the Ravens to win. If the game was rigged for the Ravens to win there wouldn't have been only 7 flags all game. There would've been like 30 holding calls on us and everytime we got physical with a receiver we would've been flagged. The refs were scared to throw a flag on the last play of the game, stupid, but the game wasn't rigged.

The league wanted a physical SB and they got what they wanted, but it was at the expense of bad officiating all game for both teams.

A rigged game has nothing to do with how many flags thrown. Considering the refs stopped "letting them play" when the ravens needed to score and started "letting them play" when the Niners needed to play it's pretty obvious. The refs weren't letting this one get away from the Ravens. Which it did.
Originally posted by Puckdaddy:
Ok, the league wanted a physical SB and the refs were too scared to throw the flag at a critical time then why did Torrey Smith get the PI call on the Ravens second to last drive? Why the offsides on Brooks but non on Reed? Were we unfortunate for having the ball too late in the game to be afforded refs that will do their jobs? A rigged game wont have an obvious blueprint. Think about it, there were two no calls on two Ravens TD's. Then there was a no call that allowed pressure on the 2 point conversion and left us down 2. there was a no call on a deep ball to Crabtree in the 3rd quarter I think. So a rigged game does not need many calls to dictate a game. No calls will most certainly suffice.

If your theory was the truth about the officials, then those same flags that were chalked up as "allowing them to play" when the 9ers were violated, should have been the same flags that were held on the same drive that Baltimore kicked their last field goal and went up 5 instead of 2. They called 2 HUGE calls in that drive. Now that 3 was big because instead of a FG to win, we needed a TD to win. And guess what? That put the 9ers in a terrible situation because "the refs can just let them play" and recieve a desired outcome just so long as that tactic lines up. In a game where two teams are evenly or closely matched, it wont take your standard amount of flags to ruin a game. They were succeessful in decieving you because you have a built-in expectation of a rob job or it didnt happen in your eyes.

If this game was rigged there's no way the refs let the late hit on Joe Flacco in the red zone just go. If they called that flag, they would've had the ball on the 1 with 3 downs to get a TD. Giving them 35 points at the time and making it 38-29 and the goal line stand by the Ravens would've been pointless. They let the players play and only called 1 pass interference the whole game and it just so happened to be on us so now the game was rigged? Do we even know if it was the same ref watching the 4th and goal play that threw the flag on Culliver? Because each ref has a different POV on PI.

And do you honestly believe the refs would've let us get within 5 yards of winning the game if it was rigged?

If we call 1 good play on the last drive and score we wouldn't even be talking about the game being rigged. It's only because we lost that all these conspiracies are coming out. It was a bad call at the end, but it was still a hard call to make. Refs swallowed their whistles, time to move on.
[ Edited by Kaep4MVP on Feb 6, 2013 at 3:31 AM ]
You TCOB and don't let the refs decide the game with bad calls or no calls. This one is on the coaching staff plain and simple.
Originally posted by Kaep4MVP:
Originally posted by Puckdaddy:
Ok, the league wanted a physical SB and the refs were too scared to throw the flag at a critical time then why did Torrey Smith get the PI call on the Ravens second to last drive? Why the offsides on Brooks but non on Reed? Were we unfortunate for having the ball too late in the game to be afforded refs that will do their jobs? A rigged game wont have an obvious blueprint. Think about it, there were two no calls on two Ravens TD's. Then there was a no call that allowed pressure on the 2 point conversion and left us down 2. there was a no call on a deep ball to Crabtree in the 3rd quarter I think. So a rigged game does not need many calls to dictate a game. No calls will most certainly suffice.

If your theory was the truth about the officials, then those same flags that were chalked up as "allowing them to play" when the 9ers were violated, should have been the same flags that were held on the same drive that Baltimore kicked their last field goal and went up 5 instead of 2. They called 2 HUGE calls in that drive. Now that 3 was big because instead of a FG to win, we needed a TD to win. And guess what? That put the 9ers in a terrible situation because "the refs can just let them play" and recieve a desired outcome just so long as that tactic lines up. In a game where two teams are evenly or closely matched, it wont take your standard amount of flags to ruin a game. They were succeessful in decieving you because you have a built-in expectation of a rob job or it didnt happen in your eyes.

If this game was rigged there's no way the refs let the late hit on Joe Flacco in the red zone just go. If they called that flag, they would've had the ball on the 1 with 3 downs to get a TD. Giving them 35 points at the time and making it 38-29 and the goal line stand by the Ravens would've been pointless. They let the players play and only called 1 pass interference the whole game and it just so happened to be on us so now the game was rigged? Do we even know if it was the same ref watching the 4th and goal play that threw the flag on Culliver? Because each ref has a different POV on PI.

And do you honestly believe the refs would've let us get within 5 yards of winning the game if it was rigged?

If we call 1 good play on the last drive and score we wouldn't even be talking about the game being rigged. It's only because we lost that all these conspiracies are coming out. It was a bad call at the end, but it was still a hard call to make. Refs swallowed their whistles, time to move on.


Yeah I know, take the 'cool route' man. The supposed "late hit" on Flacco was not late. Soap was already in the act of attacking. No matter how many times I prove your logic to be short sighted you return with more of the same logic. Again and for the last time. The number of calls is not a legitamate gauge for a rigged game as that would not be conducive to "allowing them to play". I also showed how 'no calls' are just as effective. Actually that is what was more effective. We dont know if the same ref was watching each play but we do know that HE WAS NOT ACTUALLY QUALIFIED AND WAS HANDPICKED BY THE NFL. I mean since you want to take it there, Mr 'im too cool to believe we were robbed'.

And again, I showed you how those were not "bad plays" at the end. That entire 4 plays the Ravens where keying in on the Run with 9 in the box. On the TO they were going with the read option but the play was stopped. Roman wanted to attack those edges because of the Raven's box stacking. On 4th down Crabtree had the mismatch and was our best WR wether you like it or not. You proposed a "slant" which was exactly what the defense was setup for.
[ Edited by Puckdaddy on Feb 6, 2013 at 3:52 AM ]
Originally posted by Puckdaddy:
Yeah I know, take the 'cool route' man. The supposed "late hit" on Flacco was not late. Soap was already in the act of attacking. No matter how many times I prove your logic to be short sighted you return with more of the same logic. Again and for the last time. The number of calls is not a legitamate gauge for a rigged game as that would not be conducive to "allowing them to play". I also showed how 'no calls' are just as effective. Actually that is what was more effective. We dont know if the same ref was watching each play but we do know that HE WAS NOT ACTUALLY QUALIFIED AND WAS HANDPICKED BY THE NFL. I mean since you want to take it there, Mr 'im too cool to believe we were robbed'.

And again, I showed you how those were not "bad plays" at the end. That entire 4 plays the Ravens where keying in on the Run with 9 in the box. On the TO they were going with the read option but the play was stopped. Roman wanted to attack those edges because of the Raven's box stacking. On 4th down Crabtree had the mismatch and was our best WR wether you like it or not. You proposed a "slant" which was exactly what the defense was setup for.

Soap gave him a push as he was going out of bounds, he wasn't already attacking, Joe had already released the ball when Soap pushed him. There were just as many bad calls for the Ravens as there were for us, but everyone here has to show the ones only we got just to show how the game was rigged. Even though, the only thing that absolutely changed this game was the blackout that helped us not the Ravens.

So keep b***hing about how the game was rigged, nothing's going to change the fact that the Ravens are the winners and we lost. The only people who are going to consider this SB "tainted" is Niner fans who can't get past the fact that we lost. Maybe you can go buy a replica trophy and scratch out Ravens and put Niners as the winner if it makes you feel any better.
Originally posted by Kaep4MVP:
Originally posted by Puckdaddy:
Ok, the league wanted a physical SB and the refs were too scared to throw the flag at a critical time then why did Torrey Smith get the PI call on the Ravens second to last drive? Why the offsides on Brooks but non on Reed? Were we unfortunate for having the ball too late in the game to be afforded refs that will do their jobs? A rigged game wont have an obvious blueprint. Think about it, there were two no calls on two Ravens TD's. Then there was a no call that allowed pressure on the 2 point conversion and left us down 2. there was a no call on a deep ball to Crabtree in the 3rd quarter I think. So a rigged game does not need many calls to dictate a game. No calls will most certainly suffice.

If your theory was the truth about the officials, then those same flags that were chalked up as "allowing them to play" when the 9ers were violated, should have been the same flags that were held on the same drive that Baltimore kicked their last field goal and went up 5 instead of 2. They called 2 HUGE calls in that drive. Now that 3 was big because instead of a FG to win, we needed a TD to win. And guess what? That put the 9ers in a terrible situation because "the refs can just let them play" and recieve a desired outcome just so long as that tactic lines up. In a game where two teams are evenly or closely matched, it wont take your standard amount of flags to ruin a game. They were succeessful in decieving you because you have a built-in expectation of a rob job or it didnt happen in your eyes.

If this game was rigged there's no way the refs let the late hit on Joe Flacco in the red zone just go. If they called that flag, they would've had the ball on the 1 with 3 downs to get a TD. Giving them 35 points at the time and making it 38-29 and the goal line stand by the Ravens would've been pointless. They let the players play and only called 1 pass interference the whole game and it just so happened to be on us so now the game was rigged? Do we even know if it was the same ref watching the 4th and goal play that threw the flag on Culliver? Because each ref has a different POV on PI.

And do you honestly believe the refs would've let us get within 5 yards of winning the game if it was rigged?

If we call 1 good play on the last drive and score we wouldn't even be talking about the game being rigged. It's only because we lost that all these conspiracies are coming out. It was a bad call at the end, but it was still a hard call to make. Refs swallowed their whistles, time to move on.


I have a few more questions that may help you with this issue. Was the solution to the Niners issues was to start playing outside of the rules because the refs were "allowing them to play"? If so where do THEY draw the line? Doesnt this jeopardize player safety? How do you know what was or wasnt going to be called? How would they know exactly how lienient those refs would be on any particular play? If not, were they subject to be doomed? Were they obligated to have a lead that gave them "insurance" against the refs? Can you name teams that won the super bowl that didnt have insurance? Are your standards logical or reasonable?
Originally posted by Puckdaddy:

Was the solution to the Niners issues was to start playing outside of the rules because the refs were "allowing them to play"? If so where do THEY draw the line?

No, they should've just plain played better. They came out lethargic and let the Ravens out play them. The Ravens were more physical, but they were also just playing better.

Doesnt this jeopardize player safety?

It was the HarBowl. I don't think they really cared.

How do you know what was or wasnt going to be called?

I don't, but it was pretty obvious with how much each team was getting away with.


How would they know exactly how lienient those refs would be on any particular play?

You don't, you play physical until you force them to throw a flag.

If not, were they subject to be doomed?

No. Play better than the other team. Play Niner football throughout the whole game and we win.

Were they obligated to have a lead that gave them "insurance" against the refs?

I don't think being down 28-6 would be the most ideal situation if you plan on winning the Super Bowl, no.

Can you name teams that won the super bowl that didnt have insurance?

Don't know, but this was much more fun than to watch a penalty filled game like the Seahawks vs Steelers SB.

Are your standards logical or reasonable?

I'm just trying to look at things in a non-homeristic sense. And I think calling the game rigged is so homeristic that it's laughable.
[ Edited by Kaep4MVP on Feb 6, 2013 at 4:58 AM ]
Originally posted by Kaep4MVP:
Originally posted by Puckdaddy:

Was the solution to the Niners issues was to start playing outside of the rules because the refs were "allowing them to play"? If so where do THEY draw the line?

No, they should've just plain played better. They came out lethargic and let the Ravens out play them. The Ravens were more physical, but they were also just playing better.

Doesnt this jeopardize player safety?

It was the HarBowl. I don't think they really cared.

How do you know what was or wasnt going to be called?

I don't, but it was pretty obvious with how much each team was getting away with.


How would they know exactly how lienient those refs would be on any particular play?

You don't, you play physical until you force them to throw a flag.

If not, were they subject to be doomed?

No. Play better than the other team. Play Niner football throughout the whole game and we win.

Were they obligated to have a lead that gave them "insurance" against the refs?

I don't think being down 28-6 would be the most ideal situation if you plan on winning the Super Bowl, no.

Can you name teams that won the super bowl that didnt have insurance?

Don't know, but this was much more fun than to watch a penalty filled game like the Seahawks vs Steelers SB.

Are your standards logical or reasonable?

I'm just trying to look at things in a non-homeristic sense. And I think calling the game rigged is so homeristic that it's laughable.





Well what reason do you have to be so sure that it was not rigged?

Ill address your answers dude.

No, they should've just plain played better. They came out lethargic and let the Ravens out play them. The Ravens were more physical, but they were also just playing better.

Tell me something. Did the Packers outplay the Seahawks in week 2? Did we outplay the Saints in the playoffs "all game" last year? I can go on for ages with this. Its not how you start a game its how you finish. There are no perfect games, therefore its unrealistic to have this as a standard. Like I told you before, The Ravens didnt play 4 quarters of good football. Where were they from 7 minutes in the 3rd - 8 minutes in the 4th? You can continue denying the obvious but it wont change the fact that you are wrong.

It was the HarBowl. I don't think they really cared.

And its ok that they happen to not care without notification? Thats strange.

I don't, but it was pretty obvious with how much each team was getting away with.

Well please present your cases. All you presented was the Flacco late hit. Although I dont agree, I will give you that one for the sake of arguement. Is that all you have? Because if so your arguement is over.

You don't, you play physical until you force them to throw a flag.

Well whats your definition of "physical"? In my opinion we did play physical. There is a difference between physical, and a violation. Do we hold everyone on the third down of the Ravens last drive? Culliver did exactly what you suggested and was flagged. So again Kaep4MVP, you are clearly being biased for the Ravens because your proposed arguements did actually happen only to be called differently on both sides.


No. Play better than the other team. Play Niner football throughout the whole game and we win.


Ok, did the 9ers play 9ers football in the NFC championship "all game"? Would the Ravens say they played Ravens football "all game"? Your predetermined outcomes are what hinders your view alot.

I don't think being down 28-6 would be the most ideal situation if you plan on winning the Super Bowl, no.

What about being down 17-0 or being up 28-3 and find yourself up by only 2 points with about 9 minutes left? Thats the point I am trying to explain to you. Football is not a movie scene or script. You dont know what shape the game will take, as long as you are able to overcome a bad start, you cannot blame what has been fixed as the detriment to the game.

Don't know, but this was much more fun than to watch a penalty filled game like the Seahawks vs Steelers SB
Its one thing to call unwarranted penalties and another to call just penalties. Again, where in the rulebook does it give a particular time in the game, and specific game, or anytime that a penalty is not a penalty? The only explanation is that some of you are trying to put clean clothes on a dirty body.

"I'm just trying to look at things in a non-homeristic sense. And I think calling the game rigged is so homeristic that it's laughable"

Its not about "homer and non homer", but a matter of fact or fiction. You seem to put corruption pass the NFL, yet they just recently claimed to have "substantial evidence that Johnathan Vilma ran a bounty program". Though we have yet to see any evidence. But go on putting them on a pedestal and believing they could do no wrong. America, America, god shed his grace on thee.
[ Edited by Puckdaddy on Feb 6, 2013 at 10:36 AM ]
Tell me something. Did the Packers outplay the Seahawks in week 2? Did we outplay the Saints in the playoffs "all game" last year? I can go on for ages with this. Its not how you start a game its how you finish. There are no perfect games, therefore its unrealistic to have this as a standard. Like I told you before, The Ravens didnt play 4 quarters of good football. Where were they from 7 minutes in the 3rd - 8 minutes in the 4th? You can continue denying the obvious but it wont change the fact that you are wrong.

No, it doesn't matter how you start but it doesn't help that we're down 28-6 in the 3rd. You can't tell me if we didn't play like horses**t the 1st half that we don't win this game. Yes it does matter how you finish, but we didn't do enough to say the 1st half doesn't matter since we lost. The 1st half didn't matter in the Falcons game because we won. And it doesn't matter if the Ravens played 4 quarters of good football, they played enough to win and we didn't. Simple as that.

And its ok that they happen to not care without notification? Thats strange.

No, it's really not strange. Everyone and their grandmother expected this to be a physical game. The refs let both teams play it out. Not that strange.

Well please present your cases. All you presented was the Flacco late hit. Although I dont agree, I will give you that one for the sake of arguement. Is that all you have? Because if so your arguement is over.

I don't have the whole game in front of me since I deleted it in frustration, but no holding calls the whole game and only 1 pass interference shows that the refs let both teams play.

And the only evidence of the game being rigged is the freakin blackout that was in our favor. So...The league almost let us win! Rigged.

Well whats your definition of "physical"? In my opinion we did play physical. There is a difference between physical, and a violation. Do we hold everyone on the third down of the Ravens last drive? Culliver did exactly what you suggested and was flagged. So again Kaep4MVP, you are clearly being biased for the Ravens because your proposed arguements did actually happen only to be called differently on both sides.

Well apparently they didn't play physical enough since there were only 7 penalties all game and we lost. Sure, hold everyone on 3rd down, they called one PI the whole game, I'll take that everytime. And no, it wasn't called differently on both sides, you just perceive it that way because you can't take the fact that we lost a super bowl.


Ok, did the 9ers play 9ers football in the NFC championship "all game"? Would the Ravens say they played Ravens football "all game"? Your predetermined outcomes are what hinders your view alot.

No, we didn't play Niners football all game but we played enough of it to win the game. We didn't play enough of it in the SB to win. No, te Ravens didn't play Ravens football all game, but they played enough to win.

What about being down 17-0 or being up 28-3 and find yourself up by only 2 points with about 9 minutes left? Thats the point I am trying to explain to you. Football is not a movie scene or script. You dont know what shape the game will take, as long as you are able to overcome a bad start, you cannot blame what has been fixed as the detriment to the game.

No, it necessarily doesn't matter how the game starts, but if the game finishes with you on the losing side then it obviously had an effect on the game. We sucked all 1st half, if we have even a little success we win.

Its one thing to call unwarranted penalties and another to call just penalties. Again, where in the rulebook does it give a particular time in the game, and specific game, or anytime that a penalty is not a penalty? The only explanation is that some of you are trying to put clean clothes on a dirty body.

It's not in the rulebook, nobody is saying it is, but it has always been known to anyone who watches sports is that the refs almost always swallow their whistle on the last play. I never said it was the right thing, but that's what happens.

Its not about "homer and non homer", but a matter of fact or fiction. You seem to put corruption pass the NFL, yet they just recently claimed to have "substantial evidence that Johnathan Vilma ran a bounty program". Though we have yet to see any evidence. But go on putting them on a pedestal and believing they could do no wrong. America, America, god shed his grace on thee.

It's really not about fact or fiction, it's about you finding something and then spinning it so it fits your arguement. You tried to do that with the holding in the endzone saying the time would've been back on the clock, but your thoughts were wrong so you had to find other things to try to spin.
[ Edited by Kaep4MVP on Feb 6, 2013 at 11:25 AM ]
Yes, it WAS pass interferance on Crabtree. That doesn't change the fact he ran a horrible route and initiated contact with the defender, allowing him to latch on. There were calls missed on both sides. Thats football. I don't remember there being any talk of a rigged game when Bowman interfered with Roddy White two weeks ago to end the Falcon's season. Game is over, the 49ers lost and not all the complaining in the world will change that. My theory is if Jim Harbaugh spent as much time reading his play call sheet as he did throwing it on the ground and jumping up and down on it, the team might have had something better prepared than a low percentage 4th down fade throw with the game on the line. That was a CRAPPY call!
Originally posted by Canfan:
Yes, it WAS pass interferance on Crabtree. That doesn't change the fact he ran a horrible route and initiated contact with the defender, allowing him to latch on. There were calls missed on both sides. Thats football. I don't remember there being any talk of a rigged game when Bowman interfered with Roddy White two weeks ago to end the Falcon's season. Game is over, the 49ers lost and not all the complaining in the world will change that. My theory is if Jim Harbaugh spent as much time reading his play call sheet as he did throwing it on the ground and jumping up and down on it, the team might have had something better prepared than a low percentage 4th down fade throw with the game on the line. That was a CRAPPY call!

I agree for the most part, except saying Bowman interfered with Roddy White. He initiated contact within 5 yards and chucked him and then released before the ball arrived. great, and legal play by Bowman.
Originally posted by Kaep4MVP:
Tell me something. Did the Packers outplay the Seahawks in week 2? Did we outplay the Saints in the playoffs "all game" last year? I can go on for ages with this. Its not how you start a game its how you finish. There are no perfect games, therefore its unrealistic to have this as a standard. Like I told you before, The Ravens didnt play 4 quarters of good football. Where were they from 7 minutes in the 3rd - 8 minutes in the 4th? You can continue denying the obvious but it wont change the fact that you are wrong.

No, it doesn't matter how you start but it doesn't help that we're down 28-6 in the 3rd. You can't tell me if we didn't play like horses**t the 1st half that we don't win this game. Yes it does matter how you finish, but we didn't do enough to say the 1st half doesn't matter since we lost. The 1st half didn't matter in the Falcons game because we won. And it doesn't matter if the Ravens played 4 quarters of good football, they played enough to win and we didn't. Simple as that.

And its ok that they happen to not care without notification? Thats strange.

No, it's really not strange. Everyone and their grandmother expected this to be a physical game. The refs let both teams play it out. Not that strange.

Well please present your cases. All you presented was the Flacco late hit. Although I dont agree, I will give you that one for the sake of arguement. Is that all you have? Because if so your arguement is over.

I don't have the whole game in front of me since I deleted it in frustration, but no holding calls the whole game and only 1 pass interference shows that the refs let both teams play.

And the only evidence of the game being rigged is the freakin blackout that was in our favor. So...The league almost let us win! Rigged.

Well whats your definition of "physical"? In my opinion we did play physical. There is a difference between physical, and a violation. Do we hold everyone on the third down of the Ravens last drive? Culliver did exactly what you suggested and was flagged. So again Kaep4MVP, you are clearly being biased for the Ravens because your proposed arguements did actually happen only to be called differently on both sides.

Well apparently they didn't play physical enough since there were only 7 penalties all game and we lost. Sure, hold everyone on 3rd down, they called one PI the whole game, I'll take that everytime. And no, it wasn't called differently on both sides, you just perceive it that way because you can't take the fact that we lost a super bowl.


Ok, did the 9ers play 9ers football in the NFC championship "all game"? Would the Ravens say they played Ravens football "all game"? Your predetermined outcomes are what hinders your view alot.

No, we didn't play Niners football all game but we played enough of it to win the game. We didn't play enough of it in the SB to win. No, te Ravens didn't play Ravens football all game, but they played enough to win.

What about being down 17-0 or being up 28-3 and find yourself up by only 2 points with about 9 minutes left? Thats the point I am trying to explain to you. Football is not a movie scene or script. You dont know what shape the game will take, as long as you are able to overcome a bad start, you cannot blame what has been fixed as the detriment to the game.

No, it necessarily doesn't matter how the game starts, but if the game finishes with you on the losing side then it obviously had an effect on the game. We sucked all 1st half, if we have even a little success we win.

Its one thing to call unwarranted penalties and another to call just penalties. Again, where in the rulebook does it give a particular time in the game, and specific game, or anytime that a penalty is not a penalty? The only explanation is that some of you are trying to put clean clothes on a dirty body.

It's not in the rulebook, nobody is saying it is, but it has always been known to anyone who watches sports is that the refs almost always swallow their whistle on the last play. I never said it was the right thing, but that's what happens.

Its not about "homer and non homer", but a matter of fact or fiction. You seem to put corruption pass the NFL, yet they just recently claimed to have "substantial evidence that Johnathan Vilma ran a bounty program". Though we have yet to see any evidence. But go on putting them on a pedestal and believing they could do no wrong. America, America, god shed his grace on thee.

It's really not about fact or fiction, it's about you finding something and then spinning it so it fits your arguement. You tried to do that with the holding in the endzone saying the time would've been back on the clock, but your thoughts were wrong so you had to find other things to try to spin.


Originally posted by Kaep4MVP:
Tell me something. Did the Packers outplay the Seahawks in week 2? Did we outplay the Saints in the playoffs "all game" last year? I can go on for ages with this. Its not how you start a game its how you finish. There are no perfect games, therefore its unrealistic to have this as a standard. Like I told you before, The Ravens didnt play 4 quarters of good football. Where were they from 7 minutes in the 3rd - 8 minutes in the 4th? You can continue denying the obvious but it wont change the fact that you are wrong.

No, it doesn't matter how you start but it doesn't help that we're down 28-6 in the 3rd. You can't tell me if we didn't play like horses**t the 1st half that we don't win this game. Yes it does matter how you finish, but we didn't do enough to say the 1st half doesn't matter since we lost. The 1st half didn't matter in the Falcons game because we won. And it doesn't matter if the Ravens played 4 quarters of good football, they played enough to win and we didn't. Simple as that.

And its ok that they happen to not care without notification? Thats strange.

No, it's really not strange. Everyone and their grandmother expected this to be a physical game. The refs let both teams play it out. Not that strange.

Well please present your cases. All you presented was the Flacco late hit. Although I dont agree, I will give you that one for the sake of arguement. Is that all you have? Because if so your arguement is over.

I don't have the whole game in front of me since I deleted it in frustration, but no holding calls the whole game and only 1 pass interference shows that the refs let both teams play.

And the only evidence of the game being rigged is the freakin blackout that was in our favor. So...The league almost let us win! Rigged.

Well whats your definition of "physical"? In my opinion we did play physical. There is a difference between physical, and a violation. Do we hold everyone on the third down of the Ravens last drive? Culliver did exactly what you suggested and was flagged. So again Kaep4MVP, you are clearly being biased for the Ravens because your proposed arguements did actually happen only to be called differently on both sides.

Well apparently they didn't play physical enough since there were only 7 penalties all game and we lost. Sure, hold everyone on 3rd down, they called one PI the whole game, I'll take that everytime. And no, it wasn't called differently on both sides, you just perceive it that way because you can't take the fact that we lost a super bowl.


Ok, did the 9ers play 9ers football in the NFC championship "all game"? Would the Ravens say they played Ravens football "all game"? Your predetermined outcomes are what hinders your view alot.

No, we didn't play Niners football all game but we played enough of it to win the game. We didn't play enough of it in the SB to win. No, te Ravens didn't play Ravens football all game, but they played enough to win.

What about being down 17-0 or being up 28-3 and find yourself up by only 2 points with about 9 minutes left? Thats the point I am trying to explain to you. Football is not a movie scene or script. You dont know what shape the game will take, as long as you are able to overcome a bad start, you cannot blame what has been fixed as the detriment to the game.

No, it necessarily doesn't matter how the game starts, but if the game finishes with you on the losing side then it obviously had an effect on the game. We sucked all 1st half, if we have even a little success we win.

Its one thing to call unwarranted penalties and another to call just penalties. Again, where in the rulebook does it give a particular time in the game, and specific game, or anytime that a penalty is not a penalty? The only explanation is that some of you are trying to put clean clothes on a dirty body.

It's not in the rulebook, nobody is saying it is, but it has always been known to anyone who watches sports is that the refs almost always swallow their whistle on the last play. I never said it was the right thing, but that's what happens.

Its not about "homer and non homer", but a matter of fact or fiction. You seem to put corruption pass the NFL, yet they just recently claimed to have "substantial evidence that Johnathan Vilma ran a bounty program". Though we have yet to see any evidence. But go on putting them on a pedestal and believing they could do no wrong. America, America, god shed his grace on thee.

It's really not about fact or fiction, it's about you finding something and then spinning it so it fits your arguement. You tried to do that with the holding in the endzone saying the time would've been back on the clock, but your thoughts were wrong so you had to find other things to try to spin.

This is all an epic bunch hogwash

No, it doesn't matter how you start but it doesn't help that we're down 28-6 in the 3rd. You can't tell me if we didn't play like horses**t the 1st half that we don't win this game. Yes it does matter how you finish, but we didn't do enough to say the 1st half doesn't matter since we lost. The 1st half didn't matter in the Falcons game because we won. And it doesn't matter if the Ravens played 4 quarters of good football, they played enough to win and we didn't. Simple as that.

WTF? So regardless to the Ravens giving up 25 points in 1 quarter and a half is considered "4 quarters of good football", but the 9ers giving up 21 points in 2 quarters is "horse manuer"? Now your hole logic and arguement has crumbled. I have nothing more to say to you on that issue because it is obvious that you have things twisted.

I don't have the whole game in front of me since I deleted it in frustration, but no holding calls the whole game and only 1 pass interference shows that the refs let both teams play.And the only evidence of the game being rigged is the freakin blackout that was in our favor. So...The league almost let us win! Rigged.

Really? What about the illegitamate points change to get a unqualified Boger in place to ref the game? Considereing your claims, why did they call a PI for the Ravens? What did the 9ers do to get the "rare PI" called? Why for the Ravens? I have EVIDENCE that the Ravens got away with 2 holding calls that lead to TD's. Where is your FACTUAL evidence that they were not calling holding on both sides? You see the difference between you and I. I use evidence, you use ASSUMPTIONS.


Well apparently they didn't play physical enough since there were only 7 penalties all game and we lost. Sure, hold everyone on 3rd down, they called one PI the whole game, I'll take that everytime. And no, it wasn't called differently on both sides, you just perceive it that way because you can't take the fact that we lost a super bowl.

Again, your assumption vs my facts, you cant show me where the 9ers got away with consistent blantant calls. I can show where the no calls were beneficial for the Ravens and detrimental for the 9ers. The only arguement you have at this point is that they play outside of the rules since the Ravens were doing it. You said you couldnt rewatch the game, so how do you get so much confidence that the amount of no calls were equal? Everytime you respond you expose more and more that your arguement is arbitrary interpretation, or an attempt to save face.


No, we didn't play Niners football all game but we played enough of it to win the game. We didn't play enough of it in the SB to win. No, te Ravens didn't play Ravens football all game, but they played enough to win.

Ok, so they both played "enough to win the game" and you admitted that Crabtree was held. So what stood in the way of the 9ers winning? Refs that didnt want to "interfere with the game when in actuality making no call only benefitted the defense. Unless you are going to say that the 9ers' fix was to play outside the rules.


No, it necessarily doesn't matter how the game starts, but if the game finishes with you on the losing side then it obviously had an effect on the game. We sucked all 1st half, if we have even a little success we win.

Listen to yourself. So is it because they had a bad start, or is it because of the slump? Because the Ravens had a worst slump than the 9ers in less time. Man you are not hearing yourself? We had a chance to make their 2nd half even worst but was stopped by the refs. NOT the Ravens, the refs! Why is that not dawning on you?


It's not in the rulebook, nobody is saying it is, but it has always been known to anyone who watches sports is that the refs almost always swallow their whistle on the last play. I never said it was the right thing, but that's what happens.

Ok, so why is it so hard for you to understand those that are not pleased with "the wrong thing"? The refs swallowing thier whistle was only beneficial to the Ravens at that point. Do you not see the difference? So it wasnt the right call, and considering that this was a tight game, it most certainly can be the blame for the lost.


It's really not about fact or fiction, it's about you finding something and then spinning it so it fits your arguement. You tried to do that with the holding in the endzone saying the time would've been back on the clock, but your thoughts were wrong so you had to find other things to try to spin.

Fit my arguement? I was reading the same article you persented and and it said that the ref has the clearance to stop play due to a penalty. A blatant penalty usually translates to the whistle stopping the play. In that case their were several holds. Just like the nature of offsides sometimes lead to the play being blown dead, and sometimes allowed to continue.
...