There are 204 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

More proof that NFL refs are very biased in calling games.

Originally posted by boast:

Brees better pray he doesn't face us again! Next time his head might just snap off of that chicken neck of his.
Originally posted by 4ML:
Hopefully, we can put up a good fight against your team in a few weeks.

I expect you will. No shortage of bad blood between our teams. That inspires everyone.
Originally posted by maporsche:
Originally posted by ChipDouglas510:
I would be willing to bet that according to you Golden Tate actually did catch that ball vs GB and it was a terrible offensive pi called in your superbowl loss, right?


I think the Tate catch was close enough to be called simultaneous. I think the ref that called no catch couldn't see what the f**k was going on.
And let's not talk about Superbowl XL. I think even most SF fans would agree that Seattle got hosed on several calls. They should have still fought back and won the game though. No excuses. (I will however hate the Steelers until my dying breath, or we eventually beat them in a SB).

The old Golden Tate catch test, if you argue that it was a catch you lose all credibility and become a blind homer in my eyes.

Originally posted by ChipDouglas510:

Gonna miss ya. Where ya goin?
Originally posted by Wrathman:
Originally posted by boast:

Brees better pray he doesn't face us again! Next time his head might just snap off of that chicken neck of his.

nyquil wont even help him sleep on nights before he faces our D.






Originally posted by ChipDouglas510:
Originally posted by maporsche:
Originally posted by ChipDouglas510:
I would be willing to bet that according to you Golden Tate actually did catch that ball vs GB and it was a terrible offensive pi called in your superbowl loss, right?


I think the Tate catch was close enough to be called simultaneous. I think the ref that called no catch couldn't see what the f**k was going on.
And let's not talk about Superbowl XL. I think even most SF fans would agree that Seattle got hosed on several calls. They should have still fought back and won the game though. No excuses. (I will however hate the Steelers until my dying breath, or we eventually beat them in a SB).

The old Golden Tate catch test, if you argue that it was a catch you lose all credibility and become a blind homer in my eyes.




Lol this... Simultaneous catch hahahaha
Originally posted by vermonator:
Originally posted by IronSaint:
I agree with the first half and end of your statement, but not the middle.


Maybe he'll be able to see over the offensive line now!


I agree. I couldn't believe they picked up the flag tonight on the Panthers on that final play where Gronkowski got bear-hugged from coming back to the ball.


RB's and WR's get taken down by their head/neck all the time actually, but a penalty won't be called because they are established runners; that is, unless they are also being taken down by their facemask or the horse collar.

As for the "defenseless player" deal, here's the rule from the rulebook...

"Article 7: Players in a Defenseless Posture. It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.

(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:

(1) A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass;


(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player's head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact of the defender's helmet or facemask is lower than the passer's neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him; or


Note 2: A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact."

Bla, bla, bla... How can they say it's OK here but not there? Make up your damn mind, is it or isn't it, that is the question, and unfortunately this type of hypocrisy takes the game out of the players hands and puts it into the officials hands. Once more, it gives the league the power to control and influence games. It's becoming more and more obvious that the league wants to control who wins and who loses.

Technically, the NFL is classified as "Sports Entertainment," as presented to a Supreme Court. This puts them in the same league as the WWE.
Originally posted by IronSaint:
Originally posted by 4ML:
This. Kaep was running...Brees wasn't. Though it was a bad call on the Brees hit...there is no conspiracy. lol

I agree with the first half and end of your statement, but not the middle.

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
drew brees neck looked like it stretched a foot when he got hit lol

Maybe he'll be able to see over the offensive line now!

Originally posted by Kauaiguy:
It's really a shame when a referee's call or non call has a major impact on the outcome of the game.

I agree. I couldn't believe they picked up the flag tonight on the Panthers on that final play where Gronkowski got bear-hugged from coming back to the ball.

Originally posted by solidg2000:
Defenseless player has nothing to do with that rule
You can't wrap around anyone's neck.
And a QB isn't defenseless, the only people who are "defenseless" are receivers who are going for the pass and get killed

RB's and WR's get taken down by their head/neck all the time actually, but a penalty won't be called because they are established runners; that is, unless they are also being taken down by their facemask or the horse collar.

As for the "defenseless player" deal, here's the rule from the rulebook...

"Article 7: Players in a Defenseless Posture. It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.

(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:

(1) A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass;


(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player's head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact of the defender's helmet or facemask is lower than the passer's neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him; or


Note 2: A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact."

Cept the neck contact with Bress would not be defined as "Forcibly" imo, it made slight contact on the way down. The "forcibly" took place on his chest.
Originally posted by 4ML:
Originally posted by midrdan:
Originally posted by Joecool:
I don't know why people are pissed about the holding non-call vs the Pats. No way in hell was Gronk going to make that catch. Why give the Pats a second chance on a play that was not going to get completed? I think the refs finally used some common sense.

Because the player was holding the TE. You can't say there was no way the player could not have made a catch in front of him when he is prevented from moving towards the ball due to interference. It's not about giving a team a second chance. It's about consistently enforcing the rules. If they were playing in NE, they never would have picked up the flag but the refs didn't want to get murdered on the way to their cars in Carolina.

Same rule applies to our game ... if that game was played in SF I don't think a flag gets thrown.

They did enforce the rule. You can't have PI if the ball is intercepted before it gets to the receiver. Hence, they picked up the flag.

Exactly. And the ball was four yards in front of Gronk who was still moving towards the back of the end one prior to being interfered with. Would have probably slipped down from having to change direction so fast AND move four yards up field when the ball was already about to land.

Wasn't even close.
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by 4ML:
Originally posted by midrdan:
Originally posted by Joecool:
I don't know why people are pissed about the holding non-call vs the Pats. No way in hell was Gronk going to make that catch. Why give the Pats a second chance on a play that was not going to get completed? I think the refs finally used some common sense.

Because the player was holding the TE. You can't say there was no way the player could not have made a catch in front of him when he is prevented from moving towards the ball due to interference. It's not about giving a team a second chance. It's about consistently enforcing the rules. If they were playing in NE, they never would have picked up the flag but the refs didn't want to get murdered on the way to their cars in Carolina.

Same rule applies to our game ... if that game was played in SF I don't think a flag gets thrown.

They did enforce the rule. You can't have PI if the ball is intercepted before it gets to the receiver. Hence, they picked up the flag.

Exactly. And the ball was four yards in front of Gronk who was still moving towards the back of the end one prior to being interfered with. Would have probably slipped down from having to change direction so fast AND move four yards up field when the ball was already about to land.

Wasn't even close.

Contact to the player occurred before the ball reached the end zone. It may not have been PI. Could have been holding or illegal contact ... but the point being that you have a ball in the air and a defensive player not playing the ball and bear hugging the intended receiver. What wasn't even close was the timing on the contact versus when the ball reached the end zone. Contact was made, defender wrapped up the receiver and ran him through the end zone, as the ball was in the air. To me, that's a penalty. Maybe not PI but certainly illegal contact. It should have been, at least, a 5 yard penalty and another play.
Goodell's mission in life appears to be making sure the league ends up playing 48 games of two hand touch each season. Then another 26 games of playoffs and a three out of five SuperBowl.
LOL start at post #285 to see the reaction of Falcons fans on the Ryan hit- http://boards.atlantafalcons.com/topic/3992328-the-official-saints-at-falcons-in-game-thread/page__st__280
[ Edited by Ronnie49Lott on Nov 21, 2013 at 8:50 PM ]
Are we getting a good idea who the league wants to win the Super Bowl since they seem to let a certain team get certain calls or get away with obvious penalties?
  • Kolohe
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 31,271
Biased!!!!.....no no no my friend....PAID OFF is more like it, nobody does anything for nothing.
So that is how the NFL is going to play it? Just play dumb I guess

UPDATE: Falcons coach Mike Smith said at the postgame news conference that he was told by the official that Hicks didn't hit Ryan in the head or neck area.