If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NFL)   The NFL has issued a statement about last night's Seahawk/Packer debacle. To summarize: "Suck it, haters"   (nfl.com) divider line 62
    More: Followup, Seahawks, NFL, Golden Tate, field of play, M.D. Jennings, forward pass, pass interference, touchdowns  
•       •       •

3585 clicks; posted to Sports » on 25 Sep 2012 at 6:04 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-09-25 10:21:38 PM
3 votes:
I'm tired and I've got wicked acid reflux going on right now so I'm not going to bother going through and picking out individual posts or points to direct this response to, but you know who you are.

Too many people are focusing solely on the call itself (which was also wrong, but that's been argued to death & if you're not convinced now then you're never going to be). Okay, even we grant that it was a difficult/bang-bang call to make in real-time, or even if we for some reason grant the league's claim that the call was "correct" (more accurately, that there was not sufficient evidence to overturn it), let's look at the other contributing factors in this clusterfark. Factors which would have been extremely unlikely with a regular officiating crew on the field:

1) Both officials were woefully out of position when the pass was thrown. For some reason, the line judge (the one who eventually signaled touchdown) was up around the 10 yard line on what was obviously going to be a pass into the end zone. The back judge (the one who signaled...something other than a touchdown) was standing in the middle of the field underneath the goalposts. Neither official was able to get himself into a position where they could actually see what was happening until well after the ball arrived (which may be why both missed the flagrant OPI, because they were focusing instead on trying to get to where they should be).
2) When those two officials finally did meet around the players, both looked down at Jennings and Tate on the field. The back judge then looked up at the line judge to get an opinion, but the line judge remained locked on the two players until he made his signal. It's my belief that the BJ saw the LJ's arms move and assumed he was going to signal for a clock stoppage, and that's why he gave that signal. But that's just an opinion and there's no actual evidence to support it.
3) At no point did the referee (the head & most experienced member of the officiating crew) move down to the end zone to confer with his two judges, which would have been the first thing an experienced NFL referee would do. Instead, upon receiving the signal from the replay booth that the play should be reviewed, he went immediately to conduct that review. We can assume that he saw the LJ's signal, as the story is that he found insufficient evidence to overturn that official's call, but he never actually spoke to the LJ before reviewing the play.
4) The first official explanation that anyone in the stadium received was when the referee returned to the field, turned on his mic, and said that the ruling on the field had been confirmed.

So, again...even if a regular officiating crew might have, or even would have, made the same call under those circumstances...a regular crew would never have found itself in those circumstances. The judges would have been properly positioned, or at least would have reacted quickly enough to get into position to see what occurred. They then would have conferred among themselves before signalling anything and, if unsure, would have conferred with the referee as well. The referee, after talking to all members of the crew who might have seen what happened, would have made a decision and announced it before going under the hood to review it.

And, finally, all of this doesn't even begin to address the numerous other horrific calls (and no calls) made during this game, which I haven't seen anybody attempt to deny. Nor the similarly terrible calls made in Baltimore Sunday night, nor the debacle in Tennessee, nor any of the other examples of butchered officiating from this weekend which have been forgotten because of this most recent example. Anyone who for even a second tries to convince themselves, let alone others, that the officials this season are at the same level as those who are currently locked out is either blatantly lying or has lost touch with reality.

/rant
2012-09-25 02:47:13 PM
3 votes:
I can't wait until this lockout is over so I can go back to complaining about the bad calls made by the regular refs.
2012-09-25 02:28:23 PM
3 votes:
Congratulations NFL, you just completely alienated a lot of people including me. I have now stopped caring about football completely and don't even want to watch any more games this year.
MBK [TotalFark]
2012-09-25 02:19:40 PM
3 votes:
imageshack.us
2012-09-25 02:11:38 PM
3 votes:
So the NFL position is no matter how egregious the calls by scabs there is nothing they will ever do. If they want to review just how much in the pocket of either gamblers or are gamblers themselves the refs are look at the not just blown but outright wrong call on the packers defensive interference when the Seattle player had both hands around the back of shields and even grabbed the facemask and the refs with money obviously on the Seahawks rewarded the foul by Seattle with a first down instead of 4th and 32 and that is the drive that went for a score. The refs have to be taking money.
2012-09-25 11:11:50 PM
2 votes:

justtray: Olympic Trolling Judge: Treefingers: I didn't have the patience to read through all the whining, so forgive if this has been said:

Tie goes to the offense.
Any questions?

//Eight farking sacks. EIGHT OF THEM.

It's been said. Difficulty: it wasn't a tie. Jennings established control first, and by rule, an apparently simultaneous catch goes to the guy who does that. Only if the "establishing control" part is a tie does the ball default to the offense.

/thinks the Seahawks would have won a fair game
//eight sacks in one half
///you guys have an awesome D

The only problem being that it's technically impossible for Jennings to have established control. See - every non fumble call by a receiver that was ruled incomplete, ever.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a bad call, but as per the rule, and in real time, this isn't really all that outrageous.


This. If you accept the Calvin Johnson rule, then Jennings cannot have established "possession" before Tate's hands were also jointly wrapped - which happened just prior to them both hitting the ground. Dual possession. Tie. Touchdown.
2012-09-25 10:58:11 PM
2 votes:
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
2012-09-25 07:46:04 PM
2 votes:
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
2012-09-25 07:06:06 PM
2 votes:
The Raiders had three injured players because of non calls during week 3. No flags thrown, it's open season on receivers. An illegal pick, two concussions, one possible season/career ending. Green Bay gets a bad call resulting in a loss, it's torches and pitchforks. Nice
2012-09-25 06:59:32 PM
2 votes:
Wow, and I thought the Steeler fans were whiners.
2012-09-25 06:33:48 PM
2 votes:
I'm done with this season until the regular refs come back.

I have better things to do than get emotionally invested in a game that has no integrity.
2012-09-25 06:25:06 PM
2 votes:
weknowmemes.com
2012-09-25 03:29:36 PM
2 votes:

Aarontology: But still. Imagine Goodell fining the shiat out of the Packers for that, and how much of a PR blow that would be for him and that whole "embarrassing the shield" mantra he's a fan of.


It totally would fit my fantasy of the most spectacular way this could end. To summarize: Replacement refs work the London game with Goodell in attendance. Someone suffers a career-ending injury caused by a non-call. Belichick or the players throw punches at the refs, start an honest-to-goodness soccer riot on live TV, causing an international incident. Goodell has to resign (if not end up in an English prison for it), the lockout ends, and the NFL never goes to London again. It'd be perfect.
2012-09-25 03:06:42 PM
2 votes:

borg: This is the first bad call in NFL history. The regular refs have never made an awful call affecting the outcome of a game.


Nobody is saying that. The problem is that this has morphed from a sideshow into a gigantic debacle. The regular refs do make bad calls, but they know what they're doing. They might make questionable judgement calls, but they can control the players, they have their respect and the respect of the coaches. These scabs take five goddamn minutes to spot the ball after turnovers/challenges. The stutter impotently whenever they announce penalties, they call phantom pass interference penalties and miss completely blatant holds on every single drive. They have absolutely no control. And this is ignoring the hypocrisy of the NFL (which now allegedly cares about player safety), replacing the regular refs, with 1500 years of combined professional experience, with referees from the high school level and lingerie bowl.

Have you watched any games this year?
2012-09-26 09:04:01 PM
1 votes:

Your Average Witty Fark User: How about you STFU and GFY? I'll bet you were saying they should shut up after SBXL too. So- shut up when they lose, shut up when they win? Fark off.


I bet you get told you have a winning personality about as often as the Seahawks win Super Bowls.
2012-09-26 08:21:14 PM
1 votes:

oh_please: Seriously, the Seahawks fans here are the biggest bunch of whiny little biatches I've ever seen.

You won on a bad call. Period.

Instead of saying, "yep, it was bad, but we'll take it", you have to argue your asses off, dissect it like it's the Zapruder film, and then throw in SUPERBOWLWHARRRRRGGGGBL! Holy shiat, YOU FARKING WON!!!!!

It's like you're trying to convince yourselves at this point. Shut up and take the win.


Tell the truth. You wrote that before even reading the thread. That's what you had in your mind and nothing that was actually said was going to change it, because reading would require effort. Because if you had actually bothered to read this or any other of the threads on it, you'll find that there is exactly one Seahawks fan arguing that it was a good call, and the rest of us haven't said anything remotely like that.
2012-09-26 05:31:35 PM
1 votes:
Seriously, the Seahawks fans here are the biggest bunch of whiny little biatches I've ever seen.

You won on a bad call. Period.

Instead of saying, "yep, it was bad, but we'll take it", you have to argue your asses off, dissect it like it's the Zapruder film, and then throw in SUPERBOWLWHARRRRRGGGGBL! Holy shiat, YOU FARKING WON!!!!!

It's like you're trying to convince yourselves at this point. Shut up and take the win.
2012-09-26 05:29:18 PM
1 votes:
The funny thing is that it was a catch
2012-09-26 12:29:52 PM
1 votes:

stappawho: The other problem is that people and the media continue to go on about how this is CLEARLY the WORST call in the history of the NFL.


I'd say the Edelman OPI call was worse.
cdn.bleacherreport.net
2012-09-26 12:22:37 PM
1 votes:

IAmRight: Theaetetus: Tate appears to have lost control while falling. It looks like the TD ruling was correct.

Tate was re-establishing his grip with one hand, can't really say he lost control unless you say that no one who has a one-handed catch has control.

Theaetetus: One hand isn't necessarily possession.

Neither is two.

Theaetetus: by the time he hit the ground with his body, he only had one hand on the ball.

Incorrect. He'd already gotten his second hand back on the ball.


The problem is that it happened to the packers and not the browns or dolphins etc...

The other problem is that people and the media continue to go on about how this is CLEARLY the WORST call in the history of the NFL.

It is not clearly and interception and not clearly a TD. None of it is clear. There is plenty of video and photographic evidence available that supports both arguments. Lots of different interpretations of 'control' and 'possession'.

It was called a TD and wasn't going to be overturned. I would also wager that if it were called an interception that would also not have been overturned.

May have been some rioting though...
2012-09-26 11:29:07 AM
1 votes:

JohnBigBootay: Funny to me: We've now seen half a dozen qualified refs weigh in saying the same thing - that was an interception.


You know the guy in the review booth who had the only opinion that mattered was a "qualified" referee too and not a scab right? And that he, the normal everyday non-scab NFL review official would have reviewed that play no matter what was called on the field and no matter who called it because it was in the final two minutes of the game. And thats the normal NFL non-scab review officials job.
2012-09-26 11:09:03 AM
1 votes:

FriarReb98: The funniest thing about this whole retarded thread? Multiple professional referees have given their opinion on the play, stating that it was clearly an interception by their standards and that no simultaneous catch ruling should have been made. They even did so AFTER the league had to save face by saying it wasn't. And people are still trying to believe it wasn't.

I'm so glad I gave up around 2 yesterday, because this flamewar just is beyond stupid. And yes, everyone who's pointed out every other flaw in the play is also right. We can discuss certain calls up and down the thread til the sky turns red and the sun turns blue. The simple fact is, the contributing factors to this play (missed PI excluded) couldn't have happened with them because they wouldn't have been out of position, they wouldn't have ruled without conferring, and the head referee wouldn't have been so disconnected from everything.

As for *those* guys, let me just say this: We can't convince certain people of the above. What makes you think any of said energy spent in better ways would convince them of more important and pressing matters?


When they see it on REPLAY. The ref who was in position only saw two guys go up, two guys catch it, and two guys end up on the ground with it. It happened in less than a second. I would put down money that 8 times out of 10, a regular ref would make the same call. Once the TD was signaled, the only reviewable portion of the play was if the players retained possession. All in all, the call is controversial, but I don't think it was a bad one, and perfectly ordinary in the context of what the ref who made the call actually saw. Not in the context of refs sitting at home watching the catch from 60 gazillion angles in slow motion.

If you want to talk about shiatty calls, that TD catch was probably the most minor one of the night. The 3rd and 4th quarters were a cornucopia of shiatty calls on both sides.

/most egregious, and the one no one talks about from the week was the end of the 49ers/Vikes game
//49ers ended up with basically 5 timeouts
///if the 49ers had won, would everyone be up in arms?
2012-09-26 10:56:33 AM
1 votes:

Your Average Witty Fark User: kronicfeld: Your Average Witty Fark User: So glad to see Seattle win after they farking destroyed GB in the first half

A 7-0 lead is "farking destroy[ing]" the other team?

8 sacks is destroying, dipshiat. Or did you only tune in to GB's bogus TD drive?



Oh, so that's how the winner of a game is determined, by the number of sacks? Thanks for explaining the whole NFL thing for us!
2012-09-26 09:24:01 AM
1 votes:

kronicfeld: Your Average Witty Fark User: So glad to see Seattle win after they farking destroyed GB in the first half

A 7-0 lead is "farking destroy[ing]" the other team?


8 sacks is destroying, dipshiat. Or did you only tune in to GB's bogus TD drive?
2012-09-26 09:20:17 AM
1 votes:

I sound fat: They are used to making 50 bucks a game at low level colleges. Is it so hard to think they MIGHT be on the take to throw a game?


If they wanted to throw the game, they could've just called it legitimately the whole way, rather than giving Green Bay the lead in the first place.

FriarReb98: Multiple professional referees have given their opinion on the play, stating that it was clearly an interception by their standards and that no simultaneous catch ruling should have been made.


Well, I'm sure that the professional refs, who are currently locked out of their jobs, would have no reason to openly criticize decisions made by people who are replacing them in order to put pressure on the NFL.

Frankly, I know that the regular refs would've called it an INT whether it was intercepted or not, and that's why I'm fine with them not being hired back. I like that the current refs don't seem to have the "always make sure that critical calls benefit the more popular team league-wide" mandate that the regular refs had.
2012-09-26 06:46:57 AM
1 votes:
Seattle fans are sure being classy about this.
2012-09-26 04:27:47 AM
1 votes:
I love all of the comments from people on different forums who claim that the normal refs are asking for too much in compensation. It's hilarious. Just because you don't make that much doesn't mean that their function isn't worth what they're claiming or more. The NFL is finding out how much employee retention was really worth to them the hard way. Oh, they could have cracked a book or hired a consultant with that background, but they didn't. They lead with bravado like a child on a power trip. I want to feel bad for them, but I just can't. This wasn't even close to unpredictable. They disregarded decades of good business practices. Now, I know that this will be a weird statement for some folks, but the following sentiment is extremely important in modern business:

Price is meaningless without quality. (Deming)
2012-09-26 03:06:11 AM
1 votes:

Treefingers: Ima leave this right here:

[sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x480]


Too bad he didn't catch the farking ball.
2012-09-26 02:57:16 AM
1 votes:
Simultaneous possession.


Tie goes to the receiver.


Kthxbye.
2012-09-26 02:45:10 AM
1 votes:
Ima leave this right here:

sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
2012-09-26 01:27:24 AM
1 votes:

kingflower: (which was a legit touchdown


No, no it wasn't.
2012-09-26 01:06:26 AM
1 votes:

Harv72b: rugman11: I'm basing my comments on the pictures released after the game. I don't know that I would have been able to make the same decision based on the video replays. There's no indication of Tate having and losing possession on the replay, I'm inferring based on him not having possession after he hit the ground in the photos.

There's a still somewhere of Tate's right arm flying away from the ball/Jennings as they lose momentum and start to fall towards the ground. Brief search found this one, but it isn't the exact frame I'm thinking of:

[static3.businessinsider.com image 850x547]


Was it this one?


sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net 

/not only are both his hands on the ball (along with the Green Bay player), but his feet are also on the ground (unlike the Green Bay player).
2012-09-26 12:15:15 AM
1 votes:
It's funny that people think the Packers would have won a tightly officiated game
2012-09-26 12:04:40 AM
1 votes:

LtDarkstar: dudemanbro: Congratulations NFL, you just completely alienated a lot of people including me. I have now stopped caring about football completely and don't even want to watch any more games this year.

Oh good, maybe you'll get yourself a life then and go talk to your family for once. I'm sick of football fans who are too busy worshiping their team to care about anything or anyone else besides themselves. Maybe get yourself an edukashun and read a book! :P


i.qkme.me
2012-09-25 11:24:29 PM
1 votes:

Harv72b: vaderstg: This. If you accept the Calvin Johnson rule, then Jennings cannot have established "possession" before Tate's hands were also jointly wrapped - which happened just prior to them both hitting the ground. Dual possession. Tie. Touchdown.

Possession might be 9/10 of the law, but it's completely irrelevant in this debate.

It's been said. Difficulty: it wasn't a tie. Jennings established control first, and by rule, an apparently simultaneous catch goes to the guy who does that. Only if the "establishing control" part is a tie does the ball default to the offense.

This is relevant.

The only problem being that it's technically impossible for Jennings to have established control. See - every non fumble call by a receiver that was ruled incomplete, ever.

This is false.

The reasons behind all of my statements have typed dozens of times already in this and the other threads on this topic.


Weird, only one of us followed up our point with an explanation. The other one just said they've explained it, when in reality, they haven't.

Guess which one you are?

Address the Calvin Johnson ruling vs this one while citing the NFL rulebook to support your point, or kindly step away from this argument and let the non bias adults talk.
2012-09-25 11:22:11 PM
1 votes:

Olympic Trolling Judge: vaderstg: justtray: The only problem being that it's technically impossible for Jennings to have established control. See - every non fumble call by a receiver that was ruled incomplete, ever.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a bad call, but as per the rule, and in real time, this isn't really all that outrageous.

This. If you accept the Calvin Johnson rule, then Jennings cannot have established "possession" before Tate's hands were also jointly wrapped - which happened just prior to them both hitting the ground. Dual possession. Tie. Touchdown.

Sounds like you two are confusing "control" with "possession." "Control" just means having the ball in your arms. "Possession" requires control, landing in-bounds, and being able to make another move, all without the ball touching the ground. The simultaneous catch rule looks at who has control first.


Since those terms aren't separated or exclusively defined anywhere I can find in any NFL rulebook, I'm going to go ahead an call "homer BS."

Possession: When a player controls the ball throughout the act of clearly touching both feet, or any other part of his body other than his hand(s), to the ground inbounds.

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/definitions
2012-09-25 11:15:00 PM
1 votes:

justtray: Olympic Trolling Judge: Treefingers: I didn't have the patience to read through all the whining, so forgive if this has been said:

Tie goes to the offense.
Any questions?

//Eight farking sacks. EIGHT OF THEM.

It's been said. Difficulty: it wasn't a tie. Jennings established control first, and by rule, an apparently simultaneous catch goes to the guy who does that. Only if the "establishing control" part is a tie does the ball default to the offense.

/thinks the Seahawks would have won a fair game
//eight sacks in one half
///you guys have an awesome D

The only problem being that it's technically impossible for Jennings to have established control. See - every non fumble call by a receiver that was ruled incomplete, ever.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a bad call, but as per the rule, and in real time, this isn't really all that outrageous.


You're conflating control and possession. Those are different things. The offical who signaled touchdown no doubt first infered Tate's control from Jennings releasing and reclutching the ball while laying on the ground. Based on that inferance (that Tate must have had control because Jennings felt the need to adjust his), he awarded Tate possession, which then became a touchdown.

That said, simultanious possession calls might be fairly rare, but it's not at all uncommon to see the team that appears to be demonstrating the lesser control be awared possession.

I just think it's hilarious that because at the end of a poorly officated game, but but not uncommonly so in any season, the obscure canadian soccer players had a call break their way, it's now involving the President of the United States and following the assassination of a diplomat on the national news. And people said Seahawks fans are whiney.

I'm fond of the observation that people beget the government they deserve, but now it's crystal clear to me that this is so in all things. Entertainment, government, and even sports.
2012-09-25 10:28:20 PM
1 votes:

Insatiable Jesus: Media has taught the retarded masses that replacement refs are bad, and they ask you to forget all of the bad calls made last year. And you do so. Like good little consumer drones, you suck on anything a corp with a flashy logo puts to your lips.


1) You're a troll
2) There's a difference between officials who make judgment calls that many people do not agree with, and officials who routinely fark up calls because they simply don't know the rules or can't be bothered to pay attention to what's happened in the game. See, e.g. Teams getting extra timeouts, penalties being enforced from the wrong yard line, penalties being enforced the wrong distance, not knowing when to start or stop the clock, failing to control the game, failing to make calls in a timely manner so as not to break the flow of the game and keep the game under four hours, etc.
3) The NFL is a corporation with a shiny logo, and they're spending a lot of time and effort and money into convincing people that the replacement refs are fine. Why do you believe anything a corp with a shiny logo tries to shove down your ass?
2012-09-25 10:20:23 PM
1 votes:
Goodell, fark you, you farking fark!!!
2012-09-25 10:07:15 PM
1 votes:
yeah but are the saints losing enough yet?
2012-09-25 09:16:50 PM
1 votes:
purplejesus.files.wordpress.com

BOO HOO

Suck it up you farking babies.

8 sacks in the first half. fail to convert a two-point attempt.

Watch the whole game.
2012-09-25 08:53:04 PM
1 votes:
Bottom line is 200 million in legal bets changed hands because of this call, which the NFL now admits was wrong. We have TEMPORARY refs, meaning HIGHLY corruptable refs. They are used to making 50 bucks a game at low level colleges. Is it so hard to think they MIGHT be on the take to throw a game?

Im not saying they are, but *THIS* is why you dont use replacement temporary officials. The NFL has destroyed its own aura of credibility.
2012-09-25 08:30:08 PM
1 votes:
I hope the replacement refs stay for the whole season. I hope they get worse over time. I hope the Super Bowl is decided by a controversial blown call. I hope all of this encourages more people to stop taking professional sports so seriously.
2012-09-25 08:27:35 PM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: you article doesn't back that up...


He's never struck me as one to let facts get in the way of a good argument.
2012-09-25 07:59:12 PM
1 votes:

Fark It: cretinbob: I didn't see the game or the play, but it sounds like the refs actually did a good job with a very difficult play.

They missed the blatant OPI call (which the NFL admits should have been called) on the final play, and called it a touchdown when it was clearly an interception, capping off a drive that only got as far as it did because of a 30+ yard defensive pass interference call that was utter horseshiat and should have been called on the offense. Which team would have won? We don't really know, the officiating is that bad.


GB would've kicked a FG, Seattle would've attempted a FG, game would've ended 10-9.

Pretty much fark everyone who's all butthurt. I think this is HILARIOUS. So glad to see Seattle win after they farking destroyed GB in the first half. Next time, maybe GB will score more points and not let their QB get sacked that much.

Suck it, haters.
2012-09-25 07:50:04 PM
1 votes:

deadcrickets: Insatiable Jesus: eurotrader: So the NFL position is no matter how egregious the calls by scabs there is nothing they will ever do.

They never reverse the bad calls, made weekly, by the regular refs either.

But go ahead and get your panties in a wad and pretend that Green Bay lost because of a single call, and that their losing had NOTHING to do with Rodgers being sacked 9 times.

I have never seen more retarded people jump on a bandwagon as they have over these replacement refs - the old refs were atrocious as well.

Was the win due to that bad call or not? Yes or no. No other answer. No Romneyism. No BS. Yes or no.


No. It was due to the fact that the Packers had scored not enough points.
2012-09-25 07:43:00 PM
1 votes:

steamingpile: bionicjoe: Reasons not to care about the refs.
Somebody lost because of one bad call. (Go cry to the tuck rule gods & Testeverde's 1.5 yard short TD)

Reasons to care about the refs
Player injuries with no flags
Rulings overturned: 80%
Twice as many penalties per game
Games running 30 minutes long
5 plays: 5 penalties (2 of these called on jersey numbers that didn't exist)
Penalty yardage marked off incorrectly

Rulings overturned are in the 50-60% range, just a little higher than regular refs, there are not twice as many penalties per game, and jersey numbers have been called wrong for years people laugh it off. And players that were injured have taken hits that were close to penalties, if they would have called them the people would still biatch.

Complaints are at an all time high though because these guys are under a spotlight, people take sports way to seriously.


The league-wide success rate is around 35-40%, so yeah its a huge deal (and I think your numbers are low).
2012-09-25 07:39:49 PM
1 votes:
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
2012-09-25 07:31:28 PM
1 votes:

Insatiable Jesus: eurotrader: So the NFL position is no matter how egregious the calls by scabs there is nothing they will ever do.

They never reverse the bad calls, made weekly, by the regular refs either.

But go ahead and get your panties in a wad and pretend that Green Bay lost because of a single call, and that their losing had NOTHING to do with Rodgers being sacked 9 times.

I have never seen more retarded people jump on a bandwagon as they have over these replacement refs - the old refs were atrocious as well.


Was the win due to that bad call or not? Yes or no. No other answer. No Romneyism. No BS. Yes or no.
2012-09-25 07:30:43 PM
1 votes:

steamingpile: He is appointed by the owners to keep both sides in line.


He can't very well keep the owners in line when he's just doing what they want him to do.
2012-09-25 07:30:29 PM
1 votes:
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
2012-09-25 07:24:20 PM
1 votes:

steamingpile: All of you do realize he's only doing what he's told to do by the owners right?


Which is the problem. The commissioner is basically there to represent the owners, not the league. It's the same problem with the MLB, NFL and NHL, you have commissioners who represent the owners and not the league as an independent entity.
2012-09-25 07:20:34 PM
1 votes:
Gary Bettman is likely the happiest guy today
2012-09-25 07:16:44 PM
1 votes:
Reasons not to care about the refs.
Somebody lost because of one bad call. (Go cry to the tuck rule gods & Testeverde's 1.5 yard short TD)

Reasons to care about the refs
Player injuries with no flags
Rulings overturned: 80%
Twice as many penalties per game
Games running 30 minutes long
5 plays: 5 penalties (2 of these called on jersey numbers that didn't exist)
Penalty yardage marked off incorrectly
2012-09-25 06:58:31 PM
1 votes:
On Sunday Green Bay plays at home. Lord have mercy on the scabs assigned to that game.
2012-09-25 06:21:57 PM
1 votes:
Nothing has to change as long as people are still watching.

As soon as people stop watching, something will change.
2012-09-25 03:32:22 PM
1 votes:

cretinbob: I didn't see the game or the play


Neither did the refs.
2012-09-25 03:18:32 PM
1 votes:
The Packers shouldn't have come out for the PAT.
2012-09-25 03:13:57 PM
1 votes:

cretinbob: Don't argue rules with the guys who make the rules.

I didn't see the game or the play, but it sounds like the refs actually did a good job with a very difficult play.
So yeah, suck it.


With all due respect, I think the only way you can conclude the refs did a good job with a difficult play is that you did not see it. They missed a PI call, were totally confused and ran around like idiots when one ref called it incomplete and the other called it a touchdown, didn't have a conference, and then went straight to the replay booth. It was the very definition of amateur hour.
2012-09-25 02:42:35 PM
1 votes:
Maybe fans should boycott this football season. I'm seriously contemplating giving up on the season. The only thing that will get the owners back to the table and bargain in good faith is us hitting them in their pocketbooks.
2012-09-25 02:32:43 PM
1 votes:

Benevolent Misanthrope: Marcus Aurelius: Benevolent Misanthrope: eurotrader: So the NFL position is no matter how egregious the calls by scabs there is nothing they will ever do. If they want to review just how much in the pocket of either gamblers or are gamblers themselves the refs are look at the not just blown but outright wrong call on the packers defensive interference when the Seattle player had both hands around the back of shields and even grabbed the facemask and the refs with money obviously on the Seahawks rewarded the foul by Seattle with a first down instead of 4th and 32 and that is the drive that went for a score. The refs have to be taking money.

Wow. I guess you were absent the day the English teacher talked about sentence construction and avoiding run-ons.

I have a headache now. And I still don't understand exactly what you were ranting about. But I do agree with you that the farking scab refs are egregious.

He's channeling his inner Faulkner. Let him go, he's on a roll.

I think I'm the only Southerner I know who admits to wondering why everyone thinks Faulkner is great.


Faulkner's lengthy sentences are legendary, but every single on of them is grammatically correct. You'll not find any structural errors in any of his books. Stylistically they can be a bit of a chore, but he was far better than that two-bit hack Charles Dickens.
2012-09-25 02:12:03 PM
1 votes:
nflhumor.com
 
Displayed 62 of 62 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report