Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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)   Raiders fans may just get a bit of good news. 12 years too late   (nfl.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, Raiders, tuck rule, NFL, Raiders fans, uniform number, Jim Schwartz, Texans  
•       •       •

5093 clicks; posted to Sports » on 14 Mar 2013 at 8:37 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-14 08:38:17 PM  
As a Raider fan, that play still infuriates me.  If that had been called a fumble, the Raiders might have won the Superbowl and instead of banging Gisele tonight, Brady might have been washing my car.
 
2013-03-14 08:44:07 PM  

8 inches: As a Raider fan, that play still infuriates me.  If that had been called a fumble, the Raiders might have won the Superbowl and instead of banging Gisele tonight, Brady might have been washing my car.


As a Niners fan, I agree that the Raiders got farked by the call. Another 'Al Davis penalty'. However, even my Raider-4-Life best friend agrees that the one blown call doesn't excuse the craptastic play of the Raiders for the rest of the game. Just like the blown call at the end of the Super Bowl this year doesn't excuse the shiat performance my guys put on the first 30 minutes.
 
2013-03-14 08:45:45 PM  

8 inches: As a Raider fan, that play still infuriates me.  If that had been called a fumble, the Raiders might have won the Superbowl and instead of banging Gisele tonight, Brady might have been washing my car.


Get over it, freakshow.

1. Consider it payback for 1976.
2.  The Raiders would've gone to the Superbowl, but they would've had zero chance against the Rams that year.  Gruden is an offensive specialist and would've tried to go toe-to-toe with Martz, which is exactly what Martz hoped for.  Instead, the Pats went and Belichick schemed for 2 weeks to realize the key was having Vrabel plant Marshall Faulk into the turf on as many early plays as possible to disrupt the Rams timing.

You honestly think that would have ever crossed Gruden's mind at any time, until after Beichick showed the world how to beat the Rams?

Let it go.  The Raiders blew it.
 
2013-03-14 08:58:19 PM  

devlin carnate: 1. Consider it payback for 1976.

 
2013-03-14 09:04:53 PM  
Sorry there, Raiders fans.  The rule might be a stupid one, but it is the rule.  Believe it or not, the Patriots actually had a fumble they recovered reversed earlier in that same season due to the tuck rule (which is why they knew about it).

The fact that they're only now looking at it 12 years later suggests the owners thought the rule was okay.
 
2013-03-14 09:07:44 PM  

Dog Welder: Sorry there, Raiders fans.  The rule might be a stupid one, but it is the rule.  Believe it or not, the Patriots actually had a fumble they recovered reversed earlier in that same season due to the tuck rule (which is why they knew about it).

The fact that they're only now looking at it 12 years later suggests the owners thought the rule was okay.


I don't know about that.  I think the fact that they're looking at it at all shows that it was wrong.

/Biased opinion is biased
 
2013-03-14 09:09:31 PM  

devlin carnate: .  Instead, the Pats went and Belichick schemed for 2 weeks to realize the key was having Vrabel plant Marshall Faulk into the turf on as many early plays as possible to disrupt the Rams timing.


You forgot hidden cameras. And extra time with halftime show to review the footage.
 
2013-03-14 09:16:44 PM  
Well good. One less reason for Brady to stick around
 
2013-03-14 09:21:31 PM  
devlin carnate:
1. Consider it payback for 1976.
2.  The Raiders would've gone to the Superbowl, but they would've had zero chance against the Rams that year.  Gruden is an offensive specialist and would've tried to go toe-to-toe with Martz, which is exactly what Martz hoped for.  Instead, the Pats went and Belichick schemed for 2 weeks to realize the key was having Vrabel plant Marshall Faulk into the turf on as many early plays as possible to disrupt the Rams timing.

You honestly think that would have ever crossed Gruden's mind at any time, until after Beichick showed the world how to beat the Rams?


1. 1976 has nothing to do with the tuck rule call but for the sake of karma, I can live with that.

2. Oakland going on to the Super Bowl was hardly a guaranty given they also would have had to go through the Steelers in Pitt. The Pats barely made it out of there themselves.

The Rams lost twice that season, once to a non playoff team. While I would have put my money on the Rams saying the Raiders had "zero chance" against them is absurd.

If by "Belichick schemed for 2 weeks" you mean "filmed the Rams in pratice" then sure. And if you are one of those that believes spygate had little to do with the Pats success that is fine as well but don't tell us that Old Bill is an epic genius  for "having a defender tackle their runnung back early on.... a lot".

The Raiders blew it.

I have never been a fan of using "you should have stopped them after anyway"  when someone wants to diminish the impact of that call. Sure you have to keep playing, but this is not some bad call in the middle of a game that a team had time to recover from. The situation was that the Raiders forced a turnover with 1:43 left in the game. With New England out of time outs that game is finished. Oakland takes 3 knees and the game ends, it's over. The only reason the Pats won was because of the blown call by the officiating crew extending the game. Saying a team blew it when they actually had the game won is simply incorrect.
 
2013-03-14 09:23:43 PM  

8 inches: As a Raider fan, that play still infuriates me.  If that had been called a fumble, the Raiders might have won the Superbowl and instead of banging Gisele tonight, Brady might have been washing my car.


This play still infuriates me. As a Raiders fan, this iced my hating of the Patriots, their dink touching coach and Tom "I wear women's shoes" Brady.
 
2013-03-14 09:25:36 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: devlin carnate: .  Instead, the Pats went and Belichick schemed for 2 weeks to realize the key was having Vrabel plant Marshall Faulk into the turf on as many early plays as possible to disrupt the Rams timing.

You forgot hidden cameras. And extra time with halftime show to review the footage.


And sleeveless sweatshirts. Those are disrupting as hell.
 
2013-03-14 09:39:49 PM  

Dog Welder: Sorry there, Raiders fans.  The rule might be a stupid one, but it is the rule.  Believe it or not, the Patriots actually had a fumble they recovered reversed earlier in that same season due to the tuck rule (which is why they knew about it).

The fact that they're only now looking at it 12 years later suggests the owners thought the rule was okay.


It is a stupid rule but another widely accepted fallacy of this play is that the rule was called correctly as it was written. In fact the rule as it was stated at the time would still have that play ruled a turnover:

NFL Rule 3, Section 22, Article 2, Note 2. When [an offensive] player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.

That last line is the key point here. Look at the pick below showing Woodson's hand before hitting the ball from Brady's. He has the ball back to his chest with both hands securing it (I know you can't see the other hand but Brady is right handed and he just pulled the ball back to himself so the right hand is there. This can be seen on the replay as well). Any way you want to read the rule, this is still a fumble.
2.bp.blogspot.com

To make matters worse, there are actually 2 blown calls on this play. As the ruling on the field was a fumble this means replay would have to show conclusively that the ball had not returned to Brady's body for it to be overturned. In Walt Coleman's defense the replay is as bang-bang as it gets and he did not have the advantage of still photography as seen above to clearly see Brady had both hands back on the ball. However this proves the replay was NOT conclusive as such the call on the field by rule have to stand as there is nothing on the replay that shows weather Brady had returned the ball to his posession for sure. Either way this is Oakland's ball with less than 2 minutes left and the Pats with no way to stop the clock. Game over.
 
2013-03-14 09:49:08 PM  
The NFL got the red, white and blue team to the Super Bowl after 9/11 AND got to f*ck over the Raiders in the process. Now that it's done, what's the point in having that rule?
 
2013-03-14 09:54:04 PM  
And yet that's still not the worst-officiated game in the playoffs of the decade.
 
2013-03-14 09:56:29 PM  

IAmRight: The NFL got the red, white and blue team to the Super Bowl after 9/11 AND got to f*ck over the Raiders in the process. Now that it's done, what's the point in having that rule?


"And, now that the team that is going to lose has allowed themselves to be introduced individually, as tradition mandates, the Patriots have elected TO BE INTRODUCED AS A TEAM!!!   A TEAM OF AMERICANS THAT BELIEVES IN FREEDOM AND AMERICA!!!  AS THE PATRIOTIC ROCK MUSIC PLAYS, HAIL YOUR AMERICAN PATRIOTS, DEFENDERS OF AMERICA!!!"

I think the blatant jingoistic symbolism and total lack of respect for the Rams was what pissed me off, and I've hated the Patriots ever since.

/The Rams never stood a chance
 
2013-03-14 10:04:16 PM  
Good it's a dumb rule.
 
2013-03-14 10:06:24 PM  

devlin carnate: 8 inches: As a Raider fan, that play still infuriates me.  If that had been called a fumble, the Raiders might have won the Superbowl and instead of banging Gisele tonight, Brady might have been washing my car.

Get over it, freakshow.

1. Consider it payback for 1976.
2.  The Raiders would've gone to the Superbowl, but they would've had zero chance against the Rams that year.  Gruden is an offensive specialist and would've tried to go toe-to-toe with Martz, which is exactly what Martz hoped for.  Instead, the Pats went and Belichick schemed for 2 weeks to realize the key was having Vrabel plant Marshall Faulk into the turf on as many early plays as possible to disrupt the Rams timing. videotaped the Rams' walkthroughs and practices so they knew what plays the Rams would run in the first half and could plan accordingly

You honestly think that would have ever crossed Gruden's mind at any time, until after Beichick showed the world how to beat the Rams?

Let it go.  The Raiders blew it.


FTFmy bitter Eagles fan self

/i know i know
 
2013-03-14 10:18:19 PM  
i1182.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-14 10:21:50 PM  
TheManofPA:

FTFmy bitter Eagles fan self


True story time. My Raider-4-Life buddy is cousins with one of the journeyman players on the Patriot team from back then. Super Bowl ends and after about 30 minutes, he calls up his cousin. The plan was that he wanted to coax his cousin into handing the phone to Tom Brady, where my buddy would have then said 'Great game, Tom. Congrats on the win. But your grandma's still dead'. *click*

The cousin pretty much saw through this cunning plan and foiled it. 'Uh...yeah. Tom's not here. Naw, man, I don't know where he is. I gotta go now...'

/My buddy got revenge on his cousin by telling his aunt 'Hey, Auntie. You know your son hung up on me when I tried to congratulate him for winning the Super Bowl?'
//Yeah, he can be a vengeful farker at times...
 
2013-03-14 10:35:20 PM  
Even as a long-time Broncos fan, I'll agree that was a serious screwjob to the Raiders.

Why the fark was this even a rule in the first place?  What purpose does it serve to say that a QB pulling the ball back after a pump fake is considered an incomplete pass?  His arm is no longer moving forward, so there's no way he's going to throw it.  Did someone think it would protect the QB?  Because that sure as hell isn't going to stop a defender from hitting the QB.

I've been convinced for the last 20 years that a lot of rules changes are solely implemented because the coaches on the Competition Committee hate turnovers, because they cost coaches jobs.
 
2013-03-14 10:45:29 PM  
/it's hard to be a Raiders fan
 
2013-03-14 10:48:24 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: TheManofPA:

FTFmy bitter Eagles fan self


True story time. My Raider-4-Life buddy is cousins with one of the journeyman players on the Patriot team from back then. Super Bowl ends and after about 30 minutes, he calls up his cousin. The plan was that he wanted to coax his cousin into handing the phone to Tom Brady, where my buddy would have then said 'Great game, Tom. Congrats on the win. But your grandma's still dead'. *click*

The cousin pretty much saw through this cunning plan and foiled it. 'Uh...yeah. Tom's not here. Naw, man, I don't know where he is. I gotta go now...'

/My buddy got revenge on his cousin by telling his aunt 'Hey, Auntie. You know your son hung up on me when I tried to congratulate him for winning the Super Bowl?'
//Yeah, he can be a vengeful farker at times...


If he's a Raiders fan I'm not at all surprised he sounds like a total douche.
 
2013-03-14 10:59:20 PM  

beantowndog: devlin carnate: 1. Consider it payback for 1976.


2. Vinitieri still had to kick the field goal DURING A SNOWSTORM AGAINST THE WIND TO TIE IT.
 
2013-03-14 11:02:54 PM  
So supposedly the Jets are looking at picking up Kevin Kolb when he's released by the Cardinals this week. That might be the one team that he would actually improve.

/Skimmed the Urlacher thread, so I might be late to the party
 
2013-03-14 11:09:09 PM  
davidphogan:
If he's a Raiders fan I'm not at all surprised he sounds like a total douche.

Get real. He was going to taunt a media-spoiled, overrated QB with mild trash talk. If you think that's harsh or 'being a douche', you've got no idea what players say to each other on the field. Being reminded that his grandmother died that year is hardly the worst thing Brady would have heard.
 
2013-03-14 11:18:18 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: davidphogan:
If he's a Raiders fan I'm not at all surprised he sounds like a total douche.

Get real. He was going to taunt a media-spoiled, overrated QB with mild trash talk. If you think that's harsh or 'being a douche', you've got no idea what players say to each other on the field. Being reminded that his grandmother died that year is hardly the worst thing Brady would have heard.


Nope, your friend is still a douche. Trying to use his cousin then crying to his auntie because his cousin caught him being a douche means he's a douche.
 
2013-03-14 11:26:26 PM  

basemetal: /it's hard to be a Raiders fan


Didn't used to be.
 
2013-03-14 11:50:57 PM  
davidphogan:

You have no idea how some family dynamics work, do you? Getting relatives in trouble with their moms is a high art form in terms of practical joking with a lot of families. Everyone does it, and everyone laughs about it at the family reunions, sometimes with some added punches to the arms. And you know what? They still have their family issues, but they're a heck of a lot less dysfunctional than more uptight families; because they're more honest with their feelings and their love for each other.
 
2013-03-14 11:51:36 PM  
UNC_Samurai:
Why the fark was this even a rule in the first place?  What purpose does it serve to say that a QB pulling the ball back after a pump fake is considered an incomplete pass?

THIS is a great great question.
/got nuthin
Oh wait--google & wikipedia....   Hmmm.
Ok, so the Tuck rule was created because officials were having a hard time determining what was an incomplete pass, and what was a fumble, and this was to make it less of a judgement call and more cut and dry.
/was happier with nuthin
 
2013-03-14 11:57:24 PM  

Incorrigible Astronaut: So supposedly the Jets are looking at picking up Kevin Kolb when he's released by the Cardinals this week. That might be the one team that he would actually improve.

/Skimmed the Urlacher thread, so I might be late to the party


I dont get why the Jets would want Kolb, they already signed Garrard.
 
2013-03-15 12:08:30 AM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: davidphogan:

You have no idea how some family dynamics work, do you? Getting relatives in trouble with their moms is a high art form in terms of practical joking with a lot of families. Everyone does it, and everyone laughs about it at the family reunions, sometimes with some added punches to the arms. And you know what? They still have their family issues, but they're a heck of a lot less dysfunctional than more uptight families; because they're more honest with their feelings and their love for each other.


One's a Raiders fan and the other played for the Patriots.  I have to assume the entire family was just a bunch of douchebags.
 
2013-03-15 12:12:35 AM  

roflmaonow: Incorrigible Astronaut: So supposedly the Jets are looking at picking up Kevin Kolb when he's released by the Cardinals this week. That might be the one team that he would actually improve.

/Skimmed the Urlacher thread, so I might be late to the party

I dont get why the Jets would want Kolb, they already signed Garrard.


They want to pay Sanchize big bucks to be 3rd string instead of just 2nd?
 
2013-03-15 12:15:50 AM  

davidphogan: RoyFokker'sGhost: davidphogan:

You have no idea how some family dynamics work, do you? Getting relatives in trouble with their moms is a high art form in terms of practical joking with a lot of families. Everyone does it, and everyone laughs about it at the family reunions, sometimes with some added punches to the arms. And you know what? They still have their family issues, but they're a heck of a lot less dysfunctional than more uptight families; because they're more honest with their feelings and their love for each other.

One's a Raiders fan and the other played for the Patriots.  I have to assume the entire family was just a bunch of douchebags.


Whatever. Thanks for giving me something to do for my last hour of work and keeping me from falling asleep;it was totally dead tonight.
 
2013-03-15 12:15:52 AM  

Incorrigible Astronaut: So supposedly the Jets are looking at picking up Kevin Kolb when he's released by the Cardinals this week. That might be the one team that he would actually improve.

/Skimmed the Urlacher thread, so I might be late to the party


Given the number of sacks the Chargers racked up on McElroy they should really focus on the offensive line before worrying about getting a decent QB killed back there.  Kolb already has shown he's not very good with a bad offensive line.  I'd hope he'd be smart enough to be backup elsewhere rather than get killed in NY.
 
2013-03-15 12:16:53 AM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: davidphogan: RoyFokker'sGhost: davidphogan:

You have no idea how some family dynamics work, do you? Getting relatives in trouble with their moms is a high art form in terms of practical joking with a lot of families. Everyone does it, and everyone laughs about it at the family reunions, sometimes with some added punches to the arms. And you know what? They still have their family issues, but they're a heck of a lot less dysfunctional than more uptight families; because they're more honest with their feelings and their love for each other.

One's a Raiders fan and the other played for the Patriots.  I have to assume the entire family was just a bunch of douchebags.

Whatever. Thanks for giving me something to do for my last hour of work and keeping me from falling asleep;it was totally dead tonight.


You're welcome.  They both might be really nice people, but I hate the Raiders and I hate the Pats, so you're just not going to convince me otherwise unless I meet them.
 
2013-03-15 12:26:48 AM  

born_yesterday: IAmRight: The NFL got the red, white and blue team to the Super Bowl after 9/11 AND got to f*ck over the Raiders in the process. Now that it's done, what's the point in having that rule?

"And, now that the team that is going to lose has allowed themselves to be introduced individually, as tradition mandates, the Patriots have elected TO BE INTRODUCED AS A TEAM!!!   A TEAM OF AMERICANS THAT BELIEVES IN FREEDOM AND AMERICA!!!  AS THE PATRIOTIC ROCK MUSIC PLAYS, HAIL YOUR AMERICAN PATRIOTS, DEFENDERS OF AMERICA!!!"

I think the blatant jingoistic symbolism and total lack of respect for the Rams was what pissed me off, and I've hated the Patriots ever since.

/The Rams never stood a chance


Must be why the rams just let them march downfield in the closing minute and a half of the fourth to allow for the dramatic field goal winner, they were in onit too.

Moron
 
2013-03-15 12:35:58 AM  

basemetal: /it's hard to be a Raiders fan


Harder still when we get to see Carson Palmer decaying before our eyes for the exorbitant price of anything over veteran minimum $13M, three top guys connected to them with the #3 pick get their stock shot to shiat by the end of the Combine, the defense might be the worst since before Al was coaching, McFadden's inevitable injury by week 7 that will kill the rest of his reason... at least the Chiefs will find a way to still suck.

/And lord willing Peyton will find another way to suck in the playoffs.
 
2013-03-15 12:55:58 AM  

basemetal: /it's hard to be a Raiders fan


Don't worry dude. Now that the team has entered Cleveland territory, we can settle into a grim, low-level disappointment that's consistent from year to year. As opposed to the rage brought on by the Raiders teams of the late 90s/early 00s that were supposed to be good but inexplicably f*cked up every single season. The Tuck Bowl was the angriest a sporting event had ever made me, with the exception of Game 3 of the 2003 ALDS between Oakland and Boston.
 
2013-03-15 01:03:08 AM  

Ken VeryBigLiar: Harder still when we get to see Carson Palmer decaying before our eyes for the exorbitant price of


I didn't realize they'd save $6 million by cutting him.  They have $19 million of cap space as it is, so unless they have some big moves in mind (which, it's definitely possible they're seriously looking at trading down for talent or extra picks) it seems risky not to give him another chance if you can build up the offense a little around him.
 
2013-03-15 01:05:42 AM  

the1hatman: It is a stupid rule but another widely accepted fallacy of this play is that the rule was called correctly as it was written. In fact the rule as it was stated at the time would still have that play ruled a turnover:

NFL Rule 3, Section 22, Article 2, Note 2. When [an offensive] player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.

That last line is the key point here. Look at the pick below showing Woodson's hand before hitting the ball from Brady's. He has the ball back to his chest with both hands securing it (I know you can't see the other hand but Brady is right handed and he just pulled the ball back to himself so the right hand is there. This can be seen on the replay as well). Any way you want to read the rule, this is still a fumble.


A thousand times this.  People weren't pissed because the rule existed, they were pissed because it was called wrong in favor of New England on a crucial play.
 
2013-03-15 01:26:28 AM  
drunksnacks.net
 
2013-03-15 01:30:53 AM  
We all knew that the Tuck Rule would be changing. This is far more interesting:

One other proposal includes not allowing a runner to initiate contact with the crown of his helmet when outside the tackle box. This is sure to be a hot topic.

This is going to reduce the value of a lot of nimble backs and create another penalty like holding that can be called whenever the ref wants to.
 
2013-03-15 02:54:08 AM  

madgonad: We all knew that the Tuck Rule would be changing. This is far more interesting:

One other proposal includes not allowing a runner to initiate contact with the crown of his helmet when outside the tackle box. This is sure to be a hot topic.

This is going to reduce the value of a lot of nimble backs and create another penalty like holding that can be called whenever the ref wants to.


Also known as the "Adrian Peterson Rule"
 
2013-03-15 02:59:57 AM  

VvonderJesus: madgonad: We all knew that the Tuck Rule would be changing. This is far more interesting:

One other proposal includes not allowing a runner to initiate contact with the crown of his helmet when outside the tackle box. This is sure to be a hot topic.

This is going to reduce the value of a lot of nimble backs and create another penalty like holding that can be called whenever the ref wants to.

Also known as the "Adrian Peterson Rule"


Given what happened in the playoffs, they may have to call it the Jacquizz Rodgers rule.

/like he'd care about using his helmet, anyway

i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-15 03:19:21 AM  

8 inches: As a Raider fan, that play still infuriates me.  If that had been called a fumble, the Raiders might have won the Superbowl and instead of banging Gisele tonight, Brady might have been washing my car.


Please, the man still has a degree from Michigan.  He couldn't get a job washing cars...
 
2013-03-15 03:57:49 AM  
I hate the Raiders more than anyone save for ex-Raiders coaches, but they were screwed. Not that I'm terribly upset by it.
 
Azz
2013-03-15 04:54:06 AM  

Cagey B: ALDS


Remind me again-

Was that the game where the ultra douche douche Eric Byrnes missed to tag the plate while showing his pissy/mentally-deranged side by shoving one of the Sox players?

/Oakland deserves everything it gets
 
2013-03-15 06:39:03 AM  
Also in the list of rule changes: The league would change the rules regarding illegally throwing the challenge flag. This is in response to last season's Houston Texans touchdown could not be reviewed after Detroit Lions coach Jim Schwartz illegally throw[sic] a flag.

So it's still a penalty/loss of the timeout for throwing the flag when the clock is already stopped and the play is to be automatically reviewed? I understand assessing a penalty for illegally throwing a flag after a play -- a coach can gain an advantage by stopping play (like having a player fake an injury), but what conceivable advantage is to there a coach who instinctively throws a flag in the Schwartz situation? Just pick up the flag and get on with it.
 
2013-03-15 08:10:41 AM  

davidphogan: I didn't realize they'd save $6 million by cutting him.  They have $19 million of cap space as it is, so unless they have some big moves in mind (which, it's definitely possible they're seriously looking at trading down for talent or extra picks) it seems risky not to give him another chance if you can build up the offense a little around him.


They would but the way I hear it told it that Reggie is acting like he has a $90M cap because of all the dead money still on the books for this year.  So the way he's operating with the limited scope in Free Agency it's probably more like half of that to him.  It's a bad sign when the period of drawing out the poison from the bad rookie deals of the old CBA takes to years. It's even worse when your former coach and de facto GM decides to pay six times sticker price for a guy who hasn't been the same since Kimo von Oelhoffen submarined him.  Hopefully Mark listens to Madden and Ron Wolf and gives McKenzie and Allen at least two more seasons to the team off of their back.

/Hue better hope he gets a police escort whenever he comes back to Oakland.
 
2013-03-15 08:28:18 AM  
I dunno... I think the play was called correctly by the letter of the rule. Now, it's an awful rule and deserves to be stricken from the book, but the ref called that correctly. The Brady tuck was a main stage opportunity to show how dumb the rule was, and I'm not sure why it took 12 years.
 
Displayed 50 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report