(01-15-2016, 06:11 PM)Beaker Wrote: Twice. And if answering you the same way each time you answer the question is backtracking, then you better get out that same dictionary you used to look up pithy and discover what backtracking really means.
Wow, you're either incredibly stupid, trolling or both. A step involved your foot leaving and then subsequently touching the ground. This clearly happened four times after he caught the ball. Please spare us more of your pathetic denials.
(01-15-2016, 06:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Wow, you're either incredibly stupid, trolling or both. A step involved your foot leaving and then subsequently touching the ground. This clearly happened four times after he caught the ball. Please spare us more of your pathetic denials.
I won't have to if you would spare us your insistence on ghost steps.
(01-15-2016, 06:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Wow, you're either incredibly stupid, trolling or both. A step involved your foot leaving and then subsequently touching the ground. This clearly happened four times after he caught the ball. Please spare us more of your pathetic denials.
Bengal fans just know how to read and apply it is all...
Also on the Brown hit he didnt catch ball but it was touched which means contact is allowed and how is he a defenseless receiver if he didnt catch anything.
(01-15-2016, 06:22 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Bengal fans just know how to read and apply it is all...
Some of them do, some of them clearly don't.
Quote:Also on the Brown hit he didnt catch ball but it was touched which means contact is allowed and how is he a defenseless receiver if he didnt catch anything.
(01-15-2016, 06:22 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Bengal fans just know how to read and apply it is all...
Also on the Brown hit he didnt catch ball but it was touched which means contact is allowed and how is he a defenseless receiver if he didnt catch anything.
Defenseless means he can't defend himself because he's in the process or has just caught the ball. An actual reception or not, has no bearing.
"The measure of a man's intelligence can be seen in the length of his argument."
(01-15-2016, 06:22 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Bengal fans just know how to read and apply it is all...
Also on the Brown hit he didnt catch ball but it was touched which means contact is allowed and how is he a defenseless receiver if he didnt catch anything.
Guess you aren't one of those who knows how to read and apply....if such bungal fans exist
You know my main grievance in all this was the inconsistency of the refs, especially in this game, but also all season.
This hit by nelson on daniels was neither flagged, nor fined:
But this hit by Shawn Williams on wheaton was:
Daniels doesn't even get the chance to take steps, wheaton does. And Williams' shoulder does make glancing contact with wheaton's facemask, but wheaton clearly ducks his head as he knows he is about to get crushed. And the refs called wheaton a defenseless WR, said nothing about contact to the head. But in those two situations, it is clear that daniels is the more defenseless of the two. The daniels hit not flagged, the Williams hit flagged.
And if you think about all the arguing about the happenings in this game, I can't recall too many people sticking up for Burfict's hit on brownn. Most concede he clipped brown's head and should be flagged. But to me it feels like the Bengals were on the short end of every call the refs made that was a judgement call. That's what was so frustrating.
(01-17-2016, 11:08 AM)Beaker Wrote: You know my main grievance in all this was the inconsistency of the refs, especially in this game, but also all season.
This hit by nelson on daniels was neither flagged, nor fined:
But this hit by Shawn Williams on wheaton was:
Daniels doesn't even get the chance to take steps, wheaton does. And Williams' shoulder does make glancing contact with wheaton's facemask, but wheaton clearly ducks his head as he knows he is about to get crushed. And the refs called wheaton a defenseless WR, said nothing about contact to the head. But in those two situations, it is clear that daniels is the more defenseless of the two. The daniels hit not flagged, the Williams hit flagged.
And if you think about all the arguing about the happenings in this game, I can't recall too many people sticking up for Burfict's hit on brownn. Most concede he clipped brown's head and should be flagged. But to me it feels like the Bengals were on the short end of every call the refs made that was a judgement call. That's what was so frustrating.
You will get ZERO argument out of me about the inconsistency from crew to crew and official to official.
Warning: Reading signatures may hurt your feelings.
(01-17-2016, 11:08 AM)Beaker Wrote: You know my main grievance in all this was the inconsistency of the refs, especially in this game, but also all season.
This hit by nelson on daniels was neither flagged, nor fined:
But this hit by Shawn Williams on wheaton was:
Daniels doesn't even get the chance to take steps, wheaton does. And Williams' shoulder does make glancing contact with wheaton's facemask, but wheaton clearly ducks his head as he knows he is about to get crushed. And the refs called wheaton a defenseless WR, said nothing about contact to the head. But in those two situations, it is clear that daniels is the more defenseless of the two. The daniels hit not flagged, the Williams hit flagged.
And if you think about all the arguing about the happenings in this game, I can't recall too many people sticking up for Burfict's hit on brownn. Most concede he clipped brown's head and should be flagged. But to me it feels like the Bengals were on the short end of every call the refs made that was a judgement call. That's what was so frustrating.
Reggie hit Daniels in the torso. You're allowed to hit a defenseless receiver as long as you don't contact his head and neck area.
Wheaton had actually become a runner. 3 steps and he braced for the contact. The flag was wrong on that play, though he did contact him in the head/neck area, he was a runner at that time.
"The measure of a man's intelligence can be seen in the length of his argument."
Let me add that after the Amendola hit last night i can't find a copy of the video that shows the scrum after where he threw a punch at a Chiefs player.
Automatic ejection for that...normally.
Warning: Reading signatures may hurt your feelings.
(01-17-2016, 11:40 AM)GMDino Wrote: Let me add that after the Amendola hit last night i can't find a copy of the video that shows the scrum after where he threw a punch at a Chiefs player.
Automatic ejection for that...normally.
Pats got several bad calls including the Brady run that clearly crossed the goal line. The Pats are a great organization and don't need the refs to win for them.
Free Agency ain't over until it is over.
First 6 years BB - 41 wins and 54 losses with 1-1 playoff record with 2 teams Browns and Pats
(01-17-2016, 12:00 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Pats got several bad calls including the Brady run that clearly crossed the goal line. The Pats are a great organization and don't need the refs to win for them.
Yeah he never put the ball over the pylon....good call.
Do you honestly watch games or just make stuff up?
Warning: Reading signatures may hurt your feelings.
(01-17-2016, 12:02 PM)GMDino Wrote: Yeah he never put the ball over the pylon....good call.
Do you honestly watch games or just make stuff up?
Please tell us how many marginal calls went against the Steelers last week and get back to us. Like I said, Pats are a solid organization and don't need refs to insure victory
Free Agency ain't over until it is over.
First 6 years BB - 41 wins and 54 losses with 1-1 playoff record with 2 teams Browns and Pats
(01-17-2016, 12:15 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Please tell us how many marginal calls went against the Steelers last week and get back to us. Like I said, Pats are a solid organization and don't need refs to insure victory
(01-17-2016, 12:15 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Please tell us how many marginal calls went against the Steelers last week and get back to us. Like I said, Pats are a solid organization and don't need refs to insure victory
You also said that was a TD when it was not. Clearly.
Warning: Reading signatures may hurt your feelings.
(01-17-2016, 02:51 PM)GMDino Wrote: You also said that was a TD when it was not. Clearly.
Yo stated that Porter was allowed on the field but the fine says you were wrong. I would have given him the TD, you would not have, not the first time they blew a replay call. Did you see the Bryant catch that was a drop by the rules
Free Agency ain't over until it is over.
First 6 years BB - 41 wins and 54 losses with 1-1 playoff record with 2 teams Browns and Pats
(01-17-2016, 04:36 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Yo stated that Porter was allowed on the field but the fine says you were wrong. I would have given him the TD, you would not have, not the first time they blew a replay call. Did you see the Bryant catch that was a drop by the rules
I did?
Or did I say coaches come out on the field for injuries all the time?
You would have given Brady a TD that everyone in the world knows was not one? You really don't watch football, do you?
Yes, please explain how "by the rules" Bryant's catch was a "drop".
You should watch the games instead of relying on your sources.
Warning: Reading signatures may hurt your feelings.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
![[Image: m6moCD1.png]](http://i.imgur.com/m6moCD1.png)
![[Image: Cz_eGI3UUAASnqC.jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cz_eGI3UUAASnqC.jpg)
