Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Blandino defends ruling on Boyd fumble
#39
(09-19-2016, 02:10 PM)jowczarski Wrote: Based on his explanation, if the initial ruling had been a catch -- that also would have been upheld due to lack of proof otherwise. This goes back a few years ago where basically when there's a fumble/interception/touchdown, the default is to call it that and let the play play out as opposed to blowing a whistle, figuring replay will validate the call or overturn it.


That is total BS and you know it. It was a catch and his knee was down end of story. Simple and everyone knows it, that is why they are "defending" it. 

It isn't fun watching the Bengals and Steelers play anymore. We can't execute a game plan because we are inside our 10 yard line on every drive. Part of that was Erickson, but shady ass penalties always creep up on special teams for some reason. Have you ever seen 3 officials throw flags on 3 different players for fouls on one kickoff before? Not only that they threw them about .5 seconds after the kick was made. There was not enough time for all that to go down.

You know something is wrong when we always hold Rotten to his worst 2 games of the year and we shut down Brown and we still lose. It is just ridiculous.
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
RE: Blandino defends ruling on Boyd fumble - bengalhoel - 09-19-2016, 07:56 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)