(01-10-2016, 02:44 AM)michaelsean Wrote: True.  I can't recall them ever acknowleding a dirty hit.  

Go be mad somewhere else.

(01-10-2016, 02:45 AM)6andcounting Wrote: Go be mad somewhere else.

That wasn't mad.  

(01-10-2016, 02:44 AM)6andcounting Wrote: Steelers had a TD taken off the board because of a blown call. Whine about that.

This is another one i would negative rep. You belong on one of those Pitt forums with the rest of the idiots. 

(01-10-2016, 02:44 AM)michaelsean Wrote: True.  I can't recall them ever acknowleding a dirty hit.  

I thought maybe Shazier would get flagged, but I accepted Mike Carey's assessment of the play.  

(01-10-2016, 02:55 AM)JS-Steelerfan Wrote: I thought maybe Shazier would get flagged, but I accepted Mike Carey's assessment of the play.  

lol. Weak.

(01-10-2016, 02:51 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: This is another one i would negative rep. You belong on one of those Pitt forums with the rest of the idiots. 

Well, you belong in JN.

(01-10-2016, 03:00 AM)6andcounting Wrote: Well, you belong in JN.

Now that was dirty.

(01-10-2016, 03:01 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Now that was dirty.

Didn't bother me a bit. He's too lazy to do anything but fall back on worn out, lazy tripe. As long as he's been on these boards, that's sad.

Scratch that. He's too stupid.

(01-10-2016, 02:41 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Ummm, no.

Umm yes. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000238662/article/new-nfl-rules-crownofhelmet-change-to-help-runner-defender

(01-10-2016, 02:55 AM)JS-Steelerfan Wrote: I thought maybe Shazier would get flagged, but I accepted Mike Carey's assessment of the play.  

Without tying to start a fight about who is dirtier. I don't understand how the helmet to helmet hit on Gio was not called, but Shawn Williams shoulder to chest hit was called. I know they said since Gio took 2 steps he was a runner, but Shazier hit with the crown of his helmet. Bryant (or Wheaton...I forget who) came down from the catch with 2 steps also...but he was not a runner? I don't get the difference.

(01-10-2016, 03:04 AM)treee Wrote: Umm yes.http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000238662/article/new-nfl-rules-crownofhelmet-change-to-help-runner-defender

Ummm, again, NO


"Incidental contact by the helmet of a runner or a tackler against an opponent would not be deemed a foul."

(01-10-2016, 03:06 AM)Beaker Wrote: Without tying to start a fight about who is dirtier. I don't understand how the helmet to helmet hit on Gio was not called, but Shawn Williams shoulder to chest hit was called. I know they said since Gio took 2 steps he was a runner, but Shazier hit with the crown of his helmet. Bryant (or Wheaton...I forget who) came down from the catch with 2 steps also...but he was not a runner? I don't get the difference.

They're two different penalties, but they're both penalties none the less.

Williams is contact to a defenseless receiver in the head or neck area and Shazier's is leading with the crown of his helmet.

(01-10-2016, 03:08 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Ummm, again, NO


"Incidental contact by the helmet of a runner or a tackler against an opponent would not be deemed a foul."

Once again your reading comprehension shines through. Where did I imply otherwise? Also, that was not incidental. 

(01-10-2016, 03:09 AM)treee Wrote: Once again your reading comprehension shines through. Where did I imply otherwise? Also, that was not incidental. 

Obviously it was.  It wasn't a penalty. It's very rarely called.

And if you're not implying it wasn't incidental, then you're not implying it was a penalty.  Seems I'm not the one with a reading comprehension problem.

(01-10-2016, 01:56 AM)JS-Steelerfan Wrote: I have no words.  That was by far the most unusual game I've ever seen.

Exactly what I tweeted.

And I am NEVER at a loss for words.

A few quick thoughts:

The Steelers wasted opportunities for TD's that hurt them later.  That fumble at the end was amazing.  Burfict and Jones blowing it?  Amazing again.

I never use the phrase "Bungles"...but this was the bungliest I have ever seen a game lost.

(01-10-2016, 03:08 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Ummm, again, NO


"Incidental contact by the helmet of a runner or a tackler against an opponent would not be deemed a foul."

“The first rule change prohibits a runner or tackler from initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet outside the tackle box,” 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/06/nfl-officiating-video-stresses-new-crown-of-the-helmet-rule/



Educate yourself, dumbass.

(01-10-2016, 03:09 AM)treee Wrote: Once again your reading comprehension shines through. Where did I imply otherwise? Also, that was not incidental. 

He is truly one stupid human being. 

(01-10-2016, 03:12 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Obviously it was.  It wasn't a penalty.  It's very rarely called.

And if you're not implying it wasn't incidental, then you're not implying it was a penalty.  Seems I'm not the one with a reading comprehension problem.

You should attempt to be less dumb. 

Pulling your head out of your ass would be a good first step. 

(01-10-2016, 03:13 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: “The first rule change prohibits a runner or tackler from initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet outside the tackle box,” 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/06/nfl-officiating-video-stresses-new-crown-of-the-helmet-rule/



Educate yourself, dumbass.

Wahhhhh....."I don't understand the rules but that won't stop me from crying the refs screwed my bungles"

Incidental contact.  Look up the definition, moron.

(01-10-2016, 03:15 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: You should attempt to be less dumb. 

Pulling your head out of your ass would be a good first step. 

How do you even remember your password drunk as you usually are, much less type it?

This entire forum is full of your idiocy the past few weeks.  Congrats - you make retards look smart.