+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias (/thread-4555.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - reuben.ahmed - 01-11-2016
I think the Bengals are going to turn into the Miami Heat of football, when Lebron joined and they became one of the most hated sports teams ever. Actually, I doubt it will get that bad, but internally I think that might help motivate them, if they already don't have enough to prove.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - sonofstat - 01-11-2016
Who was the TV announcer?
He was atrocious and really biased. It was like he had his position, statement on the bengals written before the game ...unfortunately we gave him ample opportunity to then roll his opinions out.
It was going on the whole game but the worst was when he continually kept going back to the Burfict sack of Big Ben and was desperately trying to imply it was a penalty when it was perfectly legal.
As for Burfict on Antonio Brown...clear penalty and talking of his intent and what he was trying to do is irrelevant. The league says avoid head shots in that situation and he did not/could not.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - djam - 01-11-2016
What bothers me is I grew up watching hits like that all the time. For AB, it would've been viewed as unfortunate if he got hurt and nothing more. Play over, move on --BUT, not in todays NFL.
I have no issue with the non call on the hit against Gio, if they didnt call the hit against Brown. But the fact remains, they issued a double standard in front of the entire world with those two plays. The flag against Jones, IMO, was the ref doing his part to make a little extra money for the game. Nobody is that stupid. If a ref can miss that, he should'nt have ever been a ref.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - Sovereign Nation - 01-11-2016
(01-11-2016, 08:45 AM)djam Wrote: What bothers me is I grew up watching hits like that all the time. For AB, it would've been viewed as unfortunate if he got hurt and nothing more. Play over, move on --BUT, not in todays NFL.
I have no issue with the non call on the hit against Gio, if they didnt call the hit against Brown. But the fact remains, they issued a double standard in front of the entire world with those two plays. The flag against Jones, IMO, was the ref doing his part to make a little extra money for the game. Nobody is that stupid. If a ref can miss that, he should'nt have ever been a ref.
Here is the thing though. Sure they played the double standard for the entire world to see with those 2 plays. However, the world won't see the double standard. As far as most non Bengals fans, we are the dirty, cheap shot players, just look at the penalties.
Even if we as Bengals fans, competently explain that Shazier's hit was illegal and that if the refs don't call that, then they shouldn't have called Burfict for his hit either, it won't matter.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - CJD - 01-11-2016
The problem is the Steelers are much better actors.
Brown doesn't flop to the ground, limp as a fish out of water, that penalty isn't called.
If he takes the hit like a man, gets up and walks to the sideline, people would realize that there was nothing illegal about momentum carrying a player's shoulder into the receiver's body.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - Chris - 01-11-2016
(01-11-2016, 04:43 AM)Psycholomonkey Wrote: Why is nobody talking about Munchak pulling our player's hair?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xveLI0cbqg
Honestly my biggest disappointment of the game was the fans not storming the field, truly disappointed. If ever there was a time . . .
If there is anytime It would have been appropriate for us to storm the field that would have been the time. The problem was that we were so emotionally and physically wrecked, we just didn't have anything left.
When leaving even the squealer fans were silent. Very different than last time when they were squealing like idiots. It was weird.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - Ickyshuffle - 01-11-2016
(01-11-2016, 04:43 AM)Psycholomonkey Wrote: Why is nobody talking about Munchak pulling our player's hair?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xveLI0cbqg
Honestly my biggest disappointment of the game was the fans not storming the field, truly disappointed. If ever there was a time . . .
Freaking block in the back that was missed on 84 too right at the beginning.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - Johnny Cupcakes - 01-11-2016
I have never before complained about the referees and blamed them for a loss. I actually usually take up for them and make fun of those that suggest that they were leaning one way. This game completely changed my view on that though.
- There was a hit on Eifert early on in the game that should have been flagged for targeting. TEs don't get a lot of calls like that go their way though.
- The hit that Shawn Williams put on Bryant early in the game was exactly how they want people to tackle. Super clean hit, yet it got flagged.
- The hit that Ryan Shazier put on Bernard was mega-dirty and if the refs would have called it correctly, it would have negated the fumble.
- The hit that Burfict put on Brown was close, but in my opinion he was only flagged because of the name and number on his jersey, and because it looked like a hard hit.
- Joey Porter should have been flagged for interacting with Bengals players when he shouldn't have been on the field.
- I have seen nothing from Pacman Jones that suggests he should have been flagged on that play....Really, I don't even know what the flag is for.
The league should admit their wrongdoings and hits like the ones in question should become challengeable.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - Ickyshuffle - 01-11-2016
More proof the refs had it out for Burfict/Bengals is on the steelers first drive. It was a run play behind the Left Guard and Burfict broke thru slinging the runner down behind the line of scrimmage. It was a simple tackle that happens multiple times a game for every team but one ref instantly runs up to VB and shoves his arms away and gives him a look like he did something wrong.
I think the refs had it out for us because how much heat they took last game for their terrible officiating.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - XenoMorph - 01-11-2016
(01-11-2016, 01:09 AM)tlotharw Wrote: Our fans pissed on opposing ans and threw bottles at an injured player.
1 fan threw a bottle... Doesnt make it a trend
They are lucky 60,000 didnt storm the field and quarter the ref like what happens in soccer.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - West Union KennyG - 01-11-2016
I seriously believe this video should be required viewing before anyone posts any more completely ridiculous posts referring to Burfict and intent and usage of words like targeting, dirty, intentional, etc. It's clear to me that anyone referring to Burfict intentionally doing anything on this play obviously has no clue what they are talking about and has disqualified themselves from reasonable discourse.
With that said, it's still a penalty. But you cannot conclude anything from that play that Burfict was intentionally doing anything. What's more, when juxtaposed with the Shazier hit, Shazier is the one out of control and should be suspended if anyone. As the dude hits Bernard he has his head straight down and clearly launches him in chinstraps with the crown of his helmet. How that is reviewed and called a fumble is beyond me. That should've put us 15 yards closer (and still w/o arguably our best running back because of clear targeting on that play... not at all clear targeting by Burfict, which is absolutely ridiculous!)!
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - Aquapod770 - 01-11-2016
(01-11-2016, 11:56 AM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: I have never before complained about the referees and blamed them for a loss. I actually usually take up for them and make fun of those that suggest that they were leaning one way. This game completely changed my view on that though.
- There was a hit on Eifert early on in the game that should have been flagged for targeting. TEs don't get a lot of calls like that go their way though.
- The hit that Shawn Williams put on Bryant early in the game was exactly how they want people to tackle. Super clean hit, yet it got flagged.
- The hit that Ryan Shazier put on Bernard was mega-dirty and if the refs would have called it correctly, it would have negated the fumble.
- The hit that Burfict put on Brown was close, but in my opinion he was only flagged because of the name and number on his jersey, and because it looked like a hard hit.
- Joey Porter should have been flagged for interacting with Bengals players when he shouldn't have been on the field.
- I have seen nothing from Pacman Jones that suggests he should have been flagged on that play....Really, I don't even know what the flag is for.
The league should admit their wrongdoings and hits like the ones in question should become challengeable.
Bill Belicheck proposed giving each team 2 extra challenges just for penalties (or blatant no-calls like the Bernard hit). This needs to happen.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - West Union KennyG - 01-11-2016
(01-11-2016, 03:10 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: Bill Belicheck proposed giving each team 2 extra challenges just for penalties (or blatant no-calls like the Bernard hit). This needs to happen.
Well, as we've seen, it can affect the outcome of games.
I'm not opposed to that suggestion at all.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - GreenCornBengal - 01-11-2016
(01-11-2016, 05:35 AM)BigSeph Wrote: Burfict was in a bad spot, no question about it.
If he wanted to deliver a demolishing blow to Antonio Brown, he could have done it. Tucking his elbow to his side and running beside Brown shows Burfict was going fullspeed, saw the pass wasn't caught, and tried to pull up. Brown got pushed into Burfict's shoulder, just like you said Kenny.
Shazier on the other hand intentionally lowered the top of his helmet to spear Gio with it.
Shazier - penalty (unnecessary roughness, crown of helmet)
Williams - no penalty
Burfict - penalty (unnecessary roughness, defenseless receiver)
Jones - no penalty (or contact with official, offset by a Porter penalty)
Porter - penalty (unsportsmanlike conduct)
That's how it should have gone. Burfict didn't do anything wrong but if calling it by the letter of the law, his hit on Brown was a penalty. Only thing Burfict could have done would have been to leap sideways toward the endzone, but I don't think he had much time to think.
Yep, that's how it is. That is exactly how it should have been called and that's why people were upset. You can't miss a blatant helmet to helmet launch like Shaziers.. turn it into a fumble and not expect the fans to go horseshit wild.
I have been one of the most patient fans this year... had faith we would pull it back in Seattle and every other game watched every second...
Last Saturday I turned it off after the Gio hit. I have a temper and couldn't handle it. I can imagine how everyone at the stadium felt with no where to go.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - 3wt - 01-11-2016
(01-11-2016, 06:33 AM)TKUHL Wrote: I am certain now that the first game of our 2016 season will be against Pitt.
Could easily see that. Another example of the NFL's double standards. It's all about money.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - jcfreeman0 - 01-11-2016
Heres my input/argument. #55 takes less than 2 steps before hitting #84. Per NFL rules in order to maintain a catch you have to take at least 2 steps and make a football move. How the hell is a linebacker going to react to a tipped pass while coming full speed assuming #84 going to catch that ball on arguably the biggest play of the game to that point, going to not make contact in less time than it takes of making an NFL catch? He doesnt know its a tipped pass until less than 2 steps before making contact. Hell he might not have even known it was tipped at game speed while wearing a helmet and locked in on the receiver. He could have killed #84 had he wanted to but he pulled his shoulder in to avoid helmet to helmet contact. Not only that, but CLH shoved #84 into #55 path. Watch it at game speed, not slowed down media speed while spilling their own narrative bias. This shows game speed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKln2T6UYZs
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - WestCoastBengalsFan - 01-11-2016
The problem is Burfict ran his mouth to the refs the entire game and was involved in nearly every scuffle that happened after a play. When you're so visible and constantly part of the interactions you're going to have things like this happen to you even when you're trying to pull back and not make a hit on a player. I just don't understand why he can't just play football, he's always been this way and just has anger/control issues. Just ridiculous to make yourself an easy target for the refs when you could just let your playing do the talking instead of your mouth/emotions.
RE: Video evidence of referee and announcer bias - ochocincos - 01-11-2016
(01-11-2016, 07:21 AM)sonofstat Wrote: Who was the TV announcer?
He was atrocious and really biased. It was like he had his position, statement on the bengals written before the game ...unfortunately we gave him ample opportunity to then roll his opinions out.
It was going on the whole game but the worst was when he continually kept going back to the Burfict sack of Big Ben and was desperately trying to imply it was a penalty when it was perfectly legal.
As for Burfict on Antonio Brown...clear penalty and talking of his intent and what he was trying to do is irrelevant. The league says avoid head shots in that situation and he did not/could not.
Jim Nantz and Phil Simms. Simms is one of the worst.