+- 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: Think the refs were biased? (/thread-4577.html)
RE: Think the refs were biased? - J24 - 01-11-2016
The NFL could have prevented all of this if they suspended a guy who threatened to kill one of our players. Seriously that's what started this mess and they did nothing about it.
RE: Think the refs were biased? - bengals67 - 01-11-2016
(01-11-2016, 06:46 PM)J24 Wrote: The NFL could have prevented all of this if they suspended a guy who threatened to kill one of our players. Seriously that's what started this mess and they did nothing about it.
Amen brother.
Game completely deteriorated after the ridiculous no-call on the Shazier hit.
If Burfict had done that he would have been ejected on the spot.
NFL needs to investigate if Brown was hurt. He wasn't and faked an injury. The ref did not throw the flag after the play but only after Brown lay motionless of the ground for a couple of seconds.
Of course we will never hear anything more about whether Brown was hurt, faked the injury to draw a flag to get in field goal range, and he will certainly have a miraculous recovery by next weekend.
I also want to state that calling the play Burfict made against Williams illegal is complete bullshit. It happens all the time when players run crossing patterns within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage.
The suspension of Burfict is the politically correct and no integrity NFL responding to media and not the result of any coherent precedent.
RE: Think the refs were biased? - jfkbengals - 01-11-2016
Over 33k when I signed moments ago
RE: Think the refs were biased? - Bengalzona - 01-11-2016
(01-11-2016, 04:52 PM)BengalB Wrote: Where's your ban hammer at??
(01-11-2016, 05:11 PM)bengals67 Wrote: I do not ever respond in a negative way on this board but your bias is obvious.
The hit on Gio was way worse than Burfict hitting Brown, violates an express rule, gets you ejected in college and should have seen Shazier ejected.
It completely changed the game because Bengals would have had the ball around your 10 yard line and the drive that resulted I think in a field goal would not have happened.
Why was Porter not flagged for being on the field illegally. Why was he given a game ball afterwards in the Steeler locker room.
Was Brown really hurt or did he lay on the ground and fake injury to draw a flag which was not thrown at the time of the hit but several seconds later after Brown laid on the ground not moving. Let's see if he plays next week - do you want to take a bet on that?
The refs favored the Steelers and completely lost control of the game when Shazier was not flagged for a hit that was far worse and actually hurt a player. This occurred after the history of the dirty play on Palmer, smiling face Hines Ward ruining the career of Keith Rivers, and some idiot taking out our punter last year on a malicious hit.
Shazier dancing afterwards with his teammates - and the Steelers had the gall to complain when Burfict did the same thing after hitting Bell?
Your blinders and lack of objectivity are amazing as is your gall to get on this message board and try to rub it in to the devastated Bengal fan base - typical of many Steeler fans.
By the way are you from Pittsburg or live there - I doubt it.
He can't respond tonight. He is in 'time out'. And he'd better not post in this forum ever again.
RE: Think the refs were biased? - The Burfict Answer - 01-12-2016
Signed over 34k. Hopefully we can put those zebra piece of shits on the street
RE: Think the refs were biased? - Attackcat - 01-12-2016
Also I didn't start the petition I just thought the forum would get a kick out of it. With as many sigs as it has I would say clearly it's not just Bengals fans that thought the steelers got to play with a different set of rules in that game. I quit watching at half time because of the way the game was being called.
The first two drives by both teams told you the officials were going to give the steelers the benefit of the dought and they thought the Bengals were "dirty" when birfict got warned for a good hard clean tackle and the steeler player launched himself at eiferts head and no ref said a thing to him.
I love the argument that the steelers had more penalties too just because they had more doesn't mean they didn't get away with more. The refs made the comment how many flags can we throw. There should be no set limits. You call what you see.
RE: Think the refs were biased? - Utts - 01-12-2016
(01-11-2016, 02:28 PM)Attackcat Wrote: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.wcpo.com/sports/football/bengals/thousands-signing-petition-calling-for-bengals-steelers-game-investigation&ved=0ahUKEwjilM-woqLKAhUD2D4KHfm7DRUQqUMIUzAG&usg=AFQjCNE9rQIXkUjfDYEd5BTg23BcGCqaWg sign the petition.
Wow. Some of you are really out of touch with reality. The refs didn't punch the ball out of Hill's hands, cheap shot AB, or take Porter's bait at the most crucial point in the game.
It's ironic that the 2 biggest boobs on the team sunk us right there at the end. It's also ironic that Marvin would give the ball the the fumbling bumbling J. Hill at that crucial point in time.
RE: Think the refs were biased? - Aquapod770 - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 03:27 AM)Utts Wrote: Wow. Some of you are really out of touch with reality. The refs didn't punch the ball out of Hill's hands, cheap shot AB, or take Porter's bait at the most crucial point in the game.
It's ironic that the 2 biggest boobs on the team sunk us right there at the end. It's also ironic that Marvin would give the ball the the fumbling bumbling J. Hill at that crucial point in time.
I know, he should have given it to Gio! Oh wait...
RE: Think the refs were biased? - Attackcat - 01-12-2016
i dont understand why people think the porter penalty would have been off setting either. refs see a well known shit talker around a group of bengals throw the flag for taunting, pacman never gets flagged. the refs got over there before pacman right? he sees the flag and maybe claps his hands. we all go on to talk about how the steeler coaching staff lost control and porter is the same idiot he always was, because his 15 yards offsets burficts 15 and the steelers are looking at a 65 yard field goal with 10 secs left. dont get me wrong i blame hill and only hill for losing that game, but if the nfl fines porter they are basically admitting they cost the bengals the game imo.
RE: Think the refs were biased? - Wyche'sWarrior - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 09:27 AM)Attackcat Wrote: i dont understand why people think the porter penalty would have been off setting either. refs see a well known shit talker around a group of bengals throw the flag for taunting, pacman never gets flagged. the refs got over there before pacman right? he sees the flag and maybe claps his hands. we all go on to talk about how the steeler coaching staff lost control and porter is the same idiot he always was, because his 15 yards offsets burficts 15 and the steelers are looking at a 65 yard field goal with 10 secs left. dont get me wrong i blame hill and only hill for losing that game, but if the nfl fines porter they are basically admitting they cost the bengals the game imo.
Good point.
RE: Think the refs were biased? - M.W. - 01-12-2016
Ignoring Porter on the field cursing at a group of Bengals players shows definite bias.
RE: Think the refs were biased? - CJ2etc - 01-12-2016
(01-12-2016, 09:27 AM)Attackcat Wrote: i dont understand why people think the porter penalty would have been off setting either. refs see a well known shit talker around a group of bengals throw the flag for taunting, pacman never gets flagged. the refs got over there before pacman right? he sees the flag and maybe claps his hands. we all go on to talk about how the steeler coaching staff lost control and porter is the same idiot he always was, because his 15 yards offsets burficts 15 and the steelers are looking at a 65 yard field goal with 10 secs left. dont get me wrong i blame hill and only hill for losing that game, but if the nfl fines porter they are basically admitting they cost the bengals the game imo.
Agree completely!
RE: Think the refs were biased? - Housh - 01-12-2016
Wonder if TJ Housh gets a flag if he runs on the field talking trash after someone hits Eifert and knocks him out.
Dont think for a second Pitt wasnt aware that the refs were favoring them. They know the rules and Porter knows the rules. Hes been around the NFL for a LONG TIME.
They just knew that the refs were hunting Cincinnati not them, so they took advantage of it.
I agree, after that Shazier hit, the Steelers had all the information they needed.
The funniest thing about all this is Burfict gets fined and flagged, and that is justice for Pitt. But everytime shit goes against us we have to get our justice after the fact in the form of an apology or a fine. Theres no on field justice for us. Eifert must talk alot of trash on the field because they tried to take him out twice this season. Simply put we werent hitting like they were. They were out of control. Shazier simply knew he wasnt gonna get flagged and he unloaded. That is a shame.
Even funnier is the officiating expert saying it was legal for 20 mins. Kept plugging defensivless WR but never said helmet to helmet one time. Clear cover up
Rant over after this one. Sorry my thoughts are jumbled. Shazier had that tackle in the bag. He didnt have to hit Gio like that. Gio wasnt going ANYWHERE. This dude CHOSE to lead with the helmet. He couldve still hit Gio hard as hell by running him over via shoulder or by going at his gut. Gio had just come down off the hop from catching teh ball and was only completely turned around for a millisecond. He wasnt gonna juke him out. The fact this dude went helmet first is disqusting. I honestly think he tried breaking his arm and knocking him out.
But refs saw a clean hit and fumble so whatever