Steelers Typical Dirty Play

[BFritz21]

(09-25-2018, 03:32 AM)Captain Obvious Wrote: I was reading the Bucs message board and you whine about plays that even they didn't bring up. You whine when the Steelers win, you whine when the Steelers lose. You whine whine whine whine whine whine whine all day long. Are you sure you're a man? I'm beginning to question that. I've seen little kids that missed their nap that whine less than you.

But yet you refuse to just go look at the play(s) that I mentioned to see that I'm absolutely right because you're a typical Steelers fan that's clueless about anything that's objective about the Steelers.

[JS-Steelerfan]

(09-24-2018, 10:39 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: And on that reception by Evans it was pass interference and then he was grabbing Evans’ facemask with no flag for either.

It must be nice to be above the rules.

Steelers - 13 penalties for 155 yards
Bucs -      9 penalties for 80 yards

Yep, the refs sure do go out of their way to protect the Steelers, dont they? 

And since it’s you, I’ll proactively explain the things I don't mean by that so you won't pretend that I wrote them (yeah, right):

• I don't think those numbers are unfair.  The Steelers commit way more penalties than they should, and it's frustrating to watch.  I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't mean to say that the play you're speaking of shouldn't have been a penalty.  I haven't gone back to look at it, so I don't have an opinion to share on it.  It's irrelevant to my question, which is: I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't think that the Steelers never make dirty plays.  They're surely not the only team that does so, as you guys seem to think, but I can certainly admit that they commit a lot of penalties I'd rather not see.  But, since I'm in agreement (to a certain extent) with you on that, let's stay focused on my question: I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't think that the refs were biased in favor of the Bucs.  There were missed calls both ways, which happens in football. I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't have any other reason for writing this except to ask you: how can someone imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
  

 
So, how about it, Brad? How can you justify implying that the refs favor the Steelers when the numbers turn out like that? 

I hope I've articulated my question clearly enough for you to stay focused on it.

[6andcounting]

(09-25-2018, 12:22 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Heyward-Bey going all Pacman.

He punched your mom for taking his 1's?

[BFritz21]

(09-25-2018, 06:36 AM)JS-Steelerfan Wrote: Steelers - 13 penalties for 155 yards
Bucs -      9 penalties for 80 yards

Yep, the refs sure do go out of their way to protect the Steelers, dont they? 

And since it’s you, I’ll proactively explain the things I don't mean by that so you won't pretend that I wrote them (yeah, right):

• I don't think those numbers are unfair.  The Steelers commit way more penalties than they should, and it's frustrating to watch.  I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't mean to say that the play you're speaking of shouldn't have been a penalty.  I haven't gone back to look at it, so I don't have an opinion to share on it.  It's irrelevant to my question, which is: I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't think that the Steelers never make dirty plays.  They're surely not the only team that does so, as you guys seem to think, but I can certainly admit that they commit a lot of penalties I'd rather not see.  But, since I'm in agreement (to a certain extent) with you on that, let's stay focused on my question: I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't think that the refs were biased in favor of the Bucs.  There were missed calls both ways, which happens in football. I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't have any other reason for writing this except to ask you: how can someone imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
  

 
So, how about it, Brad? How can you justify implying that the refs favor the Steelers when the numbers turn out like that? 

I hope I've articulated my question clearly enough for you to stay focused on it.

Steelers fans are so stupid now that it's ridiculous.

You laid out all those numbers and posted a bunch of empty rhetoric when all of it is it answered with a simple question:  how much more lopsided would it be if the refs didn't favor the Steelers?

The Steelers play so dirty that some penalties are impossible to ignore.

Also, ever think that the Bucs are just naturally a cleaner team? They're in the top ten in least penalized teams every year.

So, how about it, JS, how can you pretend that the refs don't favor the Steelers when they ignore penalties as open and as blatant as the pass interference and the facemask penalty, which the facemask penalty isn't even subjective because he grabbed his facemask out in the open?

[JS-Steelerfan]

(09-25-2018, 10:06 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: Steelers fans are so stupid now that it's ridiculous.

You laid out all those numbers and posted a bunch of empty rhetoric when all of it is it answered with a simple question:  how much more lopsided would it be if the refs didn't favor the Steelers?

The Steelers play so dirty that some penalties are impossible to ignore.

Also, ever think that the Bucs are just naturally a cleaner team? They're in the top ten in least penalized teams every year.

So, how about it, JS, how can you pretend that the refs don't favor the Steelers when they ignore penalties as open and as blatant as the pass interference and the facemask penalty, which the facemask penalty isn't even subjective because he grabbed his facemask out in the open?

Well, there you go. No matter how hard I try, you still see things I didn't write. I never made the point that the Bucs weren't the cleaner team. They clearly were.

As for your question, I gave you objective numbers, and you gave me subjective opinion. You're welcome to it, but I'll stick with the numbers. Also, if the refs were really trying to help the Steelers, why didn't they let at least one of those iffy roughing the passer penalties go? And why did they penalize Heywood Bey for saying something to the ref that the rest of the stadium didn't even hear?

Again (because it's you) I'll point out that I don't think they should've been overlooked, just that a biased ref easily COULD have overlooked them.

[E.A. Poe]

(09-25-2018, 10:06 AM)BFritz21 Wrote:  "....how can you pretend that the refs don't favor the Steelers..."

I'm thinking the one pretending is you. There is no league-wide bias for the Steelers...or any other team. Officiating crews are graded after each game and they review every single penalty. Do they make mistakes or miss calls? Sure. But, asserting they are dirty or biased as a whole is nothing more than conspiracy loving conjecture. 

Can you name even one official who you think favors the Steelers (or any other team), then back it up with some stats or facts?

[Whatever]

(09-25-2018, 06:36 AM)JS-Steelerfan Wrote: Steelers - 13 penalties for 155 yards
Bucs -      9 penalties for 80 yards

Yep, the refs sure do go out of their way to protect the Steelers, dont they? 

And since it’s you, I’ll proactively explain the things I don't mean by that so you won't pretend that I wrote them (yeah, right):

• I don't think those numbers are unfair.  The Steelers commit way more penalties than they should, and it's frustrating to watch.  I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't mean to say that the play you're speaking of shouldn't have been a penalty.  I haven't gone back to look at it, so I don't have an opinion to share on it.  It's irrelevant to my question, which is: I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't think that the Steelers never make dirty plays.  They're surely not the only team that does so, as you guys seem to think, but I can certainly admit that they commit a lot of penalties I'd rather not see.  But, since I'm in agreement (to a certain extent) with you on that, let's stay focused on my question: I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't think that the refs were biased in favor of the Bucs.  There were missed calls both ways, which happens in football. I just want to know how someone can imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
• I don't have any other reason for writing this except to ask you: how can someone imply preferential treatment with numbers like that.  
  

 
So, how about it, Brad? How can you justify implying that the refs favor the Steelers when the numbers turn out like that? 

I hope I've articulated my question clearly enough for you to stay focused on it.

I didn't watch the game, but just because one team was called for more penalties doesn't mean that they didn't get away with more penalties.  It's possible to call 10 penalties on one team and 6 on the other, but if the team with 10 penalties gets away with 5 obvious penalties and the team with 6 only gets away with one, the officiating can appear biased.

The other issue is that not all penalties impact the game in the same way.  A missed illegal contact on 3rd down with the offense just outside of FG range or a missed holding call on a big 3rd and long play for a first down swings the game a lot more than the same penalties on 1st down.  

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-25-2018, 07:35 AM)6andcounting Wrote: He punched your mom for taking his 1's?

My moms would kick his pansy ass.

[StrictlyBiz]

(09-25-2018, 10:06 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: Steelers fans are so stupid now that it's ridiculous.

You laid out all those numbers and posted a bunch of empty rhetoric when all of it is it answered with a simple question:  how much more lopsided would it be if the refs didn't favor the Steelers?

The Steelers play so dirty that some penalties are impossible to ignore.

Also, ever think that the Bucs are just naturally a cleaner team?  They're in the top ten in least penalized teams every year.

So, how about it, JS, how can you pretend that the refs don't favor the Steelers when they ignore penalties as open and as blatant as the pass interference and the facemask penalty, which the facemask penalty isn't even subjective because he grabbed his facemask out in the open?

To all you whiney Bengal fans who think that the refs favor the Steelers.....

I asked this question last week and am still waiting for an answer. Maybe you missed it last week, so I'll give you another shot. Faulk tried (and failed miserably), so please no replies from you. 

Last week vs KC with 12:02 left and the Steelers down by 12, AB returned a punt to near midfield giving the Steelers valuable field position. The punt was negated by an illegal formation penalty which lead to a rekick and a return to the 30. The penalty cost the Steelers time and nearly 20 valuable yards when they needed it most. The million dollar question is.....IF the refs favor the Steelers, why call the penalty especially given the circumstances? Wouldn't this be the PERFECT time to help them with a missed call? If you can answer me this without another wild conspiracy theory, then I will gladly admit that you are correct. Im not holding my breath.....

[Captain Obvious]

(09-25-2018, 11:31 AM)E.A. Poe Wrote: I'm thinking the one pretending is you. There is no league-wide bias for the Steelers...or any other team. Officiating crews are graded after each game and they review every single penalty. Do they make mistakes or miss calls? Sure. But, asserting they are dirty or biased as a whole is nothing more than conspiracy loving conjecture. 

Can you name even one official who you think favors the Steelers (or any other team), then back it up with some stats or facts?

He can't call a Steelers game objectively. When the Steelers are leading the division, he's whining about the refs favoring the Steelers. When the Steelers are in the basement, he's whining about the refs favoring the Steelers. When the Steelers have the least amount of penalties, he's whining the refs are favoring the Steelers. When the Steelers lead the league in penalties he's whining the refs are favoring the Steelers. I swear he's a child. That's the only explanation for the amount of whining he does. He's sees penalties that doesn't exist. Thank God he isn't a ref because he would throw a flag on the Steelers every down on both sides of the ball. He would be fired in a New York minute and go down as the worst ref in NFL history.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-25-2018, 02:58 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: To all you whiney Bengal fans who think that the refs favor the Steelers.....

I asked this question last week and am still waiting for an answer. Maybe you missed it last week, so I'll give you another shot. Faulk tried (and failed miserably), so please no replies from you. 

Last week vs KC with 12:02 left and the Steelers down by 12, AB returned a punt to near midfield giving the Steelers valuable field position. The punt was negated by an illegal formation penalty which lead to a rekick and a return to the 30. The penalty cost the Steelers time and nearly 20 valuable yards when they needed it most. The million dollar question is.....IF the refs favor the Steelers, why call the penalty especially given the circumstances? Wouldn't this be the PERFECT time to help them with a missed call? If you can answer me this without another wild conspiracy theory, then I will gladly admit that you are correct. Im not holding my breath.....

They do throw that flag before the return.  Plus Rooney doesn't move so fast and didn't get all the money passed out.

[Whatever]

(09-25-2018, 02:58 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: To all you whiney Bengal fans who think that the refs favor the Steelers.....

I asked this question last week and am still waiting for an answer. Maybe you missed it last week, so I'll give you another shot. Faulk tried (and failed miserably), so please no replies from you. 

Last week vs KC with 12:02 left and the Steelers down by 12, AB returned a punt to near midfield giving the Steelers valuable field position. The punt was negated by an illegal formation penalty which lead to a rekick and a return to the 30. The penalty cost the Steelers time and nearly 20 valuable yards when they needed it most. The million dollar question is.....IF the refs favor the Steelers, why call the penalty especially given the circumstances? Wouldn't this be the PERFECT time to help them with a missed call? If you can answer me this without another wild conspiracy theory, then I will gladly admit that you are correct. Im not holding my breath.....

Well, your logic is very flawed in thinking that just because the Steelers were not shown bias in this case that they are never shown bias.

In the case of an illegal formation, the foul is apparent and the flag is thrown when the ball is snapped.  The referees have no idea of what the results of the play will be when they throw the flag.  Illegal formation is also a very black and white call and doesn't have any grey area for interpretation.  In this case, the refs would have had to pick up the flag, and the penalty would have been clear when the tv crew reviewed the play to determine what it was originally thrown for.   The bias would have been obvious, and the NFL would be forced to make a statement that the refs botched the call after the KC staff asked for a review of the play.  Even if they hadn't thrown the flag at all, they still would have had to apologise and there is already a lengthy track record of the Steelers getting favorable calls on returns, such as the Trippy Tomlin incident and Huber's broken neck.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-25-2018, 02:58 PM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: To all you whiney Bengal fans who think that the refs favor the Steelers.....

I asked this question last week and am still waiting for an answer. Maybe you missed it last week, so I'll give you another shot. Faulk tried (and failed miserably), so please no replies from you. 

You and i both know why you don't want an answer from me. 

[Dill]

(09-25-2018, 10:06 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: Steelers fans are so stupid now that it's ridiculous.

You laid out all those numbers and posted a bunch of empty rhetoric when all of it is it answered with a simple question:  how much more lopsided would it be if the refs didn't favor the Steelers?

LOL  55-30?

Proving a negative.

[StrictlyBiz]

(09-25-2018, 04:21 PM)Whatever Wrote: Well, your logic is very flawed in thinking that just because the Steelers were not shown bias in this case that they are never shown bias.

In the case of an illegal formation, the foul is apparent and the flag is thrown when the ball is snapped.  The referees have no idea of what the results of the play will be when they throw the flag.  Illegal formation is also a very black and white call and doesn't have any grey area for interpretation.  In this case, the refs would have had to pick up the flag, and the penalty would have been clear when the tv crew reviewed the play to determine what it was originally thrown for.   The bias would have been obvious, and the NFL would be forced to make a statement that the refs botched the call after the KC staff asked for a review of the play.  Even if they hadn't thrown the flag at all, they still would have had to apologise and there is already a lengthy track record of the Steelers getting favorable calls on returns, such as the Trippy Tomlin incident and Huber's broken neck.

Nice effort but it falls short.

If the refs are as deep in the bag for the Steelers as a great many of your fellow Bengal fans suggest, they would be aware of the situation and see that Brown is back returning the punt (a rarity), and simply not throw the flag and let the play go on.

And there would not have to be an apology either since, again as many as your fellow Bengal fans suggest, Roger Goodell is a Steeler fan and is loyal to the Rooney’s. Video evidence wouldn’t matter either as there is already a web page created by that God awful homer announcer Dave Lampham that has a dozen or so gifs of the Steelers holding the Bengals, and yet Good Ol Rog has completely ignored it.

Better than Faulk, but still missed the mark.

[StrictlyBiz]

(09-25-2018, 05:56 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: You and i both know why you don't want an answer from me. 

Yes because it was terrible. See Whatever’s reply. He out did you and actually put some thought in to it.

[Vlad]

(09-25-2018, 05:56 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: You and i both know why you don't want an answer from me. 

Yes, because you both don't want to see you dig yourself a deeper hole.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-26-2018, 04:14 AM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: Yes because it was terrible. See Whatever’s reply. He out did you and actually put some thought in to it.

No one's answer is ever better than mine. 

[Whatever]

(09-26-2018, 04:12 AM)StrictlyBiz Wrote: Nice effort but it falls short.

If the refs are as deep in the bag for the Steelers as a great many of your fellow Bengal fans suggest, they would be aware of the situation and see that Brown is back returning the punt (a rarity), and simply not throw the flag and let the play go on.

And there would not have to be an apology either since, again as many as your fellow Bengal fans suggest, Roger Goodell is a Steeler fan and is loyal to the Rooney’s. Video evidence wouldn’t matter either as there is already a web page created by that God awful homer announcer Dave Lampham that has a dozen or so gifs of the Steelers holding the Bengals, and yet Good Ol Rog has completely ignored it.

Better than Faulk, but still missed the mark.

Your logic is still bad.  It's akin to saying "There's no way Billy stole the test answers because he got a 92% instead of 100%" or "Frank isn't an alcoholic because he forgot to buy beer on the way home yesterday." .The fact that they did not get preferential treatment on this specific play does not mean that they have never or will never again get preferential treatment.

I also don't know how much most officiating crews pay attention to who is the return man.  Gotta remember that the ref that throws the illegal formation flag is on the LoS and Brown is 40+ yards downfield.

The NFL is basically forced to issue apologies on obviously blown calls because they have to maintain the appearance of neutrality.  Some stuff is blatantly obvious to any sports reporter with the footage and a rulebook.  To deny it would a PR disaster. For example, Joey Porter was clear as day on the field when he was not allowed to be.  How can the NFL deny that they botched the call without appearing biased? 

[*michaelsean*]

(09-26-2018, 10:40 AM)Whatever Wrote: Your logic is still bad.  It's akin to saying "There's no way Billy stole the test answers because he got a 92% instead of 100%" or "Frank isn't an alcoholic because he forgot to buy beer on the way home yesterday." .The fact that they did not get preferential treatment on this specific play does not mean that they have never or will never again get preferential treatment.

I also don't know how much most officiating crews pay attention to who is the return man.  Gotta remember that the ref that throws the illegal formation flag is on the LoS and Brown is 40+ yards downfield.

The NFL is basically forced to issue apologies on obviously blown calls because they have to maintain the appearance of neutrality.  Some stuff is blatantly obvious to any sports reporter with the footage and a rulebook.  To deny it would a PR disaster. For example, Joey Porter was clear as day on the field when he was not allowed to be.  How can the NFL deny that they botched the call without appearing biased? 

Just to correct you on one thing.  We alcoholics NEVER forgot to buy the beer.