Jump to content

Playoffs 2017-18: Conference Championships


Tegis

Recommended Posts

Just now, tonyh29 said:

It was the line ref that blew straight away and I guess he felt it was down by contact the players were very close to each other 

matey boy on Sky mix didn’t even think it was a fumble , so I guess it’s tough to call decisions like that all around

 

Then it let it play out, then review it after. It's just common sense.

But no, the ref blows it immediately because the Jags may score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tonyh29 said:

It was the line ref that blew straight away and I guess he felt it was down by contact the players were very close to each other 

matey boy on Sky mix didn’t even think it was a fumble , so I guess it’s tough to call decisions like that all around

 

It was a flukey play and it would've been blown dead everywhere. Almost all of Jax penalty yards were from obvious interference. Nothing to see here, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, maqroll said:

Almost all of Jax penalty yards were from obvious interference. Nothing to see here, IMO.

I can handle almost all the pens the Jags got, it's the single measly 10 yarder on the Pats thats the problem here

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, StefanAVFC said:

You genuinely think the Pats played clean enough for 1 penalty, 10 yards?

**** me.

Are you talking about offensive holding? If so, I didn't see anything obvious. But I think we tend to see what we want to see based on our inherent bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tegis said:

Then he's obviously a complete and full blown retard

Maybe I mean turnover rather than fumble ?

I’ll be honest I don’t know enough of the rules  but I think he was saying that the ball can be in contact anywhere hip , head whatever and the ball was in contact with the leg when he was down 

nobody else on the panel agreed with him fwiw 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

Maybe I mean turnover rather than fumble ?

I’ll be honest I don’t know enough of the rules  but I think he was saying that the ball can be in contact anywhere hip , head whatever and the ball was in contact with the leg when he was down 

nobody else on the panel agreed with him fwiw 

Contact doesn't mean anything if he doesn't have control, and he clearly didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Tegis said:

Much like United in the 90s, the Pats bore me to tears.

But at the same time you have to admire them. You just knew they would win it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, maqroll said:

If it's the Vikings in the SB, will the league make them wear road whites? Thinking out loud here..

Vikes would be classed as the away team and would have to use the away dressing rooms. I guess that means away jerseys as well? 

Read it somewhere - i think the NFC team is the designated 'road team' in this years Superbowl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that jack was down at first (thought that they had rolled up on each other when the ball was not in possession of either player. 

19 minutes ago, maqroll said:

Are you talking about offensive holding? If so, I didn't see anything obvious. But I think we tend to see what we want to see based on our inherent bias.

I genuinely cannot see how you couldn't see any holding. The saying is that refs could call holding on almost every play. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, abdomlahor said:

it's gonna be absolutely glorious when the wheels finally fall off in new england.

Then the Dolphins will finally rule the division :ph34r::ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Villaphan04 said:

I thought that jack was down at first (thought that they had rolled up on each other when the ball was not in possession of either player. 

I genuinely cannot see how you couldn't see any holding. The saying is that refs could call holding on almost every play. 

 

 

I didn't see it, refs didn't see it, Nantz and Romo didn't see it, the studio guys didn't see it. Not saying it didn't happen, just that it wasn't something that looked obvious in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â