Banedon
-
Posts
65,237 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
25
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Banedon
-
I think [thought] and I think that anyone that doesn't agree with me is just [bad thing].
-
Man, you really do excuse everything Seahawks. I mean, I've spent the morning arguing this was at least an somewhat defensible call, but the Tate PI was blatant and obvious. I didn't see any PI on that play. Not on Seattle at least. Tate clearly pushed Shields to the ground.
-
No, they said "After review, the call on the field stands". The NFL statement said that it stood as there was not enough evidence to overturn.
-
@Dan_Bernstein Imagine Hawk Harrelson on the call for #Packers radio.
-
It really takes the focus off of the Packers not having played very well.
-
Man, you really do excuse everything Seahawks. I mean, I've spent the morning arguing this was at least an somewhat defensible call, but the Tate PI was blatant and obvious. All you can say in defense of the PI is that it's so rarely called on WRs. Of course Tate's was obvious and I'm sure there have been other obvious offensive PI calls not made. I haven't seen anyone of any merit calling Tate a dirty player and who cares about any blowhards that do. Well Tate also had the hard block he was fined for last week, so I'm sure that's where the argument is coming from, the combination of the two incidents. But yeah, that doesn't really build a case for him being a dirty player.
-
Holy [expletive] that's amazing Isn't he trying to do away with unions in Wisconsin? Or at least limit their power? Good time to turn around and support one because of a football game. Yeah, I posted about this in the politics thread, trying to avoid bringing this in here.
-
Man, you really do excuse everything Seahawks. I mean, I've spent the morning arguing this was at least an somewhat defensible call, but the Tate PI was blatant and obvious.
-
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000066164/article/nfl-supports-decision-to-not-overturn-seahawks-touchdown?campaign=Twitter_news
-
@JeffDarlington The NFL Officiating department reviewed the video today & supports decision not to overturn on-field ruling following replay review. @JeffDarlington The @nfl concludes, "The result of the game is final." Apparently it does admit that PI should've been called though, but that review wouldn't have corrected that.
-
Chris Kluwe thinks the Packers got screwed: http://deadspin.com/5946122
-
http://i.imgur.com/dtp22.png
-
Is that a valid argument in the movie thread?
-
But if Forte is coming back, and Bush is health, you still have Allen and Bell...there's no reason for Grant. We're missing some info here.
-
Oh I think there's plenty of Seattle fans that expected it to be reversed. I don't think the outrage would've been all that.
-
They didn't like Bell I guess? Or worse, Bush is hurt? Bell ran a lot at the end of the game.
-
this is what happened. and that's giving tate credit for "subsequently gaining joint control," which he really didn't do. http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/article/media_slots/photos/000/556/212/SeahawksCatch_original.gif?1348545245 On the second replay, it appears that tate and jennings hands hit the ball at the same time. the rule says "gains control" not "hands hit the ball." It's still plenty debatable. I'm convinced the real refs would've made a mess of this one as well.
-
The PI is irrelevant. That was a blown call, no doubt, but it's not reviewable or relevant as to whether it's a TD once it goes to review. What makes you think that the refs don't have this angle when they review it?
-
this is what happened. and that's giving tate credit for "subsequently gaining joint control," which he really didn't do. http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/article/media_slots/photos/000/556/212/SeahawksCatch_original.gif?1348545245 On the second replay, it appears that tate and jennings hands hit the ball at the same time.
-
He had two hands on it by the time his feet hit the ground. I'm not a ref (obviously), and I agree by the eyeball test, it's Packers ball. But I'm just not sure that it's as clear by the rules.
-
By the time the players hit the ground, which is when possession is determined, both players had the ball. Simultaneous catch goes to the offense. Unless I'm misunderstanding the rule.
-
They even say "caught simultaneously" a couple times.
-
The more I see it, the more I understand why it was called this way. I think it's one of those plays like the Megatron "catch" a couple years ago against the Bears....where the rules don't fit what you see with the naked eye.
-
Or it's some Packers message board flooding the poll. I imagine there were plenty of Packers fans checking out Seattle PI last night.
-
http://i.qkme.me/3r24kk.jpg
