- Joined
- Sep 20, 2014
- Messages
- 1,589
- Reaction Score
- 5,121
That was simply the most deranged piece of officiating I’ve ever seen in professional sports.
The 2002 Sacramento kings Western Conf Finals game is by far the worst officiating in pro sports.
That was simply the most deranged piece of officiating I’ve ever seen in professional sports.
Haven't read the full thread. The flag they picked up on New England was an easy one - that wasn't even close to a defensive penalty and I was horrified to even see a flag thrown in the first place.
I enjoy both MLB and the NFL, but to me the most annoying fans in sports are the ones who act like the entire world needs to stop if there is an NFL game on. If it wasn't for gambling, the NFL would lose half of its audience.I guess if your an insomniac it would be therapeutic. But honestly people complain about soccer fans trying to push their sport on people. I find that baseball fans are a lot more annoying. It is a brainless sport. I did make money off baseball fans however. Before I retired I used to use my seniority to take the corporate tickets to Red Sox Yankee games at Yankee Stadium and resell them for a nice profit. I would piss off my co-workers lol.
If you are talking about the helmet to helmet they picked up, you are blind.
If you are talking about the helmet to helmet they picked up, you are blind.
Huge Pats fan. Bizzare call from a bizarre league that has really bizzare rules so not totally surprised that the reviewers saw it the way they did. Zolak on the radio call summed it up perfectly saying the league needs to start taking officiating seriously and clean up the rule book. Overall I have a dirty feeling after the W but honestly in the end when we win the division by like 4 games it’ll go away.
Terrible call. The ball was loose for just a split second as the receiver moved the ball from one hand/arm to the other, but had the ball secured in the other hand/arm as he crossed into the end zone/hitting the pilon. The ball was only loose in his possession for a split second and he secured it before he went out of bounds. Worst call I can remember in a long time. I'm not a Jet or Patriot fan - just how I saw it.
He had already moved it from his left to his right hand (smart of him), before Butler knocked it loose. It was not him switching hands, it was knocked free by Butler. Anyone who doesn't see that isn't being objective. I don't believe he had possession when he hit the pylon. That said, it would have been easy to simply rule him out of bounds at the goal line, which I think would be the correct call.
As for those thinking that the NFL is somehow propping up the Patriots? Really? Goodell hates them. The league hates them and constantly tries to stop them using any means they can, including the farce that was deflate-gate.

Ok HH so you're the 2nd guy out of 3 million, I'm going to go with you on this. Those others can't possibly have seen it right.![]()
Well the refs saw it that way apparently. Here is what they had to say. They called it "obvious". Once he loses control, he has to then land on the ground, in bounds to re-establish possession.
"At what point he touched the pylon, it was during the process of trying to recover the ball. Even though he may have had the ball in his hands the second time, that control does not mean possession until he comes to the ground and shows firm control of the ball at that point."
Well the refs saw it that way apparently. Here is what they had to say. They called it "obvious". Once he loses control, he has to then land on the ground, in bounds to re-establish possession.
![]()
"At what point he touched the pylon, it was during the process of trying to recover the ball. Even though he may have had the ball in his hands the second time, that control does not mean possession until he comes to the ground and shows firm control of the ball at that point."
So, say a WR is making a tiptoe catch in the endzone. It hits his hands, he clearly bobbles it and taps his two feet in bounds with possession of the ball. That's a fumble out of the end zone too?
Jenkins hit the pylon with possession and there are plenty of touchdowns every week where a guy doesn't touch the endzone in any way but reaches out and hits the pylon.
According to the ref, he never came down in bounds after he bobbled it. So the touch two toes part, that never happened. He touched the pylon and then landed out of bounds. But because he had no feet or body down in bound when he touched the pylon, he's out of bounds in the end zone. Here is a pretty clear video shot, from about 9 to 12 seconds. He is in the air, loses the ball, and lands out of bounds.
According to the ref, he never came down in bounds after he bobbled it. So the touch two toes part, that never happened. He touched the pylon and then landed out of bounds. But because he had no feet or body down in bound when he touched the pylon, he's out of bounds in the end zone. Here is a pretty clear video shot, from about 9 to 12 seconds. He is in the air, loses the ball, and lands out of bounds.
Well the refs saw it that way apparently. Here is what they had to say. They called it "obvious". Once he loses control, he has to then land on the ground, in bounds to re-establish possession.
![]()
"At what point he touched the pylon, it was during the process of trying to recover the ball. Even though he may have had the ball in his hands the second time, that control does not mean possession until he comes to the ground and shows firm control of the ball at that point."
The only thing that proves is he did have possession with the right hand but where? Was it on the 6 inch line, ok bring it back or wa it a TD which was called on the field? either way can't change the call.
LOLThe entire origin of the Patriots dynasty was the attempt to enforce a bizarre rule in a strange situation with no evidence to support a reversal.
This is just the continuation of a 15-year trend.
He re-established control of the ball, in the air, which, according to the referee is not enough to "establish possession". He then needs to come down in bounds with the ball in his hands for it to be "possession". It's as if he has to catch it again. Touching the pylon isn't enough. He didn't (I think that part is pretty obvious in the video). As I said originally, I would have fudged it and given him the ball at the 6 inch line or something.
Now, as with other bizarro rulings over the years, like the tuck rule, I think you can argue whether this is the way the rule should read. But it seems like they did call it correctly based on the actual rules. This article explains why.
Well that's convincing.![]()
If you think that was helmet to helmet, then basically every single play in an NFL game is a penalty. Which by the rules, it probably is. But give me a break. He hit him down by his underarm. The receive had dropped his head. What is the defender supposed to do? Stop whining Jets fans. You lost. It was not the officials fault. It was the fact that the Jets could not hold a 14 point lead at home. Same old Jets.If you are talking about the helmet to helmet they picked up, you are blind.
I actually think it's funnier to sit back and watch non-Pat fans come up with reasons why every Patriot win/championship/SuperBowl, etc is somehow tainted. Deflategate......my goodness. You know they won that game 28-ZIP in the second half with the "real" footballs, right? And the final score was 45-7?? Some big advantage they got for that "cheating". Wonder what the score would have been if the footballs were "properly inflated" in the first half......maybe 60-0?? Love the jealousy, keep it coming!!Youre a pats fan. You still think someone called "the deflator" is referencing a puffy jacket or weight loss program. Ive long since learned not to belabor points with pats fans. Its much better to sit back and enjoy the excuses.