Gotta be honest..... | Page 3 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Gotta be honest.....

Same system or not, he was a rookie in the nfl. Growing pains.

the 2009 Texans are not even close to the team they are this year an neither is the jets defense close this year to what they were in 2009.

Hou isn't as good but they were expected to be a playoff team and were heavy favorites going into that game.
 
You are basing your arguments of what teams were "expected" to do?

Seriously, that is just silly.
 
Because the clock stopped at 2:01 and the ref blew the whistle 2-3 seconds after that. Watch the play and HEAR the whistle.



First off, Im not even talking about when the clock starts. It started at the right time, when the player came out of the EZ. Secondly, we are not discussing how long the play took. We are discussing when the refs blew the whistle to call the play dead. The clock stops only when refs blow the whistle. Thirdly, you don't know if the kicking team made a clean recovery for him to be called down at contact. Exactly why the ref took 2-3 seconds before making the call and blowing the whistle.



Again, you are trying to twist my words. The clock stops when ref blows the whistle. In this play, the clock stopped way before that. Im not talking to you about tenths of seconds and all that bs. Im not even talking about a split second hered. You can hear the whistle very cleanly and it comes about 2-3 seconds after the clock had stopped. You can argue the clock has to go the entire one second before it can drop to 2:00, but Im talking about 2-3 seconds, not a split second.



Again, the clock stops when the whistle is blown. The ref waving his hand and blowing is whistle is almost simultaneous. Almost. But that is irrelevant.



A few plays later, Hernandez was begging for a PI call. Same WR, same CB, and probably the same ref he was shouting at that gave the PI call earlier. Maybe not all players beg for a PI, but Im sure when its 3rd down and in OT, you are interfered with, you look for a flag and try to make ur case. I know Hernandez did later on.


There was 2:06 on the clock when he received the kick. From the time he entered the field of play to the time the whistle blew was only 6.3 seconds. That is only 4-tenths of a second away from the clock reading 2:01 instead of 2:00. You can see the clock move to 2:01 and it looks like it stops, but you have no clue how many tenths ran off before the clock was actually stopped. It is impossible for the whistle to have come 2-3 seconds after the clock was stopped since the entire play only took 6.3 seconds. Even if the clock operator stopped the clock as soon as it hit 2:01, the longest it could have taken would be 1 second. It could have come as little as 4 tenths of a second later if the clock operator stopped it right before it was supposed to change to 2:00. This is to the time the whistle blows, not when you can clearly tell he has possession and is being touched down which is before the whistle blows.

You admit that the official was waving his arms before the whistle blew and that can clearly be verified by watching the video. The rule does not say the clock can only stop when the official blows the whistle. It says:

The game clock operator shall stop the game clock (timeout) upon a signal by any official or upon the operator’s own positive
knowledge:

I'm sure waving of the arms is considered a signal. We don't know exactly when he started waving his arms, but we know it came before the whistle. It is very reasonable to think that he was waving his arms less than 3-tenths of a second before we actually see him come in the screen. If you look at the pictures and the time on the clock, it is very easy to see that he had possession and is being touched down long before the clock should turn to 2:00.


The players reaction mean little to me. I can watch the play and tell you it was PI. Junc will even tell you so.
 
You are basing your arguments of what teams were "expected" to do?

Seriously, that is just silly.

they missed the playoffs by one game, if they beat us week 1 they would have made the playoffs.

---------- Post added at 02:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:47 PM ----------

There was 2:06 on the clock when he received the kick. From the time he entered the field of play to the time the whistle blew was only 6.3 seconds. That is only 4-tenths of a second away from the clock reading 2:01 instead of 2:00. You can see the clock move to 2:01 and it looks like it stops, but you have no clue how many tenths ran off before the clock was actually stopped. It is impossible for the whistle to have come 2-3 seconds after the clock was stopped since the entire play only took 6.3 seconds. Even if the clock operator stopped the clock as soon as it hit 2:01, the longest it could have taken would be 1 second. It could have come as little as 4 tenths of a second later if the clock operator stopped it right before it was supposed to change to 2:00. This is to the time the whistle blows, not when you can clearly tell he has possession and is being touched down which is before the whistle blows.

You admit that the official was waving his arms before the whistle blew and that can clearly be verified by watching the video. The rule does not say the clock can only stop when the official blows the whistle. It says:



I'm sure waving of the arms is considered a signal. We don't know exactly when he started waving his arms, but we know it came before the whistle. It is very reasonable to think that he was waving his arms less than 3-tenths of a second before we actually see him come in the screen. If you look at the pictures and the time on the clock, it is very easy to see that he had possession and is being touched down long before the clock should turn to 2:00.


The players reaction mean little to me. I can watch the play and tell you it was PI. Junc will even tell you so.

there's no way a clock could stop that quickly, he jumped on the ball and the clock stopped, never will you see a quicker stoppage. we got screwed.
 
there's no way a clock could stop that quickly, he jumped on the ball and the clock stopped, never will you see a quicker stoppage. we got screwed.

He jumped on the ball and rolled over at 2:02, and the clock then changed to 2:01 when he is touched, so the clock did not stop as soon as he jumped on the ball. Again, you guys have no clue how many tenths ran off (when the clock changed to 2:01) before the clock was actually stopped. You can keep saying you got screwed, but the evidence says otherwise.
 
He jumped on the ball and rolled over at 2:02, and the clock then changed to 2:01 when he is touched, so the clock did not stop as soon as he jumped on the ball. Again, you guys have no clue how many tenths ran off (when the clock changed to 2:01) before the clock was actually stopped. You can keep saying you got screwed, but the evidence says otherwise.

he wasn't in possession until it hit 2:01 and he rolled over after picking it up, on a normal play there's no way the clock could stop that quikc, on a pile up it's even more ridiculous.

the evidence shows we got screwed, you are the only one saying we didn't.
 
he wasn't in possession until it hit 2:01 and he rolled over after picking it up, on a normal play there's no way the clock could stop that quikc, on a pile up it's even more ridiculous.

the evidence shows we got screwed, you are the only one saying we didn't.


You don't think he has possession at this point:

http://imageshack.us/a/img685/3800/kickoff4.jpg

How about this one?

http://imageshack.us/a/img42/8266/kickoff3e.jpg

Both of those are well within the time that the clock should read 2:01. You are whining about 4-tenths of a second when the whistle actually blew. He had possession and was touched down (official waving his arms) before the whistle blew. I'm not the only one that knows this. The NFL looked in to the situation and they agree. I don't really care what the NFL says though since I can look at the video / pictures and see for myself.
 
first one? nope, 2nd one would be about the time the clock operator is pressing the button and at worst it should have gone to 2 mins. I have never seen a clock stop quicker than on that play. We got screwed but again we still should have won.
 
first one? nope, 2nd one would be about the time the clock operator is pressing the button and at worst it should have gone to 2 mins. I have never seen a clock stop quicker than on that play. We got screwed but again we still should have won.

How long do you think it takes to stop the clock? The 6 seconds had not yet passed in that second photo. That second pic is at 5.5 seconds, which means that the clock should read 2:01. The entire play from the time he enters the field of play to the time the actual whistle blows is only 6.3 seconds. He was waving his arms before the whistle blew (which can be seen in the video) which means that he had signaled for the clock to stop before he blew the whistle. Exactly how long before is not know since he can not be seen, but it is safe to say that it was more than 4-tenths of a second sooner. That proves the clock should have stopped on the 2:01 Mark and not the 2:00 mark.
 
There was 2:06 on the clock when he received the kick. From the time he entered the field of play to the time the whistle blew was only 6.3 seconds. That is only 4-tenths of a second away from the clock reading 2:01 instead of 2:00. You can see the clock move to 2:01 and it looks like it stops, but you have no clue how many tenths ran off before the clock was actually stopped. It is impossible for the whistle to have come 2-3 seconds after the clock was stopped since the entire play only took 6.3 seconds. Even if the clock operator stopped the clock as soon as it hit 2:01, the longest it could have taken would be 1 second. It could have come as little as 4 tenths of a second later if the clock operator stopped it right before it was supposed to change to 2:00. This is to the time the whistle blows, not when you can clearly tell he has possession and is being touched down which is before the whistle blows.

When I said "clock stops when whistle blows" I didn't mean 'clock stopped when whistle blew'. The clock stops only after the whistle is blown. And the whistle blew a good 2-3 seconds after the clock had stopped. Watch the play and please stop talking about 6.3 seconds...yet again. We are not talking about how long the play took. We are talking about when the clock stopped.

You admit that the official was waving his arms before the whistle blew and that can clearly be verified by watching the video. The rule does not say the clock can only stop when the official blows the whistle. It says:

Yes, but the ref raised his hand to wave and inhaled a breathe at the same time, and then blew the whistle. The whole process? Maybe one fourth of a second before the whistle blows.

I'm sure waving of the arms is considered a signal. We don't know exactly when he started waving his arms, but we know it came before the whistle. It is very reasonable to think that he was waving his arms less than 3-tenths of a second before we actually see him come in the screen. If you look at the pictures and the time on the clock, it is very easy to see that he had possession and is being touched down long before the clock should turn to 2:00.

No, u can easily see the ref when he starts to wave his hand.

The players reaction mean little to me. I can watch the play and tell you it was PI. Junc will even tell you so.

Im sure u agree with junc on everything. Players reaction is the FIRST clue after the play.

I know you are going to continue bickering around with ur usual nonsense, so unless u have something new to add, please stop. I've made my case. You've made ur case.
 
You have not made a case. Everything you have said is not true.



When I said "clock stops when whistle blows" I didn't mean 'clock stopped when whistle blew'. The clock stops only after the whistle is blown. And the whistle blew a good 2-3 seconds after the clock had stopped. Watch the play and please stop talking about 6.3 seconds...yet again. We are not talking about how long the play took. We are talking about when the clock stopped.

This is not true, and I proved it by quoting the rulebook. Here it is again for you:

The game clock operator shall stop the game clock (timeout) upon a signal by any official or upon the operator’s own positive
knowledge:

Where does it say that the clock only stops when the whistle blows? It says "Upon a signal" which includes waving of the arms.

How long the entire play last is very important. There were 2:06 seconds on the clock, and you say the clock should have gone to 2:00, meaning all 6 seconds passed in full. You claim that the whistle blew 2-3 seconds after the clock had stopped. There are several problems with that. First, you have no clue when the clock actually stopped. (I do and will show you below) You can see it move to 2:01 and think that it stopped, but you have no clue how many tenths ran off before the clock was stopped. When the clock hits 2:01, all 10-tenths of that second have to pass before the clock moves to 2:00. We have 9-tenths of a second (nearly a full second) where we don't know when the clock actually stopped. It could have been stopped as soon as it hit 2:01, or maybe it didn't get stopped until it was about to change to 2:00 (5.9 seconds pass)

Here is how we can know. It can be proven when it was stopped by watching the next play. If it was stopped as soon as it his 2:01, then nearly a full second would have to go by on the next play before the clock changed to 2:00. If you watch the next play, the clock changes to 2:00 as soon as the ball is snapped to Tebow. This proves that the clock was stopped right before it was going to change to 2:00. (5.9 seconds)

You say that the whistle came 2-3 seconds after the clock stopped. That is impossible. I just proved that the clock was stopped after 5.9 seconds, and we know that we heard the whistle after 6.3 seconds. That is a difference of 4-tenths of a second, not 2 to 3 seconds.



Yes, but the ref raised his hand to wave and inhaled a breathe at the same time, and then blew the whistle. The whole process? Maybe one fourth of a second before the whistle blows.

So you are saying that it takes at least 2-tenths of a second (2.5 tenths is 1/4 of a second) to inhale and blow the whistle? Good! Now we are only 2-tenths away from the clock reading 2:01.




No, u can easily see the ref when he starts to wave his hand.

Unless you have a different shot of it, this is also not true. The Ref is not in the shot and we only see a hand in the bottom left of the screen.

http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/7395/kickoff5.jpg

We know that is not when he started since his hand is up in the air when we first see it in the video. He was out of the shot and is walking towards the players when we first see his hand in the air. He has to bring it up from his side to wave it in the air. It is very reasonable to assume that he started doing that at least 2-tenths of a second sooner then what we can see in the video. Remember, you agree that we can see him waving his arms at least 2-tenths of a second before we heard the whistle.

Just put all the evidence together.

#1. There was 2:06 on the clock, and from the time he enters the field of play to the time we hear the whistle blow is only 6.3 seconds.
#2. We know the official was waving his arms before we heard the whistle blow.
#3. We know 5.9 seconds ran off the clock since the clock immediately changed to 2:00 (as soon as the ball was snapped) on the next play.
#4. The pictures show the Jets having possession and being touched down before the official is seen waving his arms.


There is no evidence to prove that the clock should have gone to 2:00. There is plenty of evidence to prove why it should have stopped at 2:01.


Im sure u agree with junc on everything. Players reaction is the FIRST clue after the play.

Then you would probably argue that Holmes is interfered with on every play. The reaction of the player means nothing to me. I go on what the rules are and what I see. Wilson interfered with Hernandez. Me and Junc very rarely agree, so if we both see something the same way, it is most likely accurate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
but that rookie was in the same system he played in at A&M which was a HUGE advantage for him. Mark's first game he was excellent playing in the same building.

Well Sanchez is the best QB in the league and Tannehill, ha, what's he thinking having a tough first game of his NFL career? J.J. Watt is awful, what an overrated hack he is. Why couldn't Tannehill be more like the fabulous Sanchez?
 
they missed the playoffs by one game, if they beat us week 1 they would have made the playoffs.

This is the same exact **** you cried about when people said the Dolphins could have been 5-1 at this point. Why would Houston have gone to the playoffs if they won in Week 1? You think it's so easy to just assume the rest of the year would've played out the same exact way had the first game been different?
 
This is the same exact **** you cried about when people said the Dolphins could have been 5-1 at this point. Why would Houston have gone to the playoffs if they won in Week 1? You think it's so easy to just assume the rest of the year would've played out the same exact way had the first game been different?

they missed by 1 game, we beat them. if they win maybe the season doesn't play out the same- maybe the win 2 or 3 more games? who knows? but what we do know is they missed by one game on a tiebreaker to us b/c we beat them.
 
You have not made a case. Everything you have said is not true.

Its all true.

This is not true, and I proved it by quoting the rulebook. Here it is again for you:

The clock stopped way before the ref signaled.

Where does it say that the clock only stops when the whistle blows? It says "Upon a signal" which includes waving of the arms.

Waving of the arm and whistle were almost simultaneous, not three seconds apart.

How long the entire play last is very important.

No its not. We are talking about when the clock stops. I could care less what happened before that.

There were 2:06 seconds on the clock, and you say the clock should have gone to 2:00, meaning all 6 seconds passed in full. You claim that the whistle blew 2-3 seconds after the clock had stopped. There are several problems with that. First, you have no clue when the clock actually stopped. (I do and will show you below) You can see it move to 2:01 and think that it stopped, but you have no clue how many tenths ran off before the clock was stopped. When the clock hits 2:01, all 10-tenths of that second have to pass before the clock moves to 2:00. We have 9-tenths of a second (nearly a full second) where we don't know when the clock actually stopped. It could have been stopped as soon as it hit 2:01, or maybe it didn't get stopped until it was about to change to 2:00 (5.9 seconds pass)

Again, a whistle is what calls the play dead. Without a whistle, players don't know if play is dead. The whistle blew three seconds after the clock had stopped. Maybe the clock didn't stop on 2:01. Maybe it stopped at 2:00:20. Then the whistle blew TWO seconds after.

Here is how we can know. It can be proven when it was stopped by watching the next play. If it was stopped as soon as it his 2:01, then nearly a full second would have to go by on the next play before the clock changed to 2:00. If you watch the next play, the clock changes to 2:00 as soon as the ball is snapped to Tebow. This proves that the clock was stopped right before it was going to change to 2:00. (5.9 seconds)

Wrong again. We were never arguing over two tenths of a second.

You say that the whistle came 2-3 seconds after the clock stopped. That is impossible. I just proved that the clock was stopped after 5.9 seconds, and we know that we heard the whistle after 6.3 seconds. That is a difference of 4-tenths of a second, not 2 to 3 seconds.

You are wrong again. Let me prove it to you in ur words. If the play took 6.3 seconds then from 2:06:00 minus 6:3 seconds is 1:59:70.

If the clocks shows 2:01, does it mean it might be 2:00:2? As in 2 tenths of a second away from 2 minute warning?
If yes, then 2:06 can be anywhere between 2:05:01 to 2:06:00. Agreed? Now do the math and deduct 6.3 seconds from 2:06, the most time remaining on that sixth second possible. You also have to consider the operators reaction time, which is about one tenth of a second to say the least so even the 5.9 second bs is wrong.

So you are saying that it takes at least 2-tenths of a second (2.5 tenths is 1/4 of a second) to inhale and blow the whistle? Good! Now we are only 2-tenths away from the clock reading 2:01.

Either way you slice, 3 seconds can not be cut down to .2 to .4 seconds u claim.

Unless you have a different shot of it, this is also not true. The Ref is not in the shot and we only see a hand in the bottom left of the screen.

Yes, hes not in the screen, but when he waves his hand, its easy to tell he was right there just outside the visible area and the moment he waved his hand, it showed up in the screen. You have to use judgement, which I know you won't cuz ur stuck with ur made up 4 tenths of a second bs.

#1. There was 2:06 on the clock, and from the time he enters the field of play to the time we hear the whistle blow is only 6.3 seconds.
#2. We know the official was waving his arms before we heard the whistle blow.
#3. We know 5.9 seconds ran off the clock since the clock immediately changed to 2:00 (as soon as the ball was snapped) on the next play.
#4. The pictures show the Jets having possession and being touched down before the official is seen waving his arms.

There is no evidence to prove that the clock should have gone to 2:00. There is plenty of evidence to prove why it should have stopped at 2:01.

Yes, there is more than enough evidence to prove the clock should have stopped at 1:59 to say the least. Here is the proof. Watch the replay of the recovery from another angle. You will see the Jets player didn't have full control of the ball when the returner touched him. The angle you can see this is shown after Jets first down play when clock stops at 1:56 for the 2-min warning.

Then you would probably argue that Holmes is interfered with on every play. The reaction of the player means nothing to me. I go on what the rules are and what I see. Wilson interfered with Hernandez. Me and Junc very rarely agree, so if we both see something the same way, it is most likely accurate.

I never said players reaction is what should be considered a PI. But if PI truly occurred, the WR will ask for a flag...generally speaking. A few plays later, the same player was begging for a flag against the same defender. I wonder why he was begging for the flag on that play and not on one of the most crucial play of that drive? And u agreeing with Junc has no meaning. WVDolphin agrees with me, does that mean me and him are also correct? How can two people have different view of the same play, yet both be right? You don't make any sense when u say junc agrees with u so you must be right. You should visit theganggreen.com and see how many of us disagree with Junc on several things.

You still fail to get the point. Point is, Jets had every opportunity to win that game. They couldn't. Refs made some bad calls, but they were not the reason Jets lost.
 
Back
Top Bottom