MNF - Arizona vs Chicago
- Thread starter Vertical Limit
- Start date
That was hysterical. HAHAHAHAHA!!!Vertical Limit said:
What a jerk. Just b/c you are a historically crappy coach who has a penchant for blowing close games, don't take it out on the media. This is the second game that Arizona has blown a double-digit lead in the fourth quarter at home. Some of that has to fall on Denny's ***.
1crazy_finfan
Fin fan & Bears fan!!
How 'bout dem Bears!?! Yeah BOY!! :clap:
HysterikiLL
Practice Squad
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2004
- Messages
- 12,653
- Reaction score
- 2
1crazy_finfan said:
:rawk: Yeah, baby. I'm tired of all these '85 comparisons, time to make a new line of history.
Blade
Pro Bowler
HysterikiLL said:
Yea, but if Grossman has 6 turnovers against a good team, there is no way they win.
flintsilver7
Sack Monster
Rocky Raccoon said:
Says the NFL Rulebook. In the NFL a runner is ruled down if his forward progress has been stopped and he is sufficiently held by defenders. Forward progress IS a judgment call. This means that the officials must have believed that Edgerrin James had a reasonable chance of escaping after having his legs (from the knees down) completely enveloped by a 300-pound lineman and being bent backwards by a 250 pound linebacker. All of this for about a full second (if not more) AND THEN the ball came loose. In real time I thought immediately there was no question the play should've been blown dead; Green threw the flag before Tillman even picked it up. Then they informed Green the play was not reviewable. Why exactly I'm not sure. While you can't challenge forward progress, you can challenge a fumble - is there something in the replay rules that says you can't overturn an obviously incorrect judgment call?
In football I'm two things - a Dolphins fan and a rules nut. I had no horse in that race - I don't care about either team. And furthermore I think we all know there would be an incredible outrage if that happened to us instead of Arizona.
Pennington's Rocket Arm
Sucking for Luck Since 2004
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2006
- Messages
- 7,535
- Reaction score
- 1
you just said it yourself--it's a judgement call. therefore it can't be reviewed.
flintsilver7
Sack Monster
UF Fin Kat said:
Well, it was an awful judgment call. That's my stand.
However, that wasn't my question. You can't review pass interference, for example. What I wonder about for the fumble is the following.
Say you can't review forward progress, as is the case. If Green had said I want to review the fumble. One of the necessary conditions for a live ball fumble is that the runner not be down and the play still be live. The forward progress rules state that to protect the runner the play should be ruled dead when a runner's forward progress has been stopped with little or no chance of resuming it.
If they review the fumble, do they, upon review, consider that his forward progress was stopped? Or do they only consider that the play was not whistled dead on the field and hence they only care that the ball came out? It's a legitimate question.
flintsilver7
Sack Monster
bjchit said:
I didn't watch the entire game, so I didn't see that play. That isn't what I was talking about regardless.
HysterikiLL
Practice Squad
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2004
- Messages
- 12,653
- Reaction score
- 2
:confused: It was clearly a fumble anyway, so what did it matter if he challenged it?
If we're talking about bad play calling, what about Antrel Rolle's clear pass interference on Berrian on 3rd and long in field goal range with 5 mins left. It would've given the Bears 1st and goal down 13 with 5 mins left.
If we're talking about bad play calling, what about Antrel Rolle's clear pass interference on Berrian on 3rd and long in field goal range with 5 mins left. It would've given the Bears 1st and goal down 13 with 5 mins left.