fearsomefour
Legend
Why don't the Rams just run Tutu deep a couple of times a year and have Stafford under throw him....which he would likely do anyway....and have Tutu just slow down and let the CB run him over.....get a free 40 yards?
Ref Vent Thread
- Thread starter Ellard80
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
- Status
Now I could see 5 yard 10 yard or 15 yard penalties or spot of the ball depending on severity of the PI. If it is clearly accidental - 5 yards.
Guarding with hands - 10 yards. I have seen receivers still catching the ball when being guarded with hands to the face.
Clear Tugging at the shirt 15 yards.
Tackling the receiver - spot of the ball if greater than 15 yards. Otherwise 15 yards.
The PI by McDuffie would be 5 yards.
NO!!! Let's not introduce more subjectivity!!
If I didn't read your blather, how would I know you have anger issues and should get help? Duh
More personal attacks. Lovely. You sound hypocritical, saying that I needed to - to quote you, "Stay classy" when you're throwing out personal attacks like you're a starting pitcher in a baseball game. As a reminder, you're not entitled to personally attack people on this site because you don't like what they're saying. Attack the post, not the poster (the former being good constructive discussion; the latter being solely negative and against site rules). That sort of thing. I haven't done the same to you, and yet from the absolute jump, you went for the insults. "Stay classy"? Take your own advice, please.
And my blather? How odd. It really seems you didn't truly read what I was saying or just scrolled through all of the posts I've posted on this subject. If you say you've read my "blather", you didn't get the point of everything I've said in my posts. You only took the tiniest, most irrelevant parts in all of my entire posts on this thread and decided to harp on them. You seem to be completely offended by my saying that the Puritan values need to go back to the 1600s where they can be put to rest for good, that children aren't innocent little angels who need "protection" from the things players do, that parents should have their kids look up to them and respect them, and not some athlete, musician, or actor/actress who is not, by any means, a role model.
So let me make it very clear about my stance, since you missed it: I will always defend players celebrating however they want without any retaliation by the NFL via fines or suspensions. I find that it's ridiculous that the league fines them and bans celebrations for stupid reasons when their entire reffing in this league is a gigantic catastrophe. I think that it's stupid to expect everyone to act like good little automatons that obey orders made to them instead of having creativity and fun in this league. Or is it still the No Fun League?
The refs aren't the show. The fans aren't the show (just a part of watching it). The NFL Commissioner and the people below him are not the show. Even the coaches, to an extent, aren't the show. The show is and always has been the players, and personally, I don't care how they celebrate. If someone doesn't like it and can't stop them on the field, that's too bad and a shame, but that's the way the game goes; if you don't like the other team celebrating, do your best to stop them so that you can celebrate. You probably would've been offended at the bob-and-weave, too, like the teams who whined about it to the league because they couldn't stop the GSoT.
Anger? Far from it. Complete and utter annoyance for your personal attacking posts - which, again, are against site rules, by the way - that honestly deserve to be flagged? Absolutely. If you're thinking my swearing means I have anger issues, you're dead wrong; it's something I casually do in basic, fun conversation here, and basically everyone here knows that. If you think italics means I should get help, you're dead wrong; italics are to imply emphasis to a point, not anger. Even my rants aren't truly angry; I almost do them on opposing teams or refs that made many bad calls against us.
You have not seen me truly angry (and in all honesty, all of the people on this site have not seen me truly angry; merely very annoyed at most). Even now, after all of your personal attacks, I am not truly angry. I just pity you because you keep going on an irrelevant point (my so-called "anger issues" and "classless" behavior) that has absolutely nothing to do with anything I said. I pity you because you keep throwing out personal attacks towards me like you're giving out Halloween candy instead of being mature enough to hold a conversation with another grown person. And I pity you because you don't seem to realize how bad you're making yourself look with all of these juvenile antics.
Last edited:
Don't make it subjective - make it specific in the rule.NO!!! Let's not introduce more subjectivity!!
fearsomefour
Legend
That could work but is more judgement calls in play.
An interesting idea, but, it would not prevent what I am talking about.
If a deep ball....a 40 yard go route lets say....is going to a guy who is an excellent contested catch guy or a guy who has a step on a DB, CBs would be coaching to just grab the guy or knock him over....why not if it only costs 15 yards?
This plan would not work.
The umps call a way better game now. They miss close ones, but no more do they call way off the plate pitches strikes.
fearsomefour
Legend
fearsomefour
Legend
Whoops! I thought this was the boobies thread.
My plan would be that if it is clear pass interference then place the ball at the spot.
The only way it would be 15 yards if the defender could somehow make it just a tug. That is hard to do and to keep the receiver from catching the ball.
But what bugs the crap out of me. If that's purdy or mahomes, the flags come out against the Rams.
And F brady, he was the biggest cry baby wanting a flag everytime someone breathed on him.
Anybody else notice the horrible analysis by Dean Blandino today on the Deebo fumble?
That play was an OBVIOUS fumble. It wasn't close. Called on the field as a fumble, and confirmed via replay as a fumble. Yet Blandino repeatedly described it as "too close to call... not conclusive either way... so they'll just go with the ruling on the field."
I can forgive the refs on the field for missing a close call, especially a bam-bam close play. But for a TV analyst to completely screw up AFTER getting multiple conclusive slo-mo views... sheesh!
I re-watched the play a couple times. Deebo was obviously losing possession BEFORE the ball touched the ground. And his knee was NEVER CLOSE to being down.
Why pay Blandino to be a "rules expert" when he doesn't know WTF he's talking about?! Rant over.
That play was an OBVIOUS fumble. It wasn't close. Called on the field as a fumble, and confirmed via replay as a fumble. Yet Blandino repeatedly described it as "too close to call... not conclusive either way... so they'll just go with the ruling on the field."
I can forgive the refs on the field for missing a close call, especially a bam-bam close play. But for a TV analyst to completely screw up AFTER getting multiple conclusive slo-mo views... sheesh!
I re-watched the play a couple times. Deebo was obviously losing possession BEFORE the ball touched the ground. And his knee was NEVER CLOSE to being down.
Why pay Blandino to be a "rules expert" when he doesn't know WTF he's talking about?! Rant over.
Dean sucks and he always sides with the call on the field unless it is so obvious that we all know the official that made the call on the field was wrong.
- Status