BengalsOwn Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='744419' date='Feb 4 2009, 12:41 PM']Correct me if I'm wrong but isnt part of the ref's job to get the ball back so they can move onto the EP attempt? If so wouldnt it have stood to reason that they did see it?[/quote] they don't use the same ball for kicks... players keep their td balls all the time. OMG A PLAYER HELD A BALL IN THE AIR AND SHOOK IT A LITTLE BIT THAT SHOULD BE A PENALTY. Bunch of women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='BengalsOwn' post='744424' date='Feb 4 2009, 11:49 AM']they don't use the same ball for kicks... players keep their td balls all the time. OMG A PLAYER HELD A BALL IN THE AIR AND SHOOK IT A LITTLE BIT THAT SHOULD BE A PENALTY. Bunch of women.[/quote] Yeah how horible for us to expect that rules should be followed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|SF2| Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='744419' date='Feb 4 2009, 12:41 PM']Correct me if I'm wrong but isnt part of the ref's job to get the ball back so they can move onto the EP attempt? If so wouldnt it have stood to reason that they did see it?[/quote] No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|SF2| Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='Bengals1181' post='744420' date='Feb 4 2009, 12:43 PM']more than reason, its the way it goes. [b]S[/b]tealer [b]F[/b]an [b]2[/b] is just finally confirming what we've all suspected since he joined.[/quote] Because I don't know if the ref saw Holmes shake the ball I am now a Stealers fan. That there is some of that Kentucky logic. SF stands for Saints Fan as I spent half of my youth in New Orleans. I don't like the Stealers, particulary when they are kicking our arse most of the time and laughing about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|SF2| Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='744427' date='Feb 4 2009, 12:53 PM']Yeah how horible for us to expect that rules should be followed.[/quote] I think it was penalty. Not sure why some don't understand this. My point has been a. Did the refs see it? NOT, SHOULD THE REFS HAVE SEEN IT? They can't call something they did not see. b. Were the refs instructed before the game to not call excessive celebration unless it was VERY excessive? There is certainly a desire by most people in the league to quit calling this penalty on minor celebrations but YES IT IS STILL THE RULE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalsOwn Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='744427' date='Feb 4 2009, 12:53 PM']Yeah how horible for us to expect that rules should be followed.[/quote] :rofl: Do you know what team you root for? Chad Johnson is the king of TD dances. All this whining over a guy holding a football in the air and shaking it around for 5 seconds. "Rules" like that should be thrown out. Chad Johnson gets penalized for that and Bengals fans everywhere cry out OMG NO FUN LEAGUEZZ I'm relieved the super bowl wasn't influenced by a stupid ass penalty like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Elflocko| Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='BengalsOwn' post='744443' date='Feb 4 2009, 12:25 PM']:rofl: Do you know what team you root for? Chad Johnson is the king of TD dances. All this whining over a guy holding a football in the air and shaking it around for 5 seconds. "Rules" like that should be thrown out. Chad Johnson gets penalized for that and Bengals fans everywhere cry out OMG NO FUN LEAGUEZZ I'm relieved the super bowl wasn't influenced by a stupid ass penalty like that.[/quote] Had it been Chad, he [b]would[/b] have been flagged... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='Elflocko' post='744444' date='Feb 4 2009, 12:28 PM']Had it been Chad, he [b]would[/b] have been flagged...[/quote] and it wouldnt have been the first time chad got flagged for a celebration Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='BengalsOwn' post='744443' date='Feb 4 2009, 12:25 PM']:rofl: Do you know what team you root for? Chad Johnson is the king of TD dances. All this whining over a guy holding a football in the air and shaking it around for 5 seconds. "Rules" like that should be thrown out. Chad Johnson gets penalized for that and Bengals fans everywhere cry out OMG NO FUN LEAGUEZZ I'm relieved the super bowl wasn't influenced by a stupid ass penalty like that.[/quote] duely noted, and when Chad celebrates his next TD you better not bitch about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol_Bengal Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='BengalsOwn' post='744443' date='Feb 4 2009, 01:25 PM']:rofl: Do you know what team you root for? Chad Johnson is the king of TD dances. All this whining over a guy holding a football in the air and shaking it around for 5 seconds. "Rules" like that should be thrown out. Chad Johnson gets penalized for that and Bengals fans everywhere cry out OMG NO FUN LEAGUEZZ [b]I'm relieved the super bowl wasn't influenced by a stupid ass penalty like that.[/b][/quote] Quite honestly I agree with you... I'm glad something that small didn't affect the outcome either. However, rules are rules... [quote name='Elflocko' post='744444' date='Feb 4 2009, 01:28 PM']Had it been Chad, he [b]would[/b] have been flagged...[/quote] and, exactly. several other people do the same thing, at the same time, in the same place they're getting the hanky thrown on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccartman2 Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='STRAYCAT' post='744273' date='Feb 3 2009, 08:37 PM']Look at the play when the Cards were gonna punch it in and pisburgh ran it back on the interception....one DB was running forward before the snap and was offsides...caused Kurt to throw sooner.....int. They still should of tackled his ass anyway Nobody called offsides WTF![/quote] Well, I'm going to be honest, I saw this on the Super Bowl game thread and went back to the play. Watching it in slow mo no one jumps offsides on the snap. A case could be made that the corner nearest the screen was offsides, but that could have been camera angle too. It's best we just let the offsides go. [quote name='KRiMiNaL513' post='744283' date='Feb 3 2009, 09:06 PM'][img]http://i43.tinypic.com/2ighzyx.jpg[/img] Block in the back anyone??????[/quote] NOW THIS!!! This changed the game. Oft, Bam.... Any thoughts on the video evidence? Great find and welcome to the board. [quote name='Le Tigre' post='744285' date='Feb 3 2009, 09:11 PM']Sort of OT...but maybe not. I saw Bob Knight on an ESPN segment several weeks ago. He was watching film showing how, on any given play around the lane, certain teams/players are rarely if ever called for traveling. He showed like 5 different shots from high-profile NCAA games--usually those in the tournament or big-time telly games. It was amazing to see guys like Hansbrough get away with steps over and over again. The General was lamenting that calls that were always made years ago...rarely consistently get called today--especially in "big" games. All he could say was "not much you can do, it's all about the television dollars". And this was with the NCAA. This trend in the NFL towards rewarding the "star power" is not just limited to the Stealers (although they always seem to benefit the most for some reason)...I have been noticing this with all high-profile teams in recent years...especially in the "big" games. It's been going on for years in the NBA...so it doesn't surprise me that the NFL has followed suit.[/quote] I guess if that's what the NFL wants to do, then they are welcome. They should realize though that there are reasons while the NBA struggles to stay ahead of the NHL as the number 4 sport in the U.S. and it sure as hell isn't because basketball is a bad game. The league is aweful and the game so tainted, it's not worth watching. Now if the NFL wants to go that route so be it. Probably only one year away from just watching hockey if the league goes uncapped. Hello Yankees - Red Sox every year for the Super Bowl and money can buy Super Bowls a lot easier then it can World Series Rings. And before anyone sites the Redskins, they do a bad job because they are always trying to build that way and build no continuity. Think New England would give up players like Branch, and McGinnest (I know they have declined) with out the cap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oftt4 Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='GoBengals' post='744323' date='Feb 3 2009, 10:46 PM']name once ever...[/quote] Two come to mind immediately. 1) the Polamalu overturned INT against tyhe Colts in the 2005 playoffs 2) they said the Holmes celebration in XLIII should have been a penalty, and that they missed it. I'm sure there are countless others...but you only asked for one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oftt4 Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='esjbh2' post='744342' date='Feb 3 2009, 11:48 PM']Guilty as charged. It was Timmons jumping the snap count. [b]FWIW, there was another poster shortly thereafter that said he watched it again on slo-mo tivo and said it was not offsides[/b]. I don't have access to tape so I don't know for sure, but it looked way offsides to me at fullspeed.[/quote] That info doesnt fit in to the conspiracy theory, and will be discarded. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oftt4 Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='ccartman2' post='744455' date='Feb 4 2009, 01:02 PM']NOW THIS!!! This changed the game. Oft, Bam.... Any thoughts on the video evidence? Great find and welcome to the board.[/quote] Not sure what you want me to say. It isnt an illegal block in the back. The guy was running to the sideline, not downfield. His back was to the opposing sideline and Woodley was running straight downfield. The guy fell to the side, not forward. You guys are going to see what you want to see, but I think the block on Ben in SB XL on that INT return was just as bad, or worse than this and there was no call there either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol_Bengal Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='oftt4' post='744471' date='Feb 4 2009, 02:52 PM']Not sure what you want me to say. [b]It isnt an illegal block in the back. The guy was running to the sideline, not downfield. His back was to the opposing sideline and Woodley was running straight downfield. The guy fell to the side, not forward.[/b] You guys are going to see what you want to see, but I think the block on Ben in SB XL on that INT return was just as bad, or worse than this and there was no call there either.[/quote] You are out of you mind... anything beyond halfway of the shoulder is "in the back"... Let me guess - you're going to say he blocked him from the side, right? What a joke! Get out of here - you're hilarious! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|kennethmw| Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='oftt4' post='744471' date='Feb 4 2009, 02:52 PM']Not sure what you want me to say. It isnt an illegal block in the back. The guy was running to the sideline, not downfield. His back was to the opposing sideline and Woodley was running straight downfield. The guy fell to the side, not forward. You guys are going to see what you want to see, but I think the block on Ben in SB XL on that INT return was just as bad, or worse than this and there was no call there either. [b]Now, who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes, Dammit![/b][/quote] Fixt it for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oftt4 Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='Vol_Bengal' post='744474' date='Feb 4 2009, 02:13 PM']You are out of you mind... [b]anything beyond halfway of the shoulder is "in the back"...[/b] Let me guess - you're going to say he blocked him from the side, right? What a joke! Get out of here - you're hilarious![/quote] Pretty sure you're wrong there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 [quote name='oftt4' post='744489' date='Feb 4 2009, 04:39 PM']Pretty sure you're wrong there.[/quote] No, that's an obvious block in the back. The right hand is arguably ok. The left hand is in the middle of the Cardinal player's back. I realize the refs are middle aged guys who can't keep up with the players when play reverses from one end of the field to the other but they shouldn't have missed something as obvious as this, even from well behind the play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
claptonrocks Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 Maybe just maybe the DUMBASS Cardinals should have tried and pushed him OUT OF BOUNDS during that 100 yard jaunt.....jesus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oftt4 Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 [quote name='sparky151' post='744507' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:43 PM']No, that's an obvious block in the back. The right hand is arguably ok. The left hand is in the middle of the Cardinal player's back. I realize the refs are middle aged guys who can't keep up with the players when play reverses from one end of the field to the other but they shouldn't have missed something as obvious as this, even from well behind the play.[/quote] The way I understand it is that for it to be a block in the back both hands have to essentially be on his numbers. I mean if it was that blatant, dont you think the guy that was blocked would have complained? [quote name='claptonrocks' post='744510' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:45 PM']Maybe just maybe the DUMBASS Cardinals should have tried and pushed him OUT OF BOU"MNDS during that 100 yard jaunt.....jesus[/quote] That would have worked. I heard a Cards fan on Sirius NFL claim that Fitz was half assing it until Harrison got to the 50 yard line (at which point it was obviously too late). I guess he thought someone else would get him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 [quote name='oftt4' post='744527' date='Feb 4 2009, 07:40 PM']The way I understand it is that for it to be a block in the back both hands have to essentially be on his numbers. I mean if it was that blatant, dont you think the guy that was blocked would have complained?[/quote] It was the last play of the half. There was a review to see if Harrison got over the goal line, but the Cards were going to the locker room. Blocking in the back means hitting or pushing a player in the back. Woodley clearly did that here. It doesn't require two hands for it to be called. If we give the referees the benefit of the doubt, they weren't in position to see the push due to play moving quickly from one end of the field to the other. The referee starts the play in the offensive backfield and still should have had an angle to see the foul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTBengalsFan Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 On NFL live they just said there was an obvious clipping no-call on the Steelers during the run-back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwing Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 [quote name='sparky151' post='744507' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:43 PM']No, that's an obvious block in the back. The right hand is arguably ok. The left hand is in the middle of the Cardinal player's back. I realize the refs are middle aged guys who can't keep up with the players when play reverses from one end of the field to the other but they shouldn't have missed something as obvious as this, even from well behind the play.[/quote] If any part of the block is ok ------ it will rarely be called a penalty. His right hand is in front of the shoulder. A bigger question is #25 jumping onto a guys back near the endzone. It is not clear but if he hit the guy falling to the ground -------- that could ahve been a penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengalmaniac Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Goodell is the steelers #1 fan...Enough said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poggle Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 I HATE THE STEALERS GOD DAM BUNCH OF COCK SUCKING ASS HOLES!! THEY STEAL THE SUPER BALL AGAIN!!! FUCK THEM ALL THOSE FUCKIN FUCKERS FUCKED US WHEN THEY HIT CARTON PALMER IN THE DOGGONE PLAYOFF, THEN THEY RIGGED THE SUPER BALL WHICH SHOULD HAD THE SEATTLE SEAHWKS WIN. THEY AWARD THE OFICCIALS GOLD WHISTLES DURING THE RING CEREOMONY THATS WHY THEY CAN STEAL THE SUPER BALL EVERY TIME THEY PLAY. I HATE THEM DO TEH WORLD A FAVOR, WHEN YOU SEE A STEALERS FAN PUNCHEM IN THE JAW AND SHOUT "HOO DAY" IN THERE FACE, THIS AND I LIKE TO THROW ROCKS AT EM. ITS TIME TO LET THEM KNOW WE ARE BETTER, DON'T BACK BACK FROM THE STEALERS FANS CAUSE THEY ARE A BUNCH OF FAGS. HOO DAY BENGALS IN THE SUPER BALL IN 09 MUTHER FUCKER!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.