phillybengal Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 I didn't actually watch it yet, but sounds like he says Porter being there isn't a penalty.http://operations.nfl.com/the-officials/inside-nfl-gameday-central/official-review-with-dean-blandino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 Heard Blandino earlier in the week. He backs the refs. Porter and his actual actions are insignificant to his POV.If the flag would have been thrown on Porter. He'd be saying it was the right call, IMOMy impression of him is when people question clearly blown/wrong calls he'll quickly point that the "refs" get many more right than they do wrong. He's a ref Homer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Rock Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 Same bullshit. He's saying the Coach shouldn't be out there, but no flag. Nobody wants to elaborate further because if you stay on topic and continue to evaluate what they're saying, it makes no sense. It's in the rules. They're using the confusion on the field at the time to legitimize the refs overlooking Porter. Well if it's just a madhouse of violations, throw offsetting flags and restore order. The piece starts with him mentioning the petition pertaining to the bad officiating. The prick then mentions the Hill fumble which obviously no one ever contested. That pisses me off enough to yet again post this number. NFL (212)-450-2000. If you have spare time, call em up just to voice your displeasure, and let em know we don't accept a 30 yard penalty on an incomplete pass to end the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 I wonder why he didn't go into the Shazier hit on Bernard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|High School Harry| Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 Who's Dan Blandino and who the fuck cares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 Who's Dan Blandino and who the fuck cares?Former head of the officials, I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 Former head of the officials, I believe. Current VP of officiating actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 Yeah so, He's going to back his officials 99.9% of the time. If they would have thrown the flag on Porter and if it would have caused mass questioning he would find reasons to support it. Not a surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 Yeah so, He's going to back his officials 99.9% of the time. If they would have thrown the flag on Porter and if it would have caused mass questioning he would find reasons to support it. Not a surprise. Well duh.The reason he is on that show isn't so there is transparency and mea culpa's. It's all about public relations and assuring people that the games outcomes need not be questioned. I think we all get that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alleycat Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 This is no different than GW sending Colin Powell in front of Congress and the UN to tell us that there were, in fact, weapons of mass destruction. He had his own shiny graphics, too. As long as you send your head official out in public to tell us the way things are, we can't really object, even if we all know it's crap. Because, you know, that's just the way things are.Sure, years after the fact what many knew then most will know now, but being right has never had anything to do with anyone doing the right thing, especially when it comes to power and money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Dr Tarzan| Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 Same shit that Pereira did when he was in his position. His refs were always right with a token once or twice a year "they did that one wrong". Now he isn't answerable to anybody in NFL offices and on the network games he says they are wrong on questionable calls over half the time. Blandino is just pulling a Periera, gonna back his refs unless it is so blatantly obvious the offending team even admits to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 Same shit that Pereira did when he was in his position. His refs were always right with a token once or twice a year "they did that one wrong". Now he isn't answerable to anybody in NFL offices and on the network games he says they are wrong on questionable calls over half the time. Blandino is just pulling a Periera, gonna back his refs unless it is so blatantly obvious the offending team even admits to it.Which is exactly why they didn't cover the Shazier hit. And why everyone in the media is avoiding it as well. Because there is no way to defend it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 There was plenty of conversation about the Shazier hit on sports talk radio. National shows, too. Not sure were this "avoiding" perspective comes from.Mike and Mike covered it. Dan Patrick did. Rich Eisen covered it. I guess most were on the Bengals side in the questioning of the hit. I believe Dean covered it exclusively on DPs show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 There was plenty of conversation about the Shazier hit on sports talk radio. National shows, too. Not sure were this "avoiding" perspective comes from. Link? I mean something where the guys do more than tell you "it was an unfortunate but legal hit". I haven't from anyone but fans that Shazier's should have been flagged. It's easy to whitewash on radio, where, you know there are no moving pictures to refute what they are saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 Link? I mean something where the guys do more than tell you "it was an unfortunate but legal hit". I haven't from anyone but fans that Shazier's should have been flagged. It's easy to whitewash on radio, where, you know there are no moving pictures to refute what they are saying.You are the one that claimed the media is avoiding it. So now you are saying you haven't listened and need a link to the shows? I can tell you all day long Bengals/Stealers was a topic from A-Z about that game to a point that it put the College National Championship into the background. I'm sure you can look up those shows and listen. In addition you can look up Sporting News and PFT in which they take the league to task about crown of the helmet instructional video of what not to do in 2013 here's a taste: Two years ago, an instructional video for NFL officials stressed the importance of the "crown of the helmet rule." The rule made it illegal for players to initiate contact with the crown of their helmet beyond the tackle box. The key components to a play worth penalizing: The initiator lines up his opponent, lowers his head and delivers "a forcible blow." Shazier's hit seems to fit the definition. But that definition is built on blurred lines. "Incidental" contact is forgiven. The penalty is subjective. And thus, we enter the fray of defining "defenseless" — as if any man can defend himself from such carnage. Proving intent is difficult enough in a court of law. On a football field, at full-speed, with runners ducking, instinctively, with defenders lowering their heads, instinctively, with officials swallowing their whistles, instinctively, the nuance of slow-motion thought disappears.And that's why this play is terrifying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted January 14, 2016 Report Share Posted January 14, 2016 You are the one that claimed the media is avoiding it. So now you are saying you haven't listened and need a link to the shows? I can tell you all day long Bengals/Stealers was a topic from A-Z about that game to a point that it put the College National Championship into the background. I'm sure you can look up those shows and listen. In addition you can look up Sporting News and PFT in which they take the league to task about crown of the helmet instructional video of what not to do in 2013 here's a taste: Two years ago, an instructional video for NFL officials stressed the importance of the "crown of the helmet rule." The rule made it illegal for players to initiate contact with the crown of their helmet beyond the tackle box. The key components to a play worth penalizing: The initiator lines up his opponent, lowers his head and delivers "a forcible blow." Shazier's hit seems to fit the definition. But that definition is built on blurred lines. "Incidental" contact is forgiven. The penalty is subjective. And thus, we enter the fray of defining "defenseless" — as if any man can defend himself from such carnage. Proving intent is difficult enough in a court of law. On a football field, at full-speed, with runners ducking, instinctively, with defenders lowering their heads, instinctively, with officials swallowing their whistles, instinctively, the nuance of slow-motion thought disappears.And that's why this play is terrifying. I have been listening/watching. That's why I said what I said in the first place. I can't prove what isn't there. And "Defenseless" doesn't even enter into it.. That was part of the bullshit being spewed by Carey on the TV that night. Where in that "crown of the helmet" rule do you see the word "defenseless"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scharm Posted January 15, 2016 Report Share Posted January 15, 2016 Segment above clearly states shaziers hit seems to fit the definition. I believe Dan Patrick asked Dean directly and even asked him again as in not accepting his explanation. Jay Mohr did a bunch on it. Quite a few others did as well including PFT and Sporting news. If you really wanted to know you could google it. Either way your claim to suggest the media was avoiding seems unfounded. Maybe you should watch or listen better? Usatoday declared it illegal and said it should draw a fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArizonaRising Posted January 15, 2016 Report Share Posted January 15, 2016 Being a Philly Bengal is like being a Minneapolis Jets fan. I can't really say much though. I'm a South Carolina (near Georgia border) Arizona fan *shrugs* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|kennethmw| Posted January 15, 2016 Report Share Posted January 15, 2016 Dean Blandino, former comedian, now head of the clown show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khatmandude Posted January 15, 2016 Report Share Posted January 15, 2016 Dean Blah Blah Blandino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Lucid| Posted January 15, 2016 Report Share Posted January 15, 2016 Dean Blandino, former comedian, now head of the clown show.Holy fuck he really is a stand-up comic.. NFL = Super Duper High Integrity! Canyou doubt it? Wocka Wocka Wocka!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.