reread my post, i said the opposite. if there was holding the entire game like you say the refs should have called it the entire game, not just in the endzone at the end of the game. My opinion would be the same if the regardless if it were the Pats or the Ravens..or the Fins for that matter. and if the holding by the Ravens was sooo blatantly ridiculous the league would certainly look into it. currently i dont think an investigation is pending.
and who says you get some "lee way to a point"? as far as i know a penalty is a penalty no matter if its the first time of the third.
and what does this mean? " Guess what, it was easier to do what the pats are doing then."
You seem to be walking the line. You say if there was holding all game the refs should have called it. But when there is blatant hold you equate that to the refs cherry picking calls to favor one team. You say a penalty is a penalty yet call a blatant penalty questionable? The refs did call penalties on the ravens during the game. What you are are really saying is the refs called the game fair until a call went against the ravens that added to them losing the game , then its slanted. If that Gaffney td went the ravens way I doubt you would say a thing about it. You also said the NFL would look into holding if it was going on. Yet there is no "investigation" on the question's you brought up. In fact I posted a video from the NFL showing why the penalty's where called. On the pats side if there was holding going on there would be an investigation , yet there is no investigation into the calls you questioned? So you trust the league only when it favors the opponent you are saying got screwed?
You act as if my claims of there being holding are laughable because if it happened the refs would have called it. They made several calls vs the ravens. Yet when they call a hold when the games on the line, a clear hold , you say its unfair officiating.
Leeway is easy to understand. Different crews let teams "play" different ways. Just let them play is the saying. But when the team starts getting out of line they start calling them on it. You cant armbar a receiver on his route and ride him down and expect to have it let go. There is a difference between letting db's be a little physical , and plain old holding people all over the place.
What the pats are doing now is HARDER then what the bears did. They are trying to go undefeated in a league with much more parody, free agency, a salary cap , and instant replay. The slant towards Offense you claim is no different then the slant towards defense back in the day. The pats just got a explosive offense. I didn't see any talk of the pats being screwed last year in the afccg when they got called for things like facegaurding. Where the pats at a dissadvantage last year to the colts since they didn't have good wr's? Facegaurding is not even a NFl rule anymore. The difference is it is harder to build a winner year in and year out now in days.
The pats blow people out, they are running up the score. The pats win close games, they are no good. The league comes down on the pats they are getting what is coming to them. The pats win a game on the leagues rules and the league is helping them. People want nothing more then the pats to lose. Thats why pats fans are defensive. Anything to discredit anything they do.
