Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Sports Discussion Boards => Topic started by: Spoony Luv on February 05, 2008, 01:06:03 PM
-
He didn't challege the pass Eli throw to David Tyree's...Anyone who has watched any amount of football over the past couple years has seen time and time again, a ball that touches the ground AND IS NOT CRADLED is indeed an incompletion...Bill Should have throw the flag period...Anyone with HD tv could see plain as day that indeed that ball touched the ground...
The Giants deserved to win the game for sure and out played the pats but the fact that NO ONE wants to talk about that ball hitting the ground including the annoucers of the game when it happend is unsettling...
-
He didn't challege the pass Eli throw to David Tyree's...Anyone who has watched any amount of football over the past couple years has seen time and time again, a ball that touches the ground AND IS NOT CRADLED is indeed an incompletion...Bill Should have throw the flag period...Anyone with HD tv could see plain as day that indeed that ball touched the ground...
The Giants deserved to win the game for sure and out played the pats but the fact that NO ONE wants to talk about that ball hitting the ground including the annoucers of the game when it happend is unsettling...
Regarding the pass to Tyree, that happened within the last 2 minutes. Therefore, he couldn't challenge it; only the booth has that priviledge in the last 2 minutes of each half and in overtime.
-
He didn't challege the pass Eli throw to David Tyree's...Anyone who has watched any amount of football over the past couple years has seen time and time again, a ball that touches the ground AND IS NOT CRADLED is indeed an incompletion...Bill Should have throw the flag period...Anyone with HD tv could see plain as day that indeed that ball touched the ground...
The Giants deserved to win the game for sure and out played the pats but the fact that NO ONE wants to talk about that ball hitting the ground including the annoucers of the game when it happend is unsettling...
???
-
He didn't challege the pass Eli throw to David Tyree's...Anyone who has watched any amount of football over the past couple years has seen time and time again, a ball that touches the ground AND IS NOT CRADLED is indeed an incompletion...Bill Should have throw the flag period...Anyone with HD tv could see plain as day that indeed that ball touched the ground...
The Giants deserved to win the game for sure and out played the pats but the fact that NO ONE wants to talk about that ball hitting the ground including the annoucers of the game when it happend is unsettling...
no one even speculated if the ball hit the ground ::)
the only comment by Joe Buck and Troy was that it was a great escape by Eli and a great catch by David, it will go down as the greatest play in SB history and not the greatest non-call in SB history, live with it.
-
He didn't challege the pass Eli throw to David Tyree's...Anyone who has watched any amount of football over the past couple years has seen time and time again, a ball that touches the ground AND IS NOT CRADLED is indeed an incompletion...Bill Should have throw the flag period...Anyone with HD tv could see plain as day that indeed that ball touched the ground...
The Giants deserved to win the game for sure and out played the pats but the fact that NO ONE wants to talk about that ball hitting the ground including the annoucers of the game when it happend is unsettling...
Um. He caught that ball you dumb turd so settle down.
And kudos to that kid Tyree for making one of the greatest catches in Super Bowl history.
-
Um. He caught that ball you dumb turd so settle down.
And kudos to that kid Tyree for making one of the greatest catches in Super Bowl history.
YES
Belichick's biggest mistake was not challenging (1) the Giant's fumble earlier in the game, which the Giants got very lucky to get back, and (2) the offensive interference on Toomer in catching a pass along the sideline.
-
YES
Belichick's biggest mistake was not challenging (1) the Giant's fumble earlier in the game, which the Giants got very lucky to get back, and (2) the offensive interference on Toomer in catching a pass along the sideline.
Maybe he could have challenged the fumble, but if he wasn't certain it would be overturned, he couldn't risk losing a timeout. Interference is not a challengeable call, so there was nothing he could do about that play.
-
The Patriots will be back...
-
It was a catch. They lost. Move on with your life and congratulate the Giants. Wait till next year.
-
Um. He caught that ball you dumb turd so settle down.
And kudos to that kid Tyree for making one of the greatest catches in Super Bowl history.
you have zero clue what the rules are in the game if you don't believe the ball hit the ground...Now go eat Tom Tognelli's nut sack and understand the rules...
-
Regarding the pass to Tyree, that happened within the last 2 minutes. Therefore, he couldn't challenge it; only the booth has that priviledge in the last 2 minutes of each half and in overtime.
Yes you are right...But if Bill threw the flag, that would have forced the refs to look at the play...and then anything could have happend from there...Yes he would have lost a time out but they still probably would have looked at the play...
-
It was a catch. They lost. Move on with your life and congratulate the Giants. Wait till next year.
Apparently you missed the part of the post where i said the giants out played the pats etc :-\...
-
no one even speculated if the ball hit the ground ::)
the only comment by Joe Buck and Troy was that it was a great escape by Eli and a great catch by David, it will go down as the greatest play in SB history and not the greatest non-call in SB history, live with it.
wait until the dust settles and mark my words, that catch will be questioned...Anyone who thinks its a legit catch has not watched football over the last two years or atleast hasn't seen what the refs have been calling non catches over the past couple years...
That is all i'm saying...The giants for sure deserve the win...
-
Um. He caught that ball you dumb turd so settle down.
And kudos to that kid Tyree for making one of the greatest catches in Super Bowl history.
You must really watch a lot of football to not understand that a ball can't hit the ground unless its cradled OR HANDS UNDER THE BALL to be a catch..It happens in almost every other game for crying out loud....
-
watch the replay that I posted where did the ball hit the ground he had control of it
-
wait until the dust settles and mark my words, that catch will be questioned...Anyone who thinks its a legit catch has not watched football over the last two years or atleast hasn't seen what the refs have been calling non catches over the past couple years...
That is all i'm saying...The giants for sure deserve the win...
WOW five straight posts in a row,,,a little defensive arent you?
you are the only "genius" that is questioning the catch... two days after the victory. i listened to Mike and Mike and Colin Cowherd live streaming for the past two days and none of them, nor their guests even mentioned that the catch was questionable. they only considered the catch one of the greatest plays in SB history.
Why hasnt any of the Pats mentioned the "non catch" you speak of?
everyone knows its a legit catch.but you.
the dust that will settle is of the Giants victory parade.
do your best to consume your sour grapes in silence please.
-
???
You are not the only confused one... He had two hands on the ball when it touched the ground.
That's a catch no matter where you are.
-
wait until the dust settles and mark my words, that catch will be questioned...
ok i'll wait, maybe it will be brought up on the 3rd day after the SB :-\
-
He didn't challege the pass Eli throw to David Tyree's...Anyone who has watched any amount of football over the past couple years has seen time and time again, a ball that touches the ground AND IS NOT CRADLED is indeed an incompletion...Bill Should have throw the flag period...Anyone with HD tv could see plain as day that indeed that ball touched the ground...
The Giants deserved to win the game for sure and out played the pats but the fact that NO ONE wants to talk about that ball hitting the ground including the annoucers of the game when it happend is unsettling...
I watched it on HDTV, plenty of screen being about 50+" wide.
Ball never got close to being between the body and the hands.
It was a clean catch.
Get some glasses, and stop being so bitter your team LOST.
Bitch.
::)
-
You are not the only confused one... He had two hands on the ball when it touched the ground.
That's a catch no matter where you are.
wrong...You have to have your hands under the ball or cradle into the body to show control...Unless you've been sleeping under a rock, just about every other game played in the NFL has had a ball thrown in front of the receiver and when the reciever reaches out in front of himself and doesn't pull it into the body and goes down and the ball touches the ground, it is not a catch...Even if he has total control over the ball...It happens all the time...
-
WOW five straight posts in a row,,,a little defensive arent you?
you are the only "genius" that is questioning the catch... two days after the victory. i listened to Mike and Mike and Colin Cowherd live streaming for the past two days and none of them, nor their guests even mentioned that the catch was questionable. they only considered the catch one of the greatest plays in SB history.
Why hasnt any of the Pats mentioned the "non catch" you speak of?
everyone knows its a legit catch.but you.
the dust that will settle is of the Giants victory parade.
do your best to consume your sour grapes in silence please.
Your an idiot...try googling the catch...Everyone is talking about if it was a catch or not...You don't hear anyone on the networks talking about it because they just had the parade today for crying out loud...And the pats will never talk about it...Its just not there style...
And for the record, I could give a rats ass who won the game...How in the world anyone who calls themselves a fan of the game can't believe why the refs didn't atleast look at the catch is just fucking weird to me...Again no sour grapes here..I'll be the first one to tell ya that Brady's girlfriend is as about as real as Tom Cruises wife...
-
watch the replay that I posted where did the ball hit the ground he had control of it
You have to cradle the ball or have your hands under the ball for it to considered control....Look i truly believe the guy had total control of the ball...That is a catch in any other league but the NFL...
-
wrong...You have to have your hands under the ball or cradle into the body to show control...Unless you've been sleeping under a rock, just about every other game played in the NFL has had a ball thrown in front of the receiver and when the reciever reaches out in front of himself and doesn't pull it into the body and goes down and the ball touches the ground, it is not a catch...Even if he has total control over the ball...It happens all the time...
That's not what this says.
http://football.calsci.com/TheRules8.html
A forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball. If a receiver would have landed inbounds with both feet but is carried or pushed out of bounds while maintaining possession of the ball, pass is complete at the out-of-bounds spot.
Tyree "clearly possessed" the ball.
2 hands on it... control... = Catch.
-
That's not what this says.
http://football.calsci.com/TheRules8.html
Tyree "clearly possessed" the ball.
2 hands on it... control... = Catch.
I hear ya but how many times have you seen a catch where the guy had total control with his arms extended in front of him and the ball hits the ground and doesn't move an inch and its called an incomplete pass because the ball hit the ground without the reciever pulling it into a cradle position or having his hands under the ball...This shit happens all the time...Esp/with catches where the reciever falls out a bounds...
In any other game, there is no way that holding a ball on the top of your head is considered possession...Now if the ball never touches the ground like many on the net believe that all this talk doesn't mean anything...But if that ball touches the ground and his hands aren't UNDER the ball(which they weren't), then it is for sure not an NFL catch by the standards that they have been following...
Just about everyone watching that game was waiting for the refs to atleast check to see if he had possesion...And that never happend...At the very least, that is strange...I truly believe that it still would have been called a catch...And that would be fine...But to not even look at it truly shows that the NFL is a business first...
-
Just about everyone watching that game was waiting for the refs to atleast check to see if he had possesion...And that never happend...At the very least, that is strange...I truly believe that it still would have been called a catch...And that would be fine...But to not even look at it truly shows that the NFL is a business first...
Now I can agree with this... I was waiting for a review also, but it just didn't happen... I thought it odd too.
I do think it was a catch... I believe he had complete possession before it touched the ground, but I do think a review would have been ok..
-
It was a catch hahahahahh
we win bitches ....18 and 1
-
I'm not going to whine about "the catch". It was a catch. The pats had a bunch of chances to put the game away. Samuel , Harrison and Meriweather all dropped game ending int's.
The pats deserved to lose. They played flat , uninspired football.
The g men played better. They played like champions. The pats O line should all give there game checks back. Belichick and Mcdaniels did not ccoach a good game , and several pats players looked like they where sleep walking.
-
Your an idiot...try googling the catch...Everyone is talking about if it was a catch or not...You don't hear anyone on the networks talking about it because they just had the parade today for crying out loud...And the pats will never talk about it...Its just not there style...
And for the record, I could give a rats ass who won the game...How in the world anyone who calls themselves a fan of the game can't believe why the refs didn't atleast look at the catch is just fucking weird to me...Again no sour grapes here..I'll be the first one to tell ya that Brady's girlfriend is as about as real as Tom Cruises wife...
By everyone do you mean delusional Pats fans? so let me get this straight..you googled the catch and its all over the place...but yet no one on any of the networks is talking about it because they already had the parade??? ::)
its easy to understand why the refs didnt review the catch, because it was a clear catch plain and simple. live with it. its not going to change. in fact just for you ill go check espn.com, cbs sports, aol sports and fox sports and see if i can find this surge of contravercy invovlving the catch. how much information do you think i'll find?
-
By everyone do you mean delusional Pats fans? so let me get this straight..you googled the catch and its all over the place...but yet no one on any of the networks is talking about it because they already had the parade??? ::)
its easy to understand why the refs didnt review the catch, because it was a clear catch plain and simple. live with it. its not going to change. in fact just for you ill go check espn.com, cbs sports, aol sports and fox sports and see if i can find this surge of contravercy invovlving the catch. how much information do you think i'll find?
Its a moot point imo. Samuel , Harrison and Meriweather all dropped game ending ints. The catch was a catch. It was a great one to.
-
By everyone do you mean delusional Pats fans? so let me get this straight..you googled the catch and its all over the place...but yet no one on any of the networks is talking about it because they already had the parade??? ::)
its easy to understand why the refs didnt review the catch, because it was a clear catch plain and simple. live with it. its not going to change. in fact just for you ill go check espn.com, cbs sports, aol sports and fox sports and see if i can find this surge of contravercy invovlving the catch. how much information do you think i'll find?
Your right nobody on the networks will bring it up at all...Not one person...Not one person will even ask the question of whether the ball touched the ground...Not one person will even try to explain why it would be a catch if it hit the ground...
Fact is you were in the kitchen all night drinking wine with the wifes of the real football fans while the game was going on...Remember your the one who said Shockey didn't even show up at the "SB"...The only time you came out from the kitchen was to watch the commericals...That is what you do...
-
Its a moot point imo. Samuel , Harrison and Meriweather all dropped game ending ints. The catch was a catch. It was a great one to.
Yes it is a moot point. i just find it curious that Spoony would be so desperate enough to consider it a factor when it never was.
i am by no means rubbing it in the face of Pats fans, they could have easily won the game and by no means is it the end of their dynasty,or even close to it.
-
I'm not going to whine about "the catch". It was a catch. The pats had a bunch of chances to put the game away. Samuel , Harrison and Meriweather all dropped game ending int's.
The pats deserved to lose. They played flat , uninspired football.
The g men played better. They played like champions. The pats O line should all give there game checks back. Belichick and Mcdaniels did not ccoach a good game , and several pats players looked like they where sleep walking.
You seem to really know your shit when it comes to football...Lets put "that catch" a side and answer me this...
Are you saying that in ANY NFL football game a ball can touch the ground even if its not pulled into the body and or the hands are not under the ball? And are you saying that a player can hold the ball against the top of his head and as he falls to the ground and the ball can touch the ground and as long as it doesn't move... And that is total control?
Its one thing to think that the ball never touched the ground and that is fine for people to say or think that....And if it didn't, it is a catch for sure....But if it even grazed the ground, trapping a ball to to head is not possession in the nfl...
-
Your right nobody on the networks will bring it up at all...Not one person...Not one person will even ask the question of whether the ball touched the ground...Not one person will even try to explain why it would be a catch if it hit the ground...
Fact is you were in the kitchen all night drinking wine with the wifes of the real football fans while the game was going on...Remember your the one who said Shockey didn't even show up at the "SB"...The only time you came out from the kitchen was to watch the commericals...That is what you do...
hmm where did i say that about Shockey exactly? can you find that post of mine?
and i find it funny that after coming to the realization that you are in fact ridiculously wrong, you feel the need to resort to childish comments and a change of subject. yes i do enjoy a good glass of wine, as opposed to the beer helmet you prefer ;)
and i'll wait for you to find me that post of mine, and dont get so desperate as to say "i went back and changed it" after you again realize that you made a foolish mistake.
-
I'm not going to whine about "the catch". It was a catch. The pats had a bunch of chances to put the game away. Samuel , Harrison and Meriweather all dropped game ending int's.
The pats deserved to lose. They played flat , uninspired football.
The g men played better. They played like champions. The pats O line should all give there game checks back. Belichick and Mcdaniels did not ccoach a good game , and several pats players looked like they where sleep walking.
You seem to really know your shit when it comes to football...Lets put "that catch" a side and answer me this...
Are you saying that in ANY NFL football game a ball can touch the ground even if its not pulled into the body and or the hands are not under the ball? And are you saying that a player can hold the ball against the top of his head and as he falls to the ground and the ball can touch the ground and as long as it doesn't move... And that is total control?
Its one thing to think that the ball never touched the ground and that is fine for people to say or think that....And if it didn't, it is a catch for sure....But if it even grazed the ground, trapping a ball to to head is not possession in the nfl...
I see what you are saying. For me it is water under the bridge. We lost that game in so many ways. I see the point you are making though.
-
Its one thing to think that the ball never touched the ground and that is fine for people to say or think that....And if it didn't, it is a catch for sure....But if it even grazed the ground, trapping a ball to to head is not possession in the nfl...
It looked to me that he had both hands controlling the ball before the "graze" would have occurred... That's what I saw anyway.
It was still too close to notice if the ball did graze as there wasn't a good camera angle to say it did or didn't... You have to go with the receiver in that instance.
*edit*
In looking at it about 4 times on youtube just now... I'm going to have to say it didn't appear to touch the ground... It didn't create a grass indentation or anything.
I do think it came close to touching the ground, but I do not think it actually did.
-
Yes it is a moot point. i just find it curious that Spoony would be so desperate enough to consider it a factor when it never was.
i am by no means rubbing it in the face of Pats fans, they could have easily won the game and by no means is it the end of their dynasty,or even close to it.
thats the whole thing here...Of course its a moot point...I'm just questioning a play...I don't give to shits about the outcome...If it were the pats that had a catch like that happen, i would say the same thing...
But nobody wants to fucking talk about it...Any fan who has watched a few hundred games over the past couple years has seen over and over and over their team be called for an incomplete pass when a reciever had what looks like total control over the ball but the ball touches the ground....This happens all the time when a receiver has to reach forward for a catch and as he goes to the ground, if he doesn't pull the ball into his body or cup the ball from underneath and it touches the ground, it has always be ruled an incomplete pass....
That is all I'm saying here...The strangest thing here is no one on the networks will even talk about the rule...When the play went down, they kept showing replay after replay and the Homo's broadcasting the game would not even ask the question of does he have possession....
As a fan of the game, that alone was fucked up...again if you weren't sipping wine threw a straw in the kitchen, and you were actually a fan of the game itself, you may want to atleast have it explained to you...But like usual were in the kitchen trying to flirt with someone else's wife...
-
Your right nobody on the networks will bring it up at all...Not one person...Not one person will even ask the question of whether the ball touched the ground...Not one person will even try to explain why it would be a catch if it hit the ground...
Fact is you were in the kitchen all night drinking wine with the wifes of the real football fans while the game was going on...Remember your the one who said Shockey didn't even show up at the "SB"...The only time you came out from the kitchen was to watch the commericals...That is what you do...
um moron try reading my post in the context of the discusion. by "he wasnt there in the playoffs of the SB" i meant there playing with the team...you are a true moron. reading and comprehension isnt your best attribute i see.
-
I see what you are saying. For me it is water under the bridge. We lost that game in so many ways. I see the point you are making though.
but that is what i'm talking about...Its not about who won or lost the game...Obviously when someone brings up something it looks like sour grapes(i truly don't give a shit about the game) my question is why won't anyone even bring this stuff up? Will it really tarnish the "great catch"...Its like everyone is trying so hard to protect "that catch"...That sucks to me...It was a great catch for sure...One of the best games to watch...But when no one will even bring up the obvious, its just fucking weird to me...
-
thats the whole thing here...Of course its a moot point...I'm just questioning a play...I don't give to shits about the outcome...If it were the pats that had a catch like that happen, i would say the same thing...
But nobody wants to fucking talk about it...Any fan who has watched a few hundred games over the past couple years has seen over and over and over their team be called for an incomplete pass when a reciever had what looks like total control over the ball but the ball touches the ground....This happens all the time when a receiver has to reach forward for a catch and as he goes to the ground, if he doesn't pull the ball into his body or cup the ball from underneath and it touches the ground, it has always be ruled an incomplete pass....
That is all I'm saying here...The strangest thing here is no one on the networks will even talk about the rule...When the play went down, they kept showing replay after replay and the Homo's broadcasting the game would not even ask the question of does he have possession....
As a fan of the game, that alone was fucked up...again if you weren't sipping wine threw a straw in the kitchen, and you were actually a fan of the game itself, you may want to atleast have it explained to you...But like usual were in the kitchen trying to flirt with someone else's wife...
ha ha! hike up your skirt and quite your bitching already. it was a non factor, what more do you need.
-
um moron try reading my post in the context of the discusion. by "he wasnt there in the playoffs of the SB" i meant there playing with the team...you are a true moron. reading and comprehension isnt your best attribute i see.
you view a 3 hr. game out of context so whats your point...Your reality tunnel is much like all the other sheep in the world....Atheist(how original)...Look everyone, i don't believe in a god but do believe in almost everything my reality tunnel is showing me
-
you view a 3 hr. game out of context so whats your point...Your reality tunnel is much like all the other sheep in the world....Atheist(how original)...Look everyone, i don't believe in a god but do believe in almost everything my reality tunnel is showing me
my point is that you mis-read my text by not reading it in the context of the discusion and again made yourself look foolish.
how did i view a three game out of context? becuase i dont think they should have reviewed the catch? great so you know more than the league officials now. :-*
-
looks like a good catch to me. ::)