NFL robs the Steelers

[broncosmitty]

Had James' TD counted, I think Brady had 38 seconds left anyway. Steelers lose either way. This call (never one call) cannot be the "reason" for a W/L. Period.

But everyone and their dogs know that was a catch in reality... just not on paper...sort of.

I think they had two timeouts also.

 

[realityball]

shitty rule ... they should change it




... now

 

[NWPATSFAN]

I think they had two timeouts also.

You are correct sir

 

[CreepCreep2014]

WOW...lot's of responses....God Damn Patriots and the refs in their pockets...it's only league officials that are out to get them....That play didn't lose you the game. Ben's pick did...the lack of coverage on Gronk did....fuck for all we know Pitt kicks a FG and they tie....

 

[dbldwn711]

I forgot about this one:

yeah, i posted that earlier today

"it's just different" is the reply you should expect to see.

Hell, I don't care. Post it again. Maybe they will come up with a different explanation.

I'm still pissed off about an index card

When determining if there was a catch there are TWO different rules. One for an upright receiver (Cooks) and one for a receiver going to the ground (James).

Please skip to 10:45

You're welcome

 

[Vitamike]

Link?

2007 New England Patriots videotaping controversy - Wikipedia

Enough smoke here for this NFL Football fan to have a valid and differing opinion from those of most New England Patriots fans...

• Both the Boston Herald and reporter Tomase had multiple sources and still believe one particular source to be very credible and Tomase still stands by his story even though the paper redacted the story in the end.
• Your HC CBB fined half a million dollars (the max fine at the time) for breaking filming rules.
• Your team owner Kraft fined and apologized for his team breaking NFL video rules.
• Your video guy Walsh stating he turned his Pats logo'd shirt inside out & joked 'they should have filmed the Rams walkthrough' at the time.
• Walsh requiring indemnity before even agreeing to sit down with the NFL.
• Senator Spector calling for an independent investigation because of the NFL's conflict of interest.
• Lawsuits of federal racketeering filed as a result of video filming practices.
• Video tapes destroyed before anyone outside the league could ever view them.
• Boston's infamous Senator Kennedy, who along with Spector sat on the Senate Judiciary Committee deflects attention towards 'real problems putting the investigation on ice.
• The Pats 'Football Research Director' (You know the guy with the photographic memory) admitting to Congress that he was sneaking behind opponents benches and filming their huddles.
• Martz stating that Goddell told the former Rams HC CMM to write a statement that he was 'satisfied' with the NFL's investigation and that if it ever went to an Senate Investigation that it would be terrible for the League
• Even the Belichick coaching tree, McDaniels was caught in Denver doing exactly what New England was accused vs the Rams, filming the 49ers walkthrough in London.

And you know what, those are just some of the Wiki highlights there is sooo much more....

Enough by far to have a healthy opinion that the NFL was involved in a cover up.

I've said it before, I'm sort of glad it didn't go to an investigation. I love the NFL and I don't know if the League could have 'survived going to the ground' LOL.. In this case the ball of uncertainty was clearly moving and thankfully for the NFL and it's fans like me, it turned out to be a non reviewable play.

Still doesn't exonerate the Pats and their filming practices with this fan one bit.

 

[dbldwn711]

2007 New England Patriots videotaping controversy - Wikipedia

Enough smoke here for this NFL Football fan to have a valid and differing opinion from those of most New England Patriots fans...

• Both the Boston Herald and reporter Tomase had multiple sources and still believe one particular source to be very credible and Tomase still stands by his story even though the paper redacted the story in the end.
• Your HC CBB fined half a million dollars (the max fine at the time) for breaking filming rules.
• Your team owner Kraft fined and apologized for his team breaking NFL video rules.
• Your video guy Walsh stating he turned his Pats logo'd shirt inside out & joked 'they should have filmed the Rams walkthrough' at the time.
• Walsh requiring indemnity before even agreeing to sit down with the NFL.
• Senator Spector calling for an independent investigation because of the NFL's conflict of interest.
• Lawsuits of federal racketeering filed as a result of video filming practices.
• Video tapes destroyed before anyone outside the league could ever view them.
• Boston's infamous Senator Kennedy, who along with Spector sat on the Senate Judiciary Committee deflects attention towards 'real problems putting the investigation on ice.
• The Pats 'Football Research Director' (You know the guy with the photographic memory) admitting to Congress that he was sneaking behind opponents benches and filming their huddles.
• Martz stating that Goddell told the former Rams HC CMM to write a statement that he was 'satisfied' with the NFL's investigation and that if it ever went to an Senate Investigation that it would be terrible for the League
• Even the Belichick coaching tree, McDaniels was caught in Denver doing exactly what New England was accused vs the Rams, filming the 49ers walkthrough in London.

And you know what, those are just some of the Wiki highlights there is sooo much more....

Enough by far to have a healthy opinion that the NFL was involved in a cover up.

I've said it before, I'm sort of glad it didn't go to an investigation. I love the NFL and I don't know if the League could have 'survived going to the ground' LOL.. In this case the ball of uncertainty was clearly moving and thankfully for the NFL and it's fans like me, it turned out to be a non reviewable play.

Still doesn't exonerate the Pats and their filming practices with this fan one bit.

Let me help:

The original author of the story (a Boston sports writer) retracted the story once he learned that Matt Walsh (the only person who could have filmed the walk through) told the NFL under oath as part of its investigation that he did NOT film the walk through. Also, the writer printed the story without ever seeing the alleged tape (because there wasn't one).

Herald reporter: Sources never said they saw tape

Later, the actual newspaper who employed the writer issued an apology for printing the false story.

Apology - BostonHerald.com

Stay stupid.

 

[dbldwn711]

Here's a little more.

An NFL investigation into the incident showed that At the time of the Rams walk through at the Superdome there was no power to the areas where the cameras were and the cameras did not battery back ups. Additionally, as Walsh was leaving the Superdome with another member of the Patriots staff this unidentifed staff member testified under oath that Waksh turned to him and said "we should have videotaped that."

Here's the exact excerpt and link:

Following this accusation, NFL investigators immediately started looking into the allegations and found that indeed the Patriots video staff was at the Louisiana Superdome that day, but the video equipment had neither battery packs nor a power supply to run. A Patriots employee who was with Walsh at the walkthrough quoted Walsh as saying, "We should have taped that."

Fired Up: Setting the Record Straight on Spygate

 

[dbldwn711]

I was at that SuperBowl. The Rams did not take the Pats seriously. They were there for a coronation not a football game. They got out coached and outplayed that day. They wanted to throw the ball all over the field rather than pound marshal Faulk because they bought into the "greatest show on turf" nonsense. The truth is they didn't stand a chance because little did they or anyone know at the time a young QB was putting his initial touches on being the greatest QB to ever play the game.

This is why they lost (it had nothing to do with videotapes)...

Minute and half, no timeouts, Backed up inside their own 20, an inexperienced QB and a HOF coach in the booth telling them to take a knee...

 

[dbldwn711]

"Gives me goosebumps."

-- John Madden

 

[Vitamike]

Triggered...

The truth is they didn't stand a chance because little did they or anyone know at the time a young QB was putting his initial touches on being the greatest QB to ever play the game.

16 of 27, 145 yards, TD.

Yep, it was Terrific Tom!

 

[dbldwn711]

Triggered...



16 of 27, 145 yards, TD.

Yep, it was Terrific Tom!

You left out SB MVP.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

You have to be on your feet, in order to make a "football move". That's where many get confused.

Catch a ball on your feet, turn up field and dive across the goal line... lose the ball after crossing? You're good. Catch a ball while going to the ground, and turn for the goal line as a part of ONE SINGULAR motion. It's an incompletion.

I understand the gripe... but I am not sure you can declare something a "football move", if a player isn't on his feet. Ya know?

I hear you...clearly going to the ground, but also clearly caught the ball and never lost possession of it.

I understand the call, but it doesn't really apply across the board...only on a catch which creates some debate. At the same time, I've moved on.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

My problem is I still didnt see it hit the ground

We all saw it come loose, but did we really see it leave James' hands at any point clear enough to overrule?

Exactly.

 

[Oldschool739]

Good to hear. I get so nervous sometimes when I think the games are actually in doubt.

Well, you never know which scenario Roger Dodger has in mind for his WWF show, so you just have to wait and see.....

 

[flyingelvis]

Exactly.

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

Is that Right hand NOT under the ball?

Better yet, do you think thats enough to overturn the call?

Just asking

 

[dbldwn711]

Is that Right hand NOT under the ball?

Better yet, do you think thats enough to overturn the call?

Just asking

You're kidding right? UNDER the ball?

 

[dbldwn711]

Does that help?

 

[Vitamike]

You left out SB MVP.

Gotta be the worst Superbowl MVP stat line ever!

The real MVP in SB50 was the Pats Defense coming up with 3 turnovers, it was the only stat outside of Special Teams (Besides the final of course) that was in favor of New England. Some would say Vinatieri with those three field goals, two ~50 yards including the game winner, was the REAL Superbowl 50 MVP.

Brady, even though I think he is truly the GOAT, did bare minimum to not lose his first Superbowl.

He didn't turn the ball over and took two sacks for 11 yards, and took two sacks where he actually ends up with 134 net passing yards and a 59% completion percentage.



Not exactly Superbowl MVP type numbers, eh?