Moose Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 The refs mistakingly gave their Patriettes an extra down - and it was only just that what should have been fourth down ended with Tommy Brady fumbling. Stinkin' refs!
SACTOBILLSFAN Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 First the refs tried really hard not to call a penalty on a play where Marcia handed it to Faulk and Faulk then turned to throw it back to Marcia. Brady then threw it to a wide open TE for a TD. The one problem, when Faulk threw the ball to Brady it clearly went forward by 4 yards, and then Brady threw another forward pass, and the side judge didn't throw a flag, and not until a lengthy discussion did they get it right. Then the pats got a 5th down and couldn't capitalize, they're dynasty is folding up if they can't even capitalize on that gift.
UConn James Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 Did you see the look on the ref's face when he had to daintily drop the flag ~ 4 minutes after the play? Sheepish with a side helping of 'O sh--!' I'm not sure about the loss of down there, tho. I wouldn't necessarily trust Wandy Cwoss on it. I would be a little more giddy about this game if they weren't playing the Dolphags.
Buford T. Justice Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 I'm going to have to take a very long shower after this game.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 The refs mistakingly gave their Patriettes an extra down... Per Randy Cross, an illegal forward pass only results in a loss of down if its past the LOS. If you want to complain about the "stinkin' refs," complain about them calling roughing the passer after Harrington tripped over a Patriots' DL who was lying on the field. In any event, the Patriots played like such crap today that they wouldn't have won even if the refs gave them unlimited downs.
Moose Posted December 10, 2006 Author Posted December 10, 2006 PLUS prior to all that they were the beneficiaries of a totally bogus roughing the passer call. When playing the Patriettes, unless the defender cradles widdle Tommy on his way down whilst singing him a lullaby, it's a penalty. Pure horse dookey!
Hollywood Donahoe Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 PLUS prior to all that they were the beneficiaries of a totally bogus roughing the passer call. True. But what is your opinion of the two BS roughing penalties from which the Dolphins benefited? Or does that information get in the way of your asinine rant?
bartshan-83 Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 Per Randy Cross... 861612[/snapback] Yeah, not gonna cut it... But I'm just playin either way...I didn't see it.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 Then the pats got a 5th down... Copied and pasted from the other, equally-as-ill-informed thread: Per Randy Cross, an illegal forward pass only results in a loss of down if its past the LOS.
Moose Posted December 10, 2006 Author Posted December 10, 2006 True. But what is your opinion of the two BS roughing penalties from which the Dolphins benefited? Or does that information get in the way of your asinine rant? 861617[/snapback] The Patsy lineman intentionally tripped Harrington - that's a penalty. He didn't just "happen" to be lying down.
UConn James Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 If you want to complain about the "stinkin' refs," complain about them calling roughing the passer after Harrington tripped over a Patriots' DL who was lying on the field. 861612[/snapback] HD, that DL was doing barrel rolls so he could roll up on the legs of Harrington. I give a to the hyperprotectiveness of the QBs, but that penalty was well deserved and he should be fined.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 The Patsy lineman intentionally tripped Harrington - that's a penalty. He didn't just "happen" to be lying down HD, that DL was doing barrel rolls so he could roll up on the legs of Harrington. I give a to the hyperprotectiveness of the QBs, but that penalty was well deserved. Homerism is an ugly thing. Wilfork was blocked in the back into the vicinity of Harrington's leg, and then Harrington tripped over him with no movement whatsoever from Wilfork. But as said, it makes little difference. The Pats would have lost that game even without the poor officiating.
Moose Posted December 10, 2006 Author Posted December 10, 2006 Anyhoo - the bottom line is the Patsies LOST! Die, Patriots, Die!!! DIE!!! DIE!!! DIE!!! P.S And doesn't Tommy Brady look so handsome when he's mad?
UConn James Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 with no movement whatsoever from Wilfork. 861627[/snapback] HA! The ing guy was rolling around trying to roll up on the turqouise sock he saw. You've gotta be ing kidding me.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 The ing guy was rolling around trying to roll up on the turqouise sock he saw. No. That's not what happened at all. You've gotta be ing kidding me. No. I am not.
Fezmid Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 Homerism is an ugly thing. You do realize that we hate the Dolphins as much as we hate your team, right...?
UConn James Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 No. That's not what happened at all.No. I am not. 861631[/snapback] I was watching the game. They showed the replay like 4 times while Harrington was down. Wilfork had no one around him for 5 yards and was rolling around. Talk about homer-ism. Don't piss on my leg and tell me its raining.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted December 10, 2006 Posted December 10, 2006 You do realize that we hate the Dolphins as much as we hate your team, right...? I had forgotten about that bit. But whatever the case, there is no way any rational person can claim that the Wilfork roughing penalty was anything but a travesty.
Recommended Posts