Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They taught us that during our Pop Warner days.......
And the receiver made a "football move", so it wasn't like the "defenseless player" call I've seen so much of lately.
Yes, a truly awful call.
Personally, I would eliminate the "defenseless player" concept entirely. And I would use replay to review helmet-to-helmet hits on receivers and quarterbacks, penalizing only such hits that appear to be deliberate and flagrant.
It's time to let these guys play football without having to be paranoid about personal foul penalties and fines, especially the players on defense. All of the rules favor the offenses already; we must give the defenses back the advantage of hard-hitting and intimidation, at least.
The Tuck Rule, and Mike Renfro's disallowed touchdown reception in the 1979 AFC Championship Game.
Both of those calls were awful. Raiders should have won that game and, yes, the Oilers should have one that game. Plus the Bert Emmanuel Catch. This was a game between the Buccaneers and the Rams. Buccs should have won that game.
It's gotta be the tuck rule game!! Oakland Raiders vs. New England Patriots in the snow in the AFC championship game back in 2001... I don't care what the refs said, that was a fumble!!
That was a bad rule more then a bad call. The official followed the rule to the letter.
Both of those calls were awful. Raiders should have won that game and, yes, the Oilers should have one that game. Plus the Bert Emmanuel Catch. This was a game between the Buccaneers and the Rams. Buccs should have won that game.
Oh yeah, I forgot about that one. You don't suppose the NFL was trying to make sure that high-scoring St. Louis with their story-of-the-year Kurt Warner got into the Super Bowl instead of defense-and-ground-control Tampa Bay, do you?
Oh yeah, I forgot about that one. You don't suppose the NFL was trying to make sure that high-scoring St. Louis with their story-of-the-year Kurt Warner got into the Super Bowl instead of defense-and-ground-control Tampa Bay, do you?
I have no idea, but I think the Buccaneers should have one that game. I thought Marc Bulger was the quarterback for the Rams at the time. I think Buccaneers fans had been so angry to the call. Tony Dungy would know because he was the coach at the time.
Yesterday I saw a video clip of the Steelers-Dolphins game and Ben Roethlisburger runs to the end zone and fumbles the ball but the officials signal touchdown because it crossed the plain but the Dolphins recover the fumble. It looked like the Dolphins recovered it, that could also be one of them phantom calls but the referee said that they did not have clear evidence that Miami recovered the fumble.
Last edited by Jonathan Ashbeck; 04-26-2014 at 08:16 AM..
Reason: Added more info
Ahmad Brooks hit on Drew Brees he hit Brees on the shoulder and chest but because Brees is short it and sold it it looked worse.
Yes. Was just about to post this
The call directly cost the 49ers a Win and Homefield throughout the Playoffs. No-way the Seahawks were winning a final NFC Title Game at Candlestick, stadium they haven't won since 2008
Yesterday I saw a video clip of the Steelers-Dolphins game and Ben Roethlisburger runs to the end zone and fumbles the ball but the officials signal touchdown because it crossed the plain but the Dolphins recover the fumble. It looked like the Dolphins recovered it, that could also be one of them phantom calls but the referee said that they did not have clear evidence that Miami recovered the fumble.
If he had possession of the ball as he crossed the plane of the end zone, the play was over at that point. Of course if it were a pass play, other factors would have to be considered, such as had the receiver established possession before crossing the goal line. But on a run play, as soon as the ball crosses the goal line it is over. TD!
If he had possession of the ball as he crossed the plane of the end zone, the play was over at that point. Of course if it were a pass play, other factors would have to be considered, such as had the receiver established possession before crossing the goal line. But on a run play, as soon as the ball crosses the goal line it is over. TD!
But the problem is that the officials called touchdown and later reviewed and the ref said that he did not have clear evidence of the fumble recovery and set up Pittsburgh at the goal line.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
