What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

I'll give you the Walker interference. The others, no. You just look at scoring plays, and the Packers got a TD that clearly wasn't, while Shianco's seemed pretty solid. I thought maybe the replay guy would give the Vikes the TD at the end to make up for the botched TDs earlier in the game. Not really, but the thought crossed my mind.
The Packers getting a TD that clearly wasn't is on Childress and the Viking's staff, not the refs. He needs to throw the challenge flag, like McCarthy did. I have no sympathy for vikings fans that blame the refs for Quarless' TD.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

The Packers getting a TD that clearly wasn't is on Childress and the Viking's staff, not the refs. He needs to throw the challenge flag, like McCarthy did. I have no sympathy for vikings fans that blame the refs for Quarless' TD.

Wait, let me get this straight, the challenge flag has now absolved refs of guilt? What kind of terrible logic is this.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

Let's not be hasty here. There's enough blame for everyone.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

Wait, let me get this straight, the challenge flag has now absolved refs of guilt? What kind of terrible logic is this.
The Packers challenged 2 plays and had a 3rd changed in there favor on a booth review. The vikings had an opportunity to challenge the Quarless TD and didn't take advantage. You can't expect the refs to be perfect, thats why they have challenges...now I have no idea if there was a ref that should have seen the ball juggle on the Quarless TD...but the Vikings staff should have and Childress should have challenged it. Wasn't it blatantly obvious that Percy Harvin did not get 2 feet in? Yup, but the ref got it wrong, but the refs fixed it. I don't know what you want me to say. The referees were horrible last night but that doesn't change the fact that the vikings had an opportunity to get the Quarless TD overturned and didn't take it, they have no one to blame but themselves for not taking advantage of the challenge system.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

Wait, let me get this straight, the challenge flag has now absolved refs of guilt? What kind of terrible logic is this.

The referee was totally 100% screened, and thus made the wrong call. That's a problem. Luckily, the NFL has a system in place to correct this sort of problem, the challenge system.

Unfortunately, Childress wasn't unable to master the oh so difficult task of throwing a red flag 3 yards in front of him.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

The referee was totally 100% screened, and thus made the wrong call. That's a problem. Luckily, the NFL has a system in place to correct this sort of problem, the challenge system.

Unfortunately, Childress wasn't unable to master the oh so difficult task of throwing a red flag 3 yards in front of him.

Was this not the same official who called a TD when Percy was clearly out of bounds? If so, your screening excuse doesn't really fly.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

I just realized that me winning my FFL game tonight relies on Eli moving the Giants downfield. I'm f*ed.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

Was this not the same official who called a TD when Percy was clearly out of bounds? If so, your screening excuse doesn't really fly.

Again, I'm not excusing the official at all. He had a terrible game. However, I don't think there's any way he could have made the correct call on the Quarless play.
And there's a system in place to help him correct his call, but Chilly chose not to use it.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

I need Eli and Witten to outscore Romo, Austin and Jacobs. I was up by 14.5 when the night started.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

Again, I'm not excusing the official at all. He had a terrible game. However, I don't think there's any way he could have made the correct call on the Quarless play.
And there's a system in place to help him correct his call, but Chilly chose not to use it.

You misunderstand my point. You said he can't be expected to make the correct call because he was screened. Well he wasn't screened on the Harvin play and still managed to completely screw it up, so even without being screened on the Packer "TD", he still would have likely made the wrong call.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

Well, Romo just got *ed up. I could see broken collarbone.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

The referee was totally 100% screened, and thus made the wrong call. That's a problem. Luckily, the NFL has a system in place to correct this sort of problem, the challenge system.
Strange. I thought the NFL had a system in place called "multiple officials on the field in case one's view is blocked".
Unfortunately, Childress wasn't unable to master the oh so difficult task of throwing a red flag 3 yards in front of him.
He couldn't count to 12 in the NFC title game against New Orleans, either.
 
Re: NFL 2010: Now Extended By Two More Posts

Wow, Dallas. Game would be over if NYG didn't keep handing the ball away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top