PDA

View Full Version : Football I got an E-mail from Fox Sports tonight...


kysirsoze
03-20-2009, 12:47 AM
So a couple of months ago I was up late watching a "Best Damn" count down of the 50 most spectacular plays in football history. I don't normally take action in a case like this but I responded with an email, sure that it would fall on deaf ears. I wrote the following:


"You guys had the Immaculate Reception at #1 on your spectacular plays list. Then you said it was controversial because Franco Harris might have let the ball touch the ground. To my knowledge, few contest whether or not he caught the ball. The question is whether it was legal or not. At the time, in the NFL you couldn't catch a ball that had been tipped by a teammate. It was clearly tipped by the receiver before it falls into Harris' hands. The refs went with the touchdown because they knew security wouldn't be able to protect them from the unruly fans. It was a bogus play that doesn't belong on this list (at least not on top.)

For the record I am a Chiefs fan so if anyone should enjoy seeing the Raiders suffer it's me. However, misinformation bothers me more.

Stephen"


Tonight, I received a response:


[Stephen - Thanks for your email regarding the Immaculate Reception being in several of our "Top 50" shows. Please read our response.

First, you cannot call that play "bogus." If we did not include the play at all in our applicable "Top 50" shows, we probably would get thousands of emails asking where that play was. Until the NFL -- over 36 years later-- changes the outcome of the game and says that the Raiders officially won, it will still stand as a legitimate, yet controversial play.

Secondly, as you know, there are multiple controversies surrounding the "Immaculate Reception." There is nothing illegitimate about the controversy whether Franco Harris let the ball touch the ground. That is indeed one of the legitimate controversies. Obviously, if the ball did definitely touch the ground, and the referees saw it, the Frenchy Fuqua/Jack Tatum controversy would not have mattered, because it would have just been an incompletion.

In fact, in 1998, when NBC Sports re-broadcasted the TV version of the play for the first time in over 25 years, there was equal amount of talk on the 1998 NBC Sports broadcast about whether Franco Harris caught the ball as there was if the ball touched off Fuqua. This is because the TV cameras had different angles as the NFL Films camera crew. And many agreed that NBC's footage (which had not been seen since 1972) clearly showed that the ball only touched Tatum, making the reception legal. However, NBC's footage didn't shed anymore light onto whether the ball touched the ground when Harris caught it, adding more fuel to that fire of controversy.

You are correct that when the Immaculate Reception happened, the Tatum deflection was the most pressing controversy at the time, and was the Raiders' biggest beef. However, in 1978 the rule of deflections of forward passes in the NFL was changed, and in any of todays NFL games this would be deemed legal. This doesn't mean that the Tatum deflection would suddenly be deemed retroactively legal, but that specific controversy lost a little bit of its luster after the NFL rule change over 30 years ago.

The Immaculate Reception probably could have its own show if we talked about all the controversies involved (which also includes a couple possible illegal blocks after the ball was caught which obviously were not called). Unfortunately, we did not have time in the "Top 50" show to mention and analyze them all.

Thus, the Immaculate Reception will always be one of the most spectacular football plays ever, alongside "The Play" from Cal/Stanford. With the advent of Instant Replay today and 30 different camera angles capturing every play, never again will there be such legendary, spectacular, and mysterious plays in football.

The one thing I think we can agree on is that if the referees called the Immaculate Reception anything other than a touchdown, there would have been an immediate riot in Pittsburgh.

Thanks for being a fan of the show and please keep watching!

Regards,

BDSSP"


I've never written fox sports or ESPN before, but I was really impressed with the detail they went into rebutting my statements. Not only is it long, but it is also clearly in no way a form response. I may not agree totally with their points, but like I said, I was impressed.

Is this standard? I figure if anybody has sent off numerous fevered sports emails it's the people on this board.:hmmm:

Buck
03-20-2009, 12:59 AM
Thats cool, but it still could be a form response.

I wonder how many people emailed about the same thing?

kysirsoze
03-20-2009, 01:01 AM
Thats cool, but it still could be a form response.

I wonder how many people emailed about the same thing?

I thought that too but he goes through my email point for point and even quotes from it. I'm sure he used the same arguements in similar responses but it looks to me to be legit.:shrug:

Guru
03-20-2009, 01:11 AM
There is no way that was a form response. They touched on every concern. Really cool that they responded if you ask me. Even if it was to ultimately disagree with you.

Kyle DeLexus
03-20-2009, 01:26 AM
There is no way that was a form response. They touched on every concern. Really cool that they responded if you ask me. Even if it was to ultimately disagree with you.

Thats why it's the Best Damn Sports Show Period

skky man
03-20-2009, 04:09 AM
To bad they don't have any camera angles that show Lin Elliot makeing just one damn field goal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Guru
03-20-2009, 04:51 AM
To bad they don't have any camera angles that show Lin Elliot makeing just one damn field goal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Bannable offense.:cuss:

You said his name!!!!:grr::doh!:

EyePod
03-20-2009, 05:38 AM
This is not standard.

skky man
03-20-2009, 05:39 AM
Bannable offense.:cuss:

You said his name!!!!:grr::doh!:

My apologies I still have the taste of vomit in my mouth!

Kerberos
03-20-2009, 05:40 AM
To bad they don't have any camera angles that show Lin Elliot makeing just one damn field goal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bannable offense.:cuss:

You said his name!!!!:grr::doh!:

Nuthooks

skky man; that is the name of "He who shall not be mentioned" on Chiefs Planet board or ANY official Chiefs Planet functions.

It is possible you could be headed for banned camp.

skky man
03-20-2009, 05:43 AM
Nuthooks

skky man; that is the name of "He who shall not be mentioned" on Chiefs Planet board or ANY official Chiefs Planet functions.

It is possible you could be headed for banned camp.

I don't know what happend! I will make no excuses I should be banned!:banghead:

crispystl420
03-20-2009, 06:20 AM
To bad they don't have any camera angles that show Lin Elliot makeing just one damn field goal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Had he made one they would have! Please don't use that name it's blasphemy.

Sully
03-20-2009, 07:04 AM
I think that some sports network should hire Hamas to respond to viewer emails.

SenselessChiefsFan
03-20-2009, 07:24 AM
Thats cool, but it still could be a form response.

I wonder how many people emailed about the same thing?

No, that was not a form response. It handled every objection and used similar language to the original email.

Mr. Flopnuts
03-20-2009, 07:44 AM
There is no way that was a form response. They touched on every concern. Really cool that they responded if you ask me. Even if it was to ultimately disagree with you.

Yeah. Even if they sent that to the other 50 people who responded in a like wise fashion, they took some time in that response. It's surprising. And refreshing.

bowener
03-20-2009, 08:36 AM
Bannable offense.:cuss:

You said his name!!!!:grr::doh!:

Why is his name not stricken from the CP texts for life? Cant we replace it with something more fitting?

Hog Farmer
03-20-2009, 08:47 AM
You should have responded back suggesting they take a large gulp of anti-freeze

Kyle DeLexus
03-20-2009, 09:39 AM
You should have responded back suggesting they take a large gulp of anti-freeze

I would have probably replied back with a simple "so how long have you been an intern there?"

Reerun_KC
03-20-2009, 09:56 AM
To bad they don't have any camera angles that show Lin Elliot makeing just one damn field goal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah or Marty growing a fucking brain in the playoffs...

TinyEvel
03-20-2009, 09:58 AM
I bet it was written by a sports-nerd intern. Someone with a lot of time and really into it.

DaFace
03-20-2009, 10:10 AM
Why is his name not stricken from the CP texts for life? Cant we replace it with something more fitting?

It is, but not when it's misspelled. I took care of that.

Kyle DeLexus
03-20-2009, 10:10 AM
I would have probably replied back with a simple "so how long have you been an intern there?"

I bet it was written by a sports-nerd intern. Someone with a lot of time and really into it.

Great minds and all that other stuff.

Crashride
03-20-2009, 10:23 AM
Cool points for them

Chief Henry
03-20-2009, 11:18 AM
My apologies I still have the taste of vomit in my mouth!

That game is one of the lowpoints in my life.....aahhhhhgggg :cuss:

Kyle DeLexus
03-20-2009, 11:44 AM
That game is one of the lowpoints in my life.....aahhhhhgggg :cuss:

Your life must be pretty damn good then if a game is one of the lowpoints. Not to mention a game you weren't even a part of, except as a fan.

kysirsoze
03-20-2009, 12:26 PM
I bet it was written by a sports-nerd intern. Someone with a lot of time and really into it.

What??? I thought this was from Tom Arnold himself!!!:cuss: