Football Whitlock has a great idea - Page 5

orange · 10-08-2009, 11:54 AM

9. Fixing the roughing-Tom Brady-penalty crisis is rather easy.

As I did when I first addressed this problem at the beginning of the season, I'm not going to play the race card. I'm going to continue to ignore the fact that Donovan McNabb had a rib cracked while laying in the end zone and there was no penalty called, and I'm going to ignore the unpenalized illegal hits leveled against Off-The-Marcus Russell and David Garrard last week.

This is not an issue driven by race. It's a star power issue, no different from the NBA officiating that protected Michael Jordan the second half of his career and gave Dwyane Wade and the Miami Heat an NBA title.

Refs pamper the big stars. Refs are humans just like you and me. They get caught up in Brady's fame.

Ray "Avon Barksdale" Lewis and Ed "Stringer Bell" Reed had every right to blast the refs following the Patriots-Ravens game. There were two unwarranted roughing-the-Brady penalties that contributed to New England TD drives. One of the penalties occurred on third and nine and Brady threw incomplete. And the other occurred on second and 11 and Brady completed a 1-yard pass.

The "hits" didn't justify a flag and they certainly didn't justify 15-yard penalties. Why do quarterbacks deserve more protection than a punter or a kicker? Why can't there be a 5-yard running-into-the-Brady call and a 15-yard roughing-the-Brady call?

A hand accidently slapping a QB in the helmet isn't worthy of 15 yards. A defender falling down and grazing a QB's knee isn't worth 15 yards.

And there needs to be a common-sense official placed in a television replay booth. He needs the authority to stop the game and review any and every 15-yard penalty. Look at the excessive-celebration penalty that ruined the Georgia-LSU college game. A common-sense ref in the booth could've stopped that.

If you eliminated the TV timeouts after punts, kickoffs and timeouts primarily taken to stop the clock, a more active replay ref wouldn't interfere with the flow of an NFL game or prevent it from concluding in three hours or less.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/1...are-NFL-Truths

orange · 10-08-2009, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaise

Apparently you enjoy posting on the message board of the little franchise that couldn't more than a Broncos board.

Definitely. Haven't found a Broncos board worth posting on.

Why is that a problem for you?

blaise · 10-08-2009, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange

Wrong. SHOULDER to NECK AREA.

Don't twist it.

Either way you're adding things that aren't there. Don't twist what? That you're pretending you know the intent of the referee when making the call and the letter from the NFL when saying it was incorrect?

Bronco fan.

blaise · 10-08-2009, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange

Definitely. Haven't found a Broncos board worth posting on.

Why is that a problem for you?

Because your allegiance to your team is clouding your judgement here in this case and causing you to behave like a jackass.

stevieray · 10-08-2009, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange

Haven't found a Broncos board worth posting on.

what a coinkydink...!

orange · 10-08-2009, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaise

Either way you're adding things that aren't there. Don't twist what? That you're pretending you know the intent of the referee when making the call and the letter from the NFL when saying it was incorrect?

Bronco fan.

I'm guessing that the ref made a call based on what he thinks the rule is.

I'm CERTAIN he didn't make a call based on trying to hand the Giants the game.

Saccopoo · 10-08-2009, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange

Page didn't lie. All he said was that the NFL said it wasn't a helmet-to-helmet hit. He didn't claim there was an apology.

YOU guys have added all that.

And my point is that IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A HELMET-TO-HELMET HIT TO BE A PERSONAL FOUL ANYMORE.

I don't see what's so hard for some of you to understand about that.

.................................................................................................... ......................................................................

Why it's important to Page:

2008 NFL Fine Schedule

Flagrant Personal Foul
Suspension or fine; severity to be determined by degree of violation; the fine may be $10,000 or higher for first offense.

Don't get pissy because it was DJ Williams who had the most obvious and flagrant hit of the season so far to date against Roy Williams. Page's hit was textbook on a receiver who had possession of the ball. That's why the league sent over a "sorry 'bout our f'up" letter to the team. However, I'll be shocked if Williams isn't donating some money to his favorite charity this week.

**kysirsoze** · 10-08-2009, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange

I'm guessing that the ref made a call based on what he thinks the rule is.

I'm CERTAIN he didn't make a call based on trying to hand the Giants the game.

I don't think he hates the Chiefs or anything. I just think he's incompetent. If you're a ref, you don't call what you don't see. It's as basic as that. Obviously he didn't see it because it didn't happen. If, as you say, he thought a shoulder to chest hit was illegal, he should be fired immediately.

orange · 10-08-2009, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saccopoo

Don't get pissy because it was DJ Williams who had the most obvious and flagrant hit of the season so far to date against Roy Williams. Page's hit was textbook on a receiver who had possession of the ball. That's why the league sent over a "sorry 'bout our f'up" letter to the team. However, I'll be shocked if Williams isn't donating some money to his favorite charity this week.

Alrighty, then.

Let's watch for that. D.J. is going to be fined HOW MUCH?

... for the hit that wasn't a personal foul.
... that the Cowboys and their fans aren't even complaining about.

blaise · 10-08-2009, 02:02 PM

[QUOTE=orange;6151848]I'm guessing that the ref made a call based on what he thinks the rule is.

I'm CERTAIN he didn't make a call based on trying to hand the Giants the game.[/QUOTE]

Who's twisting things now? When did I ever say anything remotely like that?
You keep guessing you know what the ref thought, and assuming you know how he was applying the rule. You don't.

orange · 10-08-2009, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaise

When did I ever say anything remotely like that?

I'm responding to more people than you, ya'know.

Let's take Saccopoo above, for example.

Do you think he may be letting his Chiefs' allegiance distort his view a bit?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll say this for you - you're about the only one here who admits the Teicher article doesn't say what the Teicher article doesn't say.

Too bad you don't have the courage of your convictions to say that directly to other Chiefs fans.

blaise · 10-08-2009, 02:09 PM

The ref meant to call shoulder to neck, but even knowing the crowd would be livid, he just chose not to explain why he was making the call to the crowd.

orange · 10-08-2009, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaise

The ref meant to call shoulder to neck, but even knowing the crowd would be livid, he just chose not to explain why he was making the call to the crowd.

I'm not sure what the ref actually said. I never heard his actual call.

I was listening to Mitch and Lenny; and the replays have Deion Sanders on the voiceover; and they show Haley objecting animatedly. And they are ALL pointing out Page used his shoulder, not his head! As if it mattered!

**kysirsoze** · 10-08-2009, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange

I'm responding to more people than you, ya'know.

Let's take Saccopoo above, for example.

Do you think he may be letting his Chiefs' allegiance distort his view a bit?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll say this for you - you're about the only one here who admits the Teicher article doesn't say what the Teicher article doesn't say.

Too bad you don't have the courage of your convictions to say that directly to other Chiefs fans.

I see you have stopped trying to defend the call as correct. That's refreshing. Still, seizing on the minor point that people are calling it an apology when perhaps it's only an admission that they were wrong is silly.

orange · 10-08-2009, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kysirsoze

I see you have stopped trying to defend the call as correct. That's refreshing. Still, seizing on the minor point that people are calling it an apology when perhaps it's only an admission that they were wrong is silly.

Once again, you have lept to an unwarranted conclusion.

I have made NO such remission. I still say the call was right. I still say the Teicher article is completely unclear as to whether the league now says there should have been a penalty.

I HAVE allowed that IF the League has backed off, it could ONLY BE because they've decided it wasn't the neck area. Be that as it may, it was close enough to force the ref to make a judgement call. A smarter play would not do that.

Saccopoo · 10-08-2009, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange

I'm not sure what the ref actually said. I never heard his actual call.

I was listening to Mitch and Lenny; and the replays have Deion Sanders on the voiceover; and they show Haley objecting animatedly. And they are ALL pointing out Page used his shoulder, not his head! As if it mattered!

What's the point? The hit was below the shoulder on a receiver with possession of the ball. It was a bad call. Period.

And I don't give a crap if Williams didn't get a flag or the Cowboy fans aren't bitching about it. His hit on Williams is the exact same hit/reason why Page got flagged. It was a hit on a defenseless receiver who never had a chance on the ball. It resulted in injury. However, as you've had Lynch on your team for the past couple of years, I imagine that you've steeled yourself against other teams complaining about head shots/late hits/hits on defenseless receivers, and have come up with a litany of excuses to justify them. e.g., Williams hit on Williams, "a smarter player wouldn't do that."

10-08-2009, 11:54 AM
orange MVP Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Denver, CO Casino cash: $10004900	Whitlock has a great idea 9. Fixing the roughing-Tom Brady-penalty crisis is rather easy. As I did when I first addressed this problem at the beginning of the season, I'm not going to play the race card. I'm going to continue to ignore the fact that Donovan McNabb had a rib cracked while laying in the end zone and there was no penalty called, and I'm going to ignore the unpenalized illegal hits leveled against Off-The-Marcus Russell and David Garrard last week. This is not an issue driven by race. It's a star power issue, no different from the NBA officiating that protected Michael Jordan the second half of his career and gave Dwyane Wade and the Miami Heat an NBA title. Refs pamper the big stars. Refs are humans just like you and me. They get caught up in Brady's fame. Ray "Avon Barksdale" Lewis and Ed "Stringer Bell" Reed had every right to blast the refs following the Patriots-Ravens game. There were two unwarranted roughing-the-Brady penalties that contributed to New England TD drives. One of the penalties occurred on third and nine and Brady threw incomplete. And the other occurred on second and 11 and Brady completed a 1-yard pass. The "hits" didn't justify a flag and they certainly didn't justify 15-yard penalties. Why do quarterbacks deserve more protection than a punter or a kicker? Why can't there be a 5-yard running-into-the-Brady call and a 15-yard roughing-the-Brady call? A hand accidently slapping a QB in the helmet isn't worthy of 15 yards. A defender falling down and grazing a QB's knee isn't worth 15 yards. And there needs to be a common-sense official placed in a television replay booth. He needs the authority to stop the game and review any and every 15-yard penalty. Look at the excessive-celebration penalty that ruined the Georgia-LSU college game. A common-sense ref in the booth could've stopped that. If you eliminated the TV timeouts after punts, kickoffs and timeouts primarily taken to stop the clock, a more active replay ref wouldn't interfere with the flow of an NFL game or prevent it from concluding in three hours or less. http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/1...are-NFL-Truths
Posts: 11,661

10-08-2009, 02:02 PM	#69
blaise In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Plano, TX Casino cash: $9989900	[QUOTE=orange;6151848]I'm guessing that the ref made a call based on what he thinks the rule is. I'm CERTAIN he didn't make a call based on trying to hand the Giants the game.[/QUOTE] Who's twisting things now? When did I ever say anything remotely like that? You keep guessing you know what the ref thought, and assuming you know how he was applying the rule. You don't.
Posts: 22,189

10-08-2009, 02:09 PM	#71
blaise In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Plano, TX Casino cash: $9989900	The ref meant to call shoulder to neck, but even knowing the crowd would be livid, he just chose not to explain why he was making the call to the crowd.
Posts: 22,189