53 minutes ago, Paul Cumberland said:

 

wasn't a stiff arm, imo...  was a clear hold of the facemask...  that said, norman shouldn't have done the punch after the play was over, which combined with the horse collar is why he was fined more than others this year for simply doing a horse collar. 

 

 

Thats the one hypocritical call I would like to see changed by the rules committee.  Legally it wasnt a facemask...  but if Graham was on defense he would have been flagged and probably fined for the same move.  Josh gotta keep his cool and let the refs hand out the on-field punishment.

9 minutes ago, Paul Cumberland said:

 

 

I thought Graham almost took Norman's head off by a pretty nasty facemask on that play..  Pretty sure Josh didn't appreciate it and let him know about it after the play...  Gonna guess the league didn't take the facemask into consideration when passing out the fine....

Thats the object of a stiff arm, to keep your opponent from tackling you.  There was nothing illegal about what Graham did, Norman just did an outstanding job of holding on.  Should Graham have punched Norman for twisting his arm which could have resulted in an injury?  No!  Because Norman legally did what it took to bring his opponent down.

If Josh didnt appreciate it and feel the need to throw punches because he got in his feelings then he need to go find a safer less physical sport to play.  This is football.

Thats like a player getting trucked by a running back then going over to him and punching him because he's mad over a legit football play.  Thats football!!  You get man handled, trucked and stiff armed sometimes but dont be a **** about it.

19 minutes ago, ILikeBilly said:

But, at the beginning of the tackle, Norman had Graham with hands on the front and the back (tackle from the side of Graham) and even though Norman was inside his collar, there was no penalty until the hand/arm grabbing the front of Graham slipped off.  So, it wasn't like he was chasing Graham and grabbed him from behind.  It was a legit tackle until 1 hand slipped off, leaving only the hand inside his collar. 

 

I dont think Norman intentionally tried to horse collar him, it just turned into a weird tackle.

2 hours ago, Reaper Skins said:

John Keim ESPN Staff Writer 

Redskins corner Josh Norman was fined $36,464 for his horse collar penalty vs. Seattle Sunday, per source. Norman had said earlier Friday that he would appeal the fine.

Quote this

 

Josh Norman's horse collar fine is twice as expensive as EVERY OTHER horse collar penalty that has been called so far this season.

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/fines-suspensions/fines/horse-collar-tackle/

 

 

Probably because after the horse collar tackle Norman dropped a elbow/punch down on Graham.  Was that necessary?  You cant do that.  The fine seems justified.

2 hours ago, Taylorcooley1 said:

I'll take that win in Seattle and enjoy it...god I love when we beat the seachickens..it's typical for a field goal kicker to miss a field goal during a game..but three?..it obviously helped us get the win no doubt...any one remember the pic with laundry on the bench in Seattle during a playoff loss and there was the spirit of Sean Taylor next to him??(obviously not a real pic)...something tells me we had a special visitor in the crowd that helped with those missed field goals..

Sometimes its better to be lucky than good.  We were super lucky yesterday that he missed those fgs and im sure that Seahawks kicker will be fired today.

1 hour ago, Reaper Skins said:

Sure, two teams who have reputations for not having talented rosters and losing.  That doesn't surprise me at all.  I agree we are getting more talented, and as we continue to win games, build our roster, and shake our reputation as a losing franchise, I expect us to have more and more games where we enter as "the favorites" and start getting better calls.  But if we played the Patriots or the Steelers tommorow, I would absolutely expect to see the short end of the officiating stick 10 times out of 10.  For a long time we were very close to the bottom of the league, so we'd get more "terrible calls" than other teams.  In the past few years though, we've been a better team than the Jets or the Lions, so we've gotten less "terrible calls" than them.

 

The one exception to this is when we play the Giants.  The New York based competition committee has a clear bias of favoring the Giants in games, especially against divisional opponents, while being extremely favorable to them with player penalties off the field.  There are lots of examples in this thread of the Giants getting partial treatment, regardless of their opponents skill level, as well as smaller, or complete lack of, fines for off field conduct

I definitely agree with you as far as the off the field fines/suspensions biased in favor of the Giants players.  Its borderline criminal what they do in that aspect.

4 minutes ago, Reaper Skins said:

If your team has mostly been losing in recent years, it is less likely to get favorable calls on gameday. Refs are human, and thus more likely to subconciously give the benefit of the doubt to teams and players that have a history of playing the game well and winning.  Like how Jordan and Brady seem to get calls other players won't get.  People are also less likely to bet on teams that have the reputation as "losers" to win (like the Browns, Jags, and unfortunately, the Redskins under Snyder), so sports gambling has a vested interest in making sure the outcomes fall in line with the way people are expected to bet.  It looks less suspicious to have a game end with the outcome of "the team that usually loses couldn't overcome the competition today", so an unfair penalty flag is less likely to look suspicious if it happens to a bad team because you think "hey they probably weren't good enough to win anyway"

This is probably the best argument Ive ever heard/read to support any possible bias claim, I have to honestly admit that.  I can legitimately say this sounds very possible.   This shows probability favoring good or better teams moreso than just saying, "refs are biased against just us".  Your argument sounds more believable.

10 minutes ago, Reaper Skins said:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2169580-former-nfl-referee-mike-carey-avoided-officiating-redskins-games-over-nickname

 

Also, cherry picking one bad call in our favor (against another bottom dweller organization like the Browns no less) doesn't negate everything against us.  That's like saying global warming doesn't exist because we had one day where it snowed.  I made this thread to catalog anything unfair that happened to THIS team.  That doesn't mean unfair stuff doesn't happen to other teams too.  it's not mutually exclusive.

The refs, dont drop passes, fumble the ball, hire Zorn as HC, call extra conservative plays during the last minutes of the quarter, try to purchase all the top free agents to build an unsuccessful super team, hire Cerrato's dumb ass as a GM, get Albert Haynesworth and McNabb in free agency, and most of all draft colossal busts like RG3.  The refs didnt do that...  our organization did that to itself.  However, we ARE on the right path to success.

We have not been relevant and unsuccessful for many years because of our own doing, not because of some imaginary league wide ref bias.  Do you really think refs get up Sunday morning, drink their coffee, eat their breakfast and sit there trying to figure out all the ways they can JUST screw over the Washington Redskins?  Cmon fam, we are smarter, bigger, and better than that as a fanbase to lean on such a weak excuse as to whether we win or lose a ballgame.

Thats just as bad as the people Ive heard say that they dont like ESPN, NFL Network, and other media outlets because they have a "bias" against us.  Why should they feature us over the last 20 years?  Seriously.  When is the last time we won a playoff game?

If we win and show promise like we have been doing, then we will get our just due.  As fans of this great franchise, we have to change our mindset and way of thinking.  I know we have been down a long time, but we have something special and real here brewing.

We gotta get out of the paranoid, "they dont like us", "everybody is against us", "CONSPIRACY" way of thinking.  WE ARE THE FANS OF THE WASHINGTON REDSKINS!!!!  Lets start acting like it without the excuses.  HTTR

15 hours ago, SkinsFTW said:

Except Dez Bryant wasn't robbed because Detroit was robbed the week before when they had beaten the Cowturds, then the refs stepped in to screw up a call. 

 

 

Called PI on the field, but after the refs got together they "changed their minds"

And this is my point exactly.  Refs make human era calls.  Not bias, conspiracy, vendetta calls.  Everybody benefits from, and get hosed by human error, not this fairytale, self imagined ref bias against one team out of all 32 teams.  We have benefited from horrible calls too!  Why would we get a call in our favor in the pic below, if we are this NFL stepchild?

I think that they should get rid of the instant replay altogether.  I dont know what a catch is anymore, when it comes to a fumble, they talk about the ball shifting or does he have control, etc, etc, etc.  We should just go back to the old days....

If you look like you caught the ball its a catch.  If the ball comes out and the ref misses that your knee was down, oh well.  Human error.  They are still making human errors WITH replay observation.

As far as the ref or league conspiracy against any one team.  BS.  Thats loser talk.  The worst travesty in replay history happened to Calvin Johnson, Dez Bryant, and the Raiders with tuck rule garbage involving Tom Brady.  If anybody had a legit reason to whine about conspiracy, it was those particular players and/or teams that were horribly robbed.

It was just human error not some fairytale league wide conspiracy against a team.   That only exist in the minds of excuse givers.