Thinking Skins Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 you are mistaken. there was a 15 yard penalty on the play for a player taking off his helmet on the field. i believe the cards would have had the ball on the 21 or 20 yard line. dont u like fitz's chances there? maybe, but still, its asking them to get 20 yards on one play. The way they weren't movin the ball that last drive, it wouldn't have happened, or at least was really unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21Knock_U_Out Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 there was an unsportsmanlike penalty? A steeler took his helmet off on the field of play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheREALJBird Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 please...This game was complete and utter **** until the 4th quarter. Like the patriots vr Giants game of last year. Well despite your compelling rebuttal I thought it was a good game. I really don't care what you say I enjoyed watching it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REEGSKINS Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 maybe, but still, its asking them to get 20 yards on one play. The way they weren't movin the ball that last drive, it wouldn't have happened, or at least was really unlikely. come on dude. they at least deserved a chance. for them not to review it is ashame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 come on dude. they at least deserved a chance. for them not to review it is ashame. yeah, maybe...but i'm not gonna cry about it like the Redskins just lost the super Bowl. If you think they got cheated then so what. So did Tennessee a few years back against the Rams, but who cares. Its in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 you are mistaken. there was a 15 yard penalty on the play for a player taking off his helmet on the field. i believe the cards would have had the ball on the 21 or 20 yard line. dont u like fitz's chances there? Where the hell are you getting 20 yard line? :laugh: You realize they WEREN'T on the 35, right? They were on the 44. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'KanSkinFan Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Okay guys~gals/ "bedtime" Well, the Refs and the stealers won a game~ "look forward to August":cheers: PS: Redskin fans~ anyone want to be an NFL ref? ~ I applied, but I live in Kansas ~ no NFL team here:cheers: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 at best it woulda gave them a chance for a hail mary, and how often do they work? Uh dude, the Cards do have this guy named Fitzgerald, who in recent weeks has outjumped defenders for balls. Maybe I'll have to see the replay a few more times, but it sure looked like Warner's arm was moving forward. I don't necessarily agree with the interpretation of the "tuck" rule and think they generally give QBs too much latitude in those scenarios, but I think in most instances, that is consistently ruled an incomplete pass. Also, speaking of penalties, shouldn't Holmes have been arguably flagged for an unsportsmanlike for his "salt-shaker" motion with his hand after scoring? Now again, I'm not in favor of turning this into the No Fun League, but consistency again raises its ugly head. If Pitt had to kick from the 15 instead of the 30, may also have made things a little interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'KanSkinFan Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Where the hell are you getting 20 yard line? :laugh:You realize they WEREN'T on the 35, right? They were on the 44. Tivo it~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 I honestly think more shoulda been looked at with the TD catch by Holmes, but I really don't care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Tivo it~ Or, I could just look at the play by play log on NFL.com. Maybe you should review it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'KanSkinFan Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Uh dude, the Cards do have this guy named Fitzgerald, who in recent weeks has outjumped defenders for balls.Maybe I'll have to see the replay a few more times, but it sure looked like Warner's arm was moving forward. I don't necessarily agree with the interpretation of the "tuck" rule and think they generally give QBs too much latitude in those scenarios, but I think in most instances, that is consistently ruled an incomplete pass. Tivo and tape shows~ Kurt Arm attempting to go forward, moving arm around to miss a defender~ arm goes forward, SPLAT hit ground~ But, excuse me, I am NOT an NFL stimulus paid ref~ but that is what MY tive showed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 oh nah, I just saw the replay. THe defender hit the ball while his arm was still going back. It was a fumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'KanSkinFan Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Or, I could just look at the play by play log on NFL.com.Maybe you should review it now. DID~ SLOW mo~ now, what is your question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 oh nah, I just saw the replay. THe defender hit the ball while his arm was still going back. It was a fumble. Yep. Anyone who thinks his arm was going forward is arguing with an agenda and is unable to see things clearly right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'KanSkinFan Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 oh nah, I just saw the replay. THe defender hit the ball while his arm was still going back. It was a fumble. Yes, defender hit the arm of Warner going forward, ball hit the ground~ as Warner's arm is going forward. Perhaps Kansas got a game show for Tivo different from the regular game? But that is what my Tivo/ tape shows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Yep. Anyone who thinks his arm was going forward is arguing with an agenda and is unable to see things clearly right now. Yeah, I'm outta here now. This is just a few people bickering about the cindarella story coming to an end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'KanSkinFan Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Yep. Anyone who thinks his arm was going forward is arguing with an agenda and is unable to see things clearly right now. Right~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praise_gibbs Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Yep. Anyone who thinks his arm was going forward is arguing with an agenda and is unable to see things clearly right now. Says the guy who wanted the Cards to lose because they handled his Eagles pretty soundly. Ironic, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSkins2006 Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Tivo and tape shows~Kurt Arm attempting to go forward' date=' moving arm around to miss a defender~ arm goes forward, SPLAT hit ground~ But, excuse me, I am NOT an NFL stimulus paid ref~ but that is what MY tive showed [/quote'] It doesn't matter if his arm came forward or not...the ball was MOVING while he was in the motion to throw...the ball was moving BEFORE he got his arm past his shoulder...so in the rules, that would be ruled as a fumble and was the correct call. However I agree they should have reviewed it, but 99.9% it would not have been overturned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21Knock_U_Out Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Says the guy who wanted the Cards to lose because they handled his Eagles pretty soundly.Ironic, huh? Woo hoo, look at me. On a REDSKINS site after the superbowl... loser much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'KanSkinFan Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Says the guy who wanted the Cards to lose because they handled his Eagles pretty soundly.Ironic, huh? Well, my Tivo shows differently from the "story" of Westbrook 36; perhaps I need to contact the company that filmed and asked them "how'd ya do that"? ~ "screw up my Tivo/tape?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royallypwned Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 well that game was amazing, but it sucked. **** the Steelers. Was it an incomplete pass at the end? Who knows, but who wouldn't want to see a potential hail mary attempt to Jesus himself, Larry Fitzgerald? He is the one guy who I would be surprised if he didn't make the catch at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'KanSkinFan Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 It doesn't matter if his arm came forward or not...the ball was MOVING while he was in the motion to throw...the ball was moving BEFORE he got his arm past his shoulder...so in the rules, that would be ruled as a fumble and was the correct call. However I agree they should have reviewed it, but 99.9% it would not have been overturned. *WRONG* Warner's arm was PAST his chest~ thus arm forward motion~ hit the ground. NOT a fumble~ forward pass. Want a copy of my TIVO tape? Steelers still suck and so did the refs~ Warner deserved better then what he was dealt. But, he wasn't in the stimulus package, now was he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'KanSkinFan Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 well that game was amazing, but it sucked. **** the Steelers. Was it an incomplete pass at the end? Who knows, but who wouldn't want to see a potential hail mary attempt to Jesus himself, Larry Fitzgerald? He is the one guy who I would be surprised if he didn't make the catch at the end. For a Dallas fan~ you be smart today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.