KC

It wasn’t debunked. Even the former head of officiating sees what I said.

Explain that one.
So explain the links, champ. You're seeing what you want to see. The data proves you wrong.

And like I said earlier, this happens to every team who wins alot. It's happened to the Eagles this year. The losers cry that the refs favor them. Because crying about refs is what loser do.
 
It's not the REFs favoring anyone it is just the ridiculous subjective calls come out of nowhere? Un-reviewable (holding (last night on PHI), pass interference, illegal contact?, roughing the QB with barely a swipe (maybe that one is getting better)?).

The Refs can screw up seemingly every game without repercussions. Come back next week and do worse.

LA Rams sent to SB over NO on that late Pass Interference suddenly ignored?
 
The Tuck Rule created for Tom Brady.


Exactly. Cost the Raiders again.

This business of QB arm going forward ins incomplete bothers me greatly. The Ball may goes backwards as Defender is on the QB. The ball may drop at their feet. I would like to see some common sense occasionally. Uh, the defender caused a FUMBLE, not an incompletion. If you cant pass? But you wanted to? Too late in my book.
 
So explain the links, champ. You're seeing what you want to see. The data proves you wrong.

The links are about the total number of penalties. That’s not what this is about, champ.

When it’s a critical play with the game on the line and a questionable call is made, it almost always favored the Chiefs.

Your link says nothing about that. Even Mike Pereira says that those questionable calls (not total calls) seem to favor the Chiefs.
 
The Tuck Rule created for Tom Brady.
I thought they repealed the tuck rule because of Brady.

Tuck Rule was instituted in 99. Tuck Rule Game was in 01.

NFL Rule 3, Section 22, Article 2, Note 2.
When [an offensive] player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.



The Pats/Brady benefitted but it wasn't about them/him. That game led to them winning their first SB. Are you claiming the refs were already giving the Pats calls?
 
The links are about the total number of penalties. That’s not what this is about, champ.

When it’s a critical play with the game on the line and a questionable call is made, it almost always favored the Chiefs.

Your link says nothing about that. Even Mike Pereira says that those questionable calls (not total calls) seem to favor the Chiefs.
My goodness you're quite the little ***** aren't you?

Get over it. Your team lost to the better team, your GM and HC have inexplicably paid Purdy twice what he's worth and the SF training staff has something going on with the number of injuries that team has had year after year. And so your SB window is closed likely barring something crazy happening. SF will be a mediocre team that finishes well enough to maybe make the PO and possibly win a PO game but wont be nearly good enough to win anything real. That will last at least until the end of Purdy's contract. God help them if they resign him or restructure his deal extending the mistake.
 
in other words you hvae nothing.

Try reading it over a few times. There are two comments there. Read them both. Do that a few times if you need to.

It’s not that difficult. You should be able to figure it out.
 
Try reading it over a few times. There are two comments there. Read them both. Do that a few times if you need to.

It’s not that difficult. You should be able to figure it out.
It would have taken you less time to just point out the hypocrisy than type all this.....
 
15th post
It would have taken you less time to just point out the hypocrisy than type all this.....

It’s ok. I’m happy to take the time to help you understand things that are very simple.

What part of that are you still struggling to understand? Did you try reading both comments that were quoted? There’s a reason they were both included.
 
It’s ok. I’m happy to take the time to help you understand things that are very simple.

What part of that are you still struggling to understand? Did you try reading both comments that were quoted? There’s a reason they were both included.
Either post it or dont. You're just being a prick at this point and Im all done.
 
When you’re done being a hypocrite, you can go ahead and address what was posted. :)
It's quite clear you dont know what "hypocrite" means.


Here's a definition for you

 
Either post it or dont. You're just being a prick at this point and Im all done.

I’m trying to help you. I’m not going to do it for you.

When you’re done with your hissy fit and want to try again, let me know. It’s really not meant to be that difficult.
 
Back
Top Bottom