You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#151 Re: Guns N' Roses » Axl On Kimmel Oct 24th, Live Interview! » 664 weeks ago
any takers on a completely new look or not?
#152 Re: The Garden » 2012 NFL Season » 664 weeks ago
vikings will win the nfc north. you heard it here first.
i'll let you know when I have the year narrowed down.
#153 Re: Guns N' Roses » Axl On Kimmel Oct 24th, Live Interview! » 664 weeks ago
no, no. meesir axl no promote his work.
#154 Re: Guns N' Roses » Axl Rose Threatens Suit Over Art Installation » 665 weeks ago
actually we blame him for not moving on but imagine at every turn someone is making and art exhibit of your past.
never the less.
unless erin was dating the neighborhood kids they are both lying.
#155 Re: Guns N' Roses » "Better" Video Discussion » 665 weeks ago
What Divney said? Searched the whole topic, found nothing!
>.<
ron "mr grumpy" thal
fuck bumblefoot.
gnr 4evr.
#156 Re: The Garden » 2012 NFL Season » 665 weeks ago
I don't know the exact specifics of the "simultaneous" catch either. To me it sounds like it should be in the air. But it could very well be on the ground. To me, that's not simultaneous. The defender intercepts the ball, then when they get to the ground the offensive player wrestles the ball away, or at least shares possession. How is that simultaneous?
it's simultaneous possession. it's not a catch until you have possession with both feet or any part of body other then the hands on the ground. jennings didn't technically have possession until his second foot hit the ground. tate had both hands on the ball and both feet down before jennings got his second foot down but i don't think tate's feet were relevant. just the fact that he had a solid grip on the ball before jennings got his 2nd foot down and never clearly lost it after that.
#157 Re: The Garden » 2012 NFL Season » 665 weeks ago
it's not fandom on my part. i thought it was a bad call at first as well.
open a second window while keeping my post/s open to follow along with.
watch the replay again.
1-tate got both hands on the ball before jennings' second foot hit the ground.
2-tate had both hands on the ball when the refs inspected the situation up close and then made the call on the field.
3-there is no indisputable evidence by replay that jennings had full control or that tate didn't in between getting both feet down and the call on the field.
call on the field stands
watch the replay and tell me there is evidence that one of those is wrong.
#158 Re: The Garden » 2012 NFL Season » 665 weeks ago
in this scenario it is not ruled a posession until a player has primary control of the ball and both feet or the body touch the ground
In between jennings getting his first foot down and second foot down is when tate appears to get some sort of shared possession of the ball.
in the instant between the players hitting the ground and the refs arriving there is no replay evidence proving anything other than shared possession.
after arriving - the refs got an up close and better angle than the cameras did but the replays, at a minimum, show the following:
jennings try and fail twice to rip the ball out of tate's grasp
and
a packer #38 helping jennings fight for the ball as tate fights him off with his foot.
the play was then ruled a td.
there is no conclusive evidence in the replays that indicates jennings had sole possession of the ball any time after both feet touched the ground and there is no way tate wins that battles against two packers, including jennings being between the ball and tate's body, without tate having a good grip on the ball with both hands, indicating possession.
the more i watch this the more i think it was not only a closer call then popular opinion but even that it was the correct call based on the rule of simultaneous possession.
#159 Re: The Garden » 2012 NFL Season » 665 weeks ago
#160 Re: The Garden » 2012 NFL Season » 665 weeks ago
war wrote:gb/seattle
i still haven't seen a replay with the angle that the ref had that ruled it a catch and he was right on top of it. there is nothing to indicate blatancy. by rule it comes down to the ref's opinion whether or not the catch was simultaneous and I see nothing other than people's opinions stating that it wasn't. From what I see it was an INT but I wasn't 2 feet from the play when it happened.
I never said anything about the refs missing a blatant INT. they missed a blatant and incredibly obvious and not too mention "Hard foul" type of offensive pass interference on that play.
I can understand how the refs may have not gotten the INT right in that split second but to miss such an obvious pass interfernce against Seattle on that same play by Golden Tate is inexcusable.
bono, i didn't quote you nor did i infer that you said anything at all.
i will say now, that the offensive pass interference happens on all hail mary's and is never called and never will be.