Because they showed the replay, and it was Rex Ryan who called it, and the official standing right by him that acknowledged it.
replay didn't show Billick, he could of been yelling it too, or a player on the field. you don't know for sure, you shouldn't bring up such a ridiculous excuse.
"This guy back here is giving me the ole one more....one more back to you buddy."
everyone seems to think it was the def. cord , but i dont know
There was a clear replay of def. coordinator Rex Ryan calling the timeout, he was standing next to the side judge who was the one who blew the whistle and ran in from the side killing the play. It may have been a mistake to grant if the info that only the HC can call one is accurate, but the fact is it was granted.
So for the Ravens defensive players to be upset with Billick as I have seen elsewhere is laughable, cause it was their boy (who many of the defenders favor over Billick) who made the call that may have cost them the game.
Anyway...twas a very exciting football game.
The officiating was less than stellar..can you imagine if the final play had occured in the end zone and the Ravens had won the game while Derek Mason absolutely mauled Assante Samuel as he prepared to knock the ball down...we'd have had the biggest outcry over officiating since the 85 World Series.
replay didn't show Billick, he could of been yelling it too, or a player on the field. you don't know for sure, you shouldn't bring up such a ridiculous excuse.
Thats not a ridiculous excuse. If that had been in reverse, and the Pats made the first down but it was overruled due to the timeout, Pats fan would bitch about it forever. So dont give this shit about excuses. Its a rule. If they arent going to acknowledge the rule, then it shouldnt be in the rulebook.
Thats not a ridiculous excuse. If that had been in reverse, and the Pats made the first down but it was overruled due to the timeout, Pats fan would bitch about it forever. So dont give this shit about excuses. Its a rule. If they arent going to acknowledge the rule, then it shouldnt be in the rulebook.
yes it is ridiculous because you're arguing semantics. I'm more concerned about the refs enforcing the rules on the field, like the mugging penalties that the Ravens got away with despite the 13 penalties they got. give me a break.
YOU DO NOT KNOW IF BILLICK WAS YELLING TIMEOUT AT THE TIME. THEREFORE YOU CAN'T SAY THAT THE TIMEOUT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED.
"This guy back here is giving me the ole one more....one more back to you buddy."
last night was not a bad game by the refs, no way. every single Baltimore penalty was legitimate, no marginal calls. they were mauling the receivers.
do you people watch the same game? you guys don't know football.
i hate the Pats as much or more as anyone but I thought the hold was a penalty. I think people get upset at the timing of the penalty but refs can't let it go because it's 4th down. Now whether Gaffney had full posession was close as well but no way it could have been overturned. Looked to me like he probably had it but a bit of a juggle perhaps at the end. all and all those 2 ended up correctly I think although if that was my team I'd probably be bitching about it too.
Bottom line is the Ravens, like the Eagles, had chances to win the game and didn't get it done while the Pats did. I think the way the Pats have won the last 2 weeks is in some ways even more impressive than blowing teams out. They've been threatened, challenged and taken to the limit but have prevailed. Impressive.
So when does the asterick go up on the Patriots season? They sure liked to put one on Barry Bonds for being an accused cheater without any proof, but they have actual proof that the Patriots cheated in games. Lets throw out their season and all their records should they go undefeated!
Looked to me like he probably had it but a bit of a juggle perhaps at the end. all and all those 2 ended up correctly I think although if that was my team I'd probably be bitching about it too.
Looked to me more like he was just transferring it from his hands to the crook of his arm, not really a juggle and always in control of the ball, so therefore possession.
And had it been overturned for some reason, that was on 1st down, so the Pats would have been second and goal from the 8, but wait 2 Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalties on Scott would have twice moved the ball half the distance and the Pats would have had 1st and goal at the 2 with 44 seconds and a timeout, so in all odds they score anyway.
So when does the asterick go up on the Patriots season?
Sorry pal, but the answer is "never".
The tape confiscated 7 minutes into the first game of the season was never viewed by the Pats' coaching staff, Commisioner Hardass said so.
No result from this season has been in any way affected by that breakage of the rules, aside from maybe some extra motivation for the Pats to prove to media types (and a few select players and coaches who opened their mouths) with attitudes like yours that they are the best in the game currently.
Sorry pal, but the answer is "never".
The tape confiscated 7 minutes into the first game of the season was never viewed by the Pats' coaching staff, Commisioner Hardass said so.
No result from this season has been in any way affected by that breakage of the rules, aside from maybe some extra motivation for the Pats to prove to media types (and a few select players and coaches who opened their mouths) with attitudes like yours that they are the best in the game currently.
Its a sad world we live in when a team "tries" to cheat. I guess its the only way to do business anymore. How do we know that they did not cheat in any of those superbowls prior to this season?
Its a sad world we live in when a team "tries" to cheat. I guess its the only way to do business anymore. How do we know that they did not cheat in any of those superbowls prior to this season?
How do we know any team hasn't cheated? Stealing opposing teams signals is standard practice in football as well as baseball.
Videotaping opposing teams' signals is allowed in the NFL, just not from the position on the sidelines the Pats did it from. It is OK to do from the press box. And you can be sure at least 31 teams currently do it, and have been doing it all along. (Nobody's sure if Eric Mangini is smart enough to have found the "record" button on the camcorder yet)
last night was not a bad game by the refs, no way. every single Baltimore penalty was legitimate, no marginal calls. they were mauling the receivers.
do you people watch the same game? you guys don't know football.
did you even read my post? why are pats fans super defensive about anything that is said about their team? the holding call was clearly terrible, but as I wrote earlier the Ravens set the tone by beating the crap out of Pats receivers, and the call was there to be made all night and it wasn't until it happened on 4th down with 1 minute left in the 4th. It also sucked that the ref spoke to a player in a racist tone setting off the defense, preventing them from focusing on the Pats offense, and it sucked that the Pats won a game they had no business winning. At the same time the Pats won, and had they lost on the last play of the game that would have been a terrible no call as well (I didn't say that the refs had a bad game just for the Pats).
How do we know any team hasn't cheated? Stealing opposing teams signals is standard practice in football as well as baseball.
Videotaping opposing teams' signals is allowed in the NFL, just not from the position on the sidelines the Pats did it from. It is OK to do from the press box. And you can be sure at least 31 teams currently do it, and have been doing it all along. (Nobody's sure if Eric Mangini is smart enough to have found the "record" button on the camcorder yet)
again this is the same claim bonds defenders use...that "everyone else was doing it" so his home run record is fine. the fact is that the Patriots cheated, got a relative slap on the wrist, and are having a record breaking season much like Bonds had a record breaking career. If you cheat, and do well because of it people have the right to question it, just as you have the right to defend it...I would say that if you defend the Pats you have to defend Bonds, not one or the other, otherwise it's hypocritical.
. It also sucked that the ref spoke to a player in a racist tone setting off the defense, preventing them from focusing on the Pats offense,
This situation should not be overlooked. You're in Baltimore Ryan, so I'm sure there is more info on this there...is there any proof of this that can be sent to the league (I read that one of the officials was calling the defenders "boy"), and if so that official should be fired immediately.
again this is the same claim bonds defenders use...that "everyone else was doing it" so his home run record is fine. the fact is that the Patriots cheated, got a relative slap on the wrist, and are having a record breaking season much like Bonds had a record breaking career. If you cheat, and do well because of it people have the right to question it, just as you have the right to defend it...I would say that if you defend the Pats you have to defend Bonds, not one or the other, otherwise it's hypocritical.
You're not following completely...I know the Pats broke the rule...but it has had zero effect on any game's outcome this year, so an asterisk does not apply here.
In Bonds' case, the cream and clear led directly to his records.
ETA: The loss of a first round draft pick is a lot more than a slap on the wrist in the NFL, even if it ends up being pick #32.
Its a sad world we live in when a team "tries" to cheat. I guess its the only way to do business anymore. How do we know that they did not cheat in any of those superbowls prior to this season?
we don't know if the Pats cheated other than the one incident and we do not know if they gained any advantages. But we know that past Denver, Cowboys and Steelers SB teams did cheat (steroids, drugs, salary cap, etc.).
"This guy back here is giving me the ole one more....one more back to you buddy."
This situation should not be overlooked. You're in Baltimore Ryan, so I'm sure there is more info on this there...is there any proof of this that can be sent to the league (I read that one of the officials was calling the defenders "boy"), and if so that official should be fired immediately.
well he will probably get disciplinary action - as will Bart Scott - as well he should. The same crap goes on (maybe not with such 'racist' comments) in baseball, where sometimes the umpire instigates an argument with a batter/manager...
again this is the same claim bonds defenders use...that "everyone else was doing it" so his home run record is fine. the fact is that the Patriots cheated, got a relative slap on the wrist, and are having a record breaking season much like Bonds had a record breaking career. If you cheat, and do well because of it people have the right to question it, just as you have the right to defend it...I would say that if you defend the Pats you have to defend Bonds, not one or the other, otherwise it's hypocritical.
The thing is - the relative slap on the wrist may be justified. Is there a difference between murder and attempted murder in terms of punishment by the legal system? The answer is yes. The Patriots intended to look at the game film they were taking of the Jets and they were caught in the first quarter before they ever had a chance to look at it. So technically they did not receive any advantage and had intended to cheat, but were caught before hand. Now if they were caught "cheating" i.e. adjusting their play calls after they had viewed the tape they were making - I think their punishment would have been more severe.
But losing a 1st round pick is pretty standard in the NFL for violations. I mean the Dolphins lost one in 1970 when they were caught tampering and signed Don Shula away from the Colts when he was still under contract. A handful of teams have lost 1st round picks over the years so it was a pretty standard punishment.
And yes you can argue that they were caught in the act, but they didn't actually commit the full offense or gain an advantage from it.
Also, in a prior post you said no team on the Pats schedule will hit as hard as the Ravens. Obviously, you're not a diehard Steelers fan who watches them every week. The three hardest hitting teams in football are the Ravens, Steelers and Jags. So next week the Pats WRs should have their hands full again.
well he will probably get disciplinary action - as will Bart Scott - as well he should. The same crap goes on (maybe not with such 'racist' comments) in baseball, where sometimes the umpire instigates an argument with a batter/manager...
Scott clearly should get disciplined as well, he totally lost his cool, had he not tossed the flag into the stands (which was kind of funny), he might not face further discipline, but the old 2 wrongs theory applies.
But if any official is using thinly veiled racist comments towards players, that official needs to lose his job no questions asked.
did you even read my post? why are pats fans super defensive about anything that is said about their team? the holding call was clearly terrible, but as I wrote earlier the Ravens set the tone by beating the crap out of Pats receivers, and the call was there to be made all night and it wasn't until it happened on 4th down with 1 minute left in the 4th. It also sucked that the ref spoke to a player in a racist tone setting off the defense, preventing them from focusing on the Pats offense, and it sucked that the Pats won a game they had no business winning. At the same time the Pats won, and had they lost on the last play of the game that would have been a terrible no call as well (I didn't say that the refs had a bad game just for the Pats).
yes I read your post and you said:
"The pats won, plain and simple. Refs have terrible games now and then, and last night was definitely one of them."
the holding call was not terrible. It should of been pass interference on the 1 yard line.
"This guy back here is giving me the ole one more....one more back to you buddy."
Scott clearly should get disciplined as well, he totally lost his cool, had he not tossed the flag into the stands (which was kind of funny), he might not face further discipline, but the old 2 wrongs theory applies.
But if any official is using thinly veiled racist comments towards players, that official needs to lose his job no questions asked.
completely agree...but I have to say, if I were in Bart Scott's shoes, I may have done the same thing No excuse for it, but still, it has to be extremely disheartening to be in the lead for 59 mins, and have the game decided by officials...
Looked to me more like he was just transferring it from his hands to the crook of his arm, not really a juggle and always in control of the ball, so therefore possession.
And had it been overturned for some reason, that was on 1st down, so the Pats would have been second and goal from the 8, but wait 2 Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalties on Scott would have twice moved the ball half the distance and the Pats would have had 1st and goal at the 2 with 44 seconds and a timeout, so in all odds they score anyway.
I know I was thinking about that as they were reviewing it - would have loved to see the reaction if they overturned it but the Pats had 1st and goal on like the 2.
I hate to bring up the racism issue - but the "boy" comment was supposedly made at the end of the game after the TD - so it had no bearing on the Ravens performance. Plus we don't know in what context he used boy, boy can be used without being derogatory. We don't know what was said exactly, so you can't really bring it up.
But you notice that none of this whining, excuses, racism card is associated with Boller - the QB - the most prominent postion on the field. Or from the white head coach?
"This guy back here is giving me the ole one more....one more back to you buddy."
um how much more clutching and grabbing did the ravens think they were gonna get? the only reason it was close was the holding!
how much more clutching and grabbing were the patriots gonna get away with? if it were for all these penalties the ravens had, patriots should've blown this game out. but they didn't... maybe it's because the ravens did indeed play a good game.
give the credit to the ravens dude. just be happy your team won.
This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
completely agree...but I have to say, if I were in Bart Scott's shoes, I may have done the same thing No excuse for it, but still, it has to be extremely disheartening to be in the lead for 59 mins, and have the game decided by officials...
after all this bitching, you still have to throw in that last sentence. you people are stubborn as ox. the game was not decided by officials.
"This guy back here is giving me the ole one more....one more back to you buddy."
I hate to bring up the racism issue - but the "boy" comment was supposedly made at the end of the game after the TD - so it had no bearing on the Ravens performance. Plus we don't know in what context he used boy, boy can be used without being derogatory. We don't know what was said exactly, so you can't really bring it up.
But you notice that none of this whining, excuses, racism card is associated with Boller - the QB - the most prominent postion on the field. Or from the white head coach?
If any of the allegations are true, the only bearing it had on the game would be the field position for the final drive, cause it led to 30 yds in penalties on the kickoff.
But don't be naive...if "boy" is being used towards a grown man it is deroatory, and if as in this case it is used by a white man towards a black man or men, its got a 99% chance of being racist on top of being derogatory.
So it needs to be brought up...not so much in terms of the game's outcome, but it needs to be addressed immediately by the league.
Comments
how do you know that Billick or a player didn't call it too?
- Mr. Edward Vedder 7/11/03
Because they showed the replay, and it was Rex Ryan who called it, and the official standing right by him that acknowledged it.
replay didn't show Billick, he could of been yelling it too, or a player on the field. you don't know for sure, you shouldn't bring up such a ridiculous excuse.
- Mr. Edward Vedder 7/11/03
So for the Ravens defensive players to be upset with Billick as I have seen elsewhere is laughable, cause it was their boy (who many of the defenders favor over Billick) who made the call that may have cost them the game.
Anyway...twas a very exciting football game.
The officiating was less than stellar..can you imagine if the final play had occured in the end zone and the Ravens had won the game while Derek Mason absolutely mauled Assante Samuel as he prepared to knock the ball down...we'd have had the biggest outcry over officiating since the 85 World Series.
"We didn't feel like we were in the right configuration. We kind of knew what they were going to do and felt like we needed a better call, I guess."
Thats not a ridiculous excuse. If that had been in reverse, and the Pats made the first down but it was overruled due to the timeout, Pats fan would bitch about it forever. So dont give this shit about excuses. Its a rule. If they arent going to acknowledge the rule, then it shouldnt be in the rulebook.
yes it is ridiculous because you're arguing semantics. I'm more concerned about the refs enforcing the rules on the field, like the mugging penalties that the Ravens got away with despite the 13 penalties they got. give me a break.
YOU DO NOT KNOW IF BILLICK WAS YELLING TIMEOUT AT THE TIME. THEREFORE YOU CAN'T SAY THAT THE TIMEOUT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED.
- Mr. Edward Vedder 7/11/03
i hate the Pats as much or more as anyone but I thought the hold was a penalty. I think people get upset at the timing of the penalty but refs can't let it go because it's 4th down. Now whether Gaffney had full posession was close as well but no way it could have been overturned. Looked to me like he probably had it but a bit of a juggle perhaps at the end. all and all those 2 ended up correctly I think although if that was my team I'd probably be bitching about it too.
Bottom line is the Ravens, like the Eagles, had chances to win the game and didn't get it done while the Pats did. I think the way the Pats have won the last 2 weeks is in some ways even more impressive than blowing teams out. They've been threatened, challenged and taken to the limit but have prevailed. Impressive.
And had it been overturned for some reason, that was on 1st down, so the Pats would have been second and goal from the 8, but wait 2 Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalties on Scott would have twice moved the ball half the distance and the Pats would have had 1st and goal at the 2 with 44 seconds and a timeout, so in all odds they score anyway.
The tape confiscated 7 minutes into the first game of the season was never viewed by the Pats' coaching staff, Commisioner Hardass said so.
No result from this season has been in any way affected by that breakage of the rules, aside from maybe some extra motivation for the Pats to prove to media types (and a few select players and coaches who opened their mouths) with attitudes like yours that they are the best in the game currently.
Its all bullshit because there are so many times when the entire team is calling for a timeout yet the referees do not grant it.
Its a sad world we live in when a team "tries" to cheat. I guess its the only way to do business anymore. How do we know that they did not cheat in any of those superbowls prior to this season?
Videotaping opposing teams' signals is allowed in the NFL, just not from the position on the sidelines the Pats did it from. It is OK to do from the press box. And you can be sure at least 31 teams currently do it, and have been doing it all along. (Nobody's sure if Eric Mangini is smart enough to have found the "record" button on the camcorder yet)
In Bonds' case, the cream and clear led directly to his records.
ETA: The loss of a first round draft pick is a lot more than a slap on the wrist in the NFL, even if it ends up being pick #32.
we don't know if the Pats cheated other than the one incident and we do not know if they gained any advantages. But we know that past Denver, Cowboys and Steelers SB teams did cheat (steroids, drugs, salary cap, etc.).
- Mr. Edward Vedder 7/11/03
The thing is - the relative slap on the wrist may be justified. Is there a difference between murder and attempted murder in terms of punishment by the legal system? The answer is yes. The Patriots intended to look at the game film they were taking of the Jets and they were caught in the first quarter before they ever had a chance to look at it. So technically they did not receive any advantage and had intended to cheat, but were caught before hand. Now if they were caught "cheating" i.e. adjusting their play calls after they had viewed the tape they were making - I think their punishment would have been more severe.
But losing a 1st round pick is pretty standard in the NFL for violations. I mean the Dolphins lost one in 1970 when they were caught tampering and signed Don Shula away from the Colts when he was still under contract. A handful of teams have lost 1st round picks over the years so it was a pretty standard punishment.
And yes you can argue that they were caught in the act, but they didn't actually commit the full offense or gain an advantage from it.
Also, in a prior post you said no team on the Pats schedule will hit as hard as the Ravens. Obviously, you're not a diehard Steelers fan who watches them every week. The three hardest hitting teams in football are the Ravens, Steelers and Jags. So next week the Pats WRs should have their hands full again.
- 8/28/98
- 9/2/00
- 4/28/03, 5/3/03, 7/3/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 7/12/03, 7/14/03
- 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/1/04, 10/2/04
- 9/11/05, 9/12/05, 9/13/05, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 10/3/05
- 5/12/06, 5/13/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 6/23/06, 7/22/06, 7/23/06, 12/2/06, 12/9/06
- 8/2/07, 8/5/07
- 6/19/08, 6/20/08, 6/22/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08, 6/27/08, 6/28/08, 6/30/08, 7/1/08
- 8/23/09, 8/24/09, 9/21/09, 9/22/09, 10/27/09, 10/28/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09
- 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/23/10, 10/24/10
- 9/11/11, 9/12/11
- 10/18/13, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 11/30/13, 12/4/13
But if any official is using thinly veiled racist comments towards players, that official needs to lose his job no questions asked.
yes I read your post and you said:
"The pats won, plain and simple. Refs have terrible games now and then, and last night was definitely one of them."
the holding call was not terrible. It should of been pass interference on the 1 yard line.
- Mr. Edward Vedder 7/11/03
I know I was thinking about that as they were reviewing it - would have loved to see the reaction if they overturned it but the Pats had 1st and goal on like the 2.
But you notice that none of this whining, excuses, racism card is associated with Boller - the QB - the most prominent postion on the field. Or from the white head coach?
- Mr. Edward Vedder 7/11/03
give the credit to the ravens dude. just be happy your team won.
after all this bitching, you still have to throw in that last sentence. you people are stubborn as ox. the game was not decided by officials.
- Mr. Edward Vedder 7/11/03
But don't be naive...if "boy" is being used towards a grown man it is deroatory, and if as in this case it is used by a white man towards a black man or men, its got a 99% chance of being racist on top of being derogatory.
So it needs to be brought up...not so much in terms of the game's outcome, but it needs to be addressed immediately by the league.