Wild Card Weekend game thread (non-Pats)
- Thread starter loshjott
- Start date
This is the problem with the eye in the sky bullshit though. Vegas was not forced to risk a timeout on the last play but the Bengals are here.
Are two feet down when he gets the ball at first because then he would have 3 steps. Only chance raiders have on this review
So on the play for the Raiders, NY calls in the, "it's good," ruling. No challenge needed. But now Taylor has to use a challenge for a play that was clearly incomplete live.(note my post #242)
This is absurd. It also makes no sense. The rules don't mean anything, they are just making it up as they go along.
This is absurd. It also makes no sense. The rules don't mean anything, they are just making it up as they go along.
If the first TD was a catch, so is that catch & fumble by Renfrow.
But we're certainly getting fucked on this, and have to go for it.
But we're certainly getting fucked on this, and have to go for it.
I can't believe that was called a catch.
I honestly thought the Raiders were rushing to the LOS to catch the Bengals in a 4th down change.
I honestly thought the Raiders were rushing to the LOS to catch the Bengals in a 4th down change.
For the previous play, now they have “expedited replay” when the coach doesn’t throw the beanbag? Like college? is that what happened? I didn’t know that was a rule.
Why can't the rule be what it used to be: catch, both feet "down", and it's a reception? Why do they need to add some random "football move" to it?
Eye in the sky isn't really made to work in a situation where one team is hustling to the line. Big flaw.
The Competition committee thought it would lead to too many fumbles that they think shouldn’t count as fumbles. As I recall Belichick agreed.
Neutrally speaking, do folks think that should be a catch or an incompletion? I am honestly torn.
Incomplete. Just two feet down with control doesn’t seem like it’s long enough control to be a catch. Just my opinion
How is the Raider player making the crying baby move in front of the Bengal player not taunting?
Both live and on replay, it looked like a fairly easy incomplete call to me.
I think it is close. Ball hits his hand with a foot down and he takes two steps. But he does not secure the ball until after the first step comes up off the turf.
Leatherwood really prevented the D Tackle from being 6 rather than 7 yards from the QB when he threw. Nice job Jerome.
Follow up question, how is taunting a penalty in a league where CTE, domestic abuse, and sometimes murder are all OK?
Taunting penalties have to be the stupidest thing in all of sports
Because plays like these were fumbles and cheap turnovers (skip to 26 seconds):
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=r8ad3pDqFO4
This is the same league that perpetrated a massive fraud in plain sight to punish it's best team and besmirch it's greatest player while the rest of the nation pretended it was all legitimate. We're through the looking glass.
