I didn't see any conclusive view that placed the ball at the 1 1/2 yard line. No way they should have overturned that call.
I think Dallas got screwed on that spot
- Thread starter Wilson
- Start date
- Dec 13, 2005
- 1,772
- 11
- 0
I have to agree w/u guys on this one, I thought it had to conclusive to overturn it, and I don't think it was. Nothing more than Home Field advantage here.
It wasnt fixed.
But there is no way they should have overturned that call.
Not possible to say that there was irrefuatable evidence to overturn it.
Dallas got screwed & then Romo went limp.
:sadwave:
But there is no way they should have overturned that call.
Not possible to say that there was irrefuatable evidence to overturn it.
Dallas got screwed & then Romo went limp.
:sadwave:
Who was the ref....I want to google some info on him....
Wonder if he went to University of Washington or his wife is from Seattle or somehting like that....
Wonder if he went to University of Washington or his wife is from Seattle or somehting like that....
I thought so too............if its not conclusive then how could they over rule what is called on the field.........
not a dallas fan at all, i did bet them +2.5,
BUT THAT WAS A BS REVERSAL, NO WAY ITS CONCLUSIVE. IF THEY CALLED IN 4TH DOWN ORIGINALLY, YOU COULDNT OVERTURN THAT ALSO. BIG B. S.
BUT THAT WAS A BS REVERSAL, NO WAY ITS CONCLUSIVE. IF THEY CALLED IN 4TH DOWN ORIGINALLY, YOU COULDNT OVERTURN THAT ALSO. BIG B. S.
I think he did not get to the first down marker...BUT the official made the call that he did. The views shown on tv were no way conclusive on where the ball was on his forward progress so you have to go with the call on the field. oh well. (had dallas at +3 so for me it did not really matter.)
- Sep 13, 2005
- 2,896
- 24
- 38
Who cares? Dallas would have sat on the ball for 2-3 plays and tried the same 19 yard field goal. That was an incredible choke by Romo dropping the ball and then getting caught from behind.
Of course the bothced snap is 100% on him, but how can being tackled by a DB with a full head of steam be Romos fault......
I think it was pretty clear he didnt even come close to making it.
But it is also true there was no absolutely clear replay. The term "conclusive" sure seems to be loosely defined sometimes.
Like earlier today...any doubt that Law didnt catch that one interception? But he had the ball so covered up replay didnt show anything....but just look at his body and you know he didnt catch it.
But it is also true there was no absolutely clear replay. The term "conclusive" sure seems to be loosely defined sometimes.
Like earlier today...any doubt that Law didnt catch that one interception? But he had the ball so covered up replay didnt show anything....but just look at his body and you know he didnt catch it.
maybe dallas should have won any one of its last 3 home games. then they wouldn't be in this situation.
there wasn't "conclusive" evidence, but there was evidence enough for a home team to get the call apparently. dallas can blame itself for losing 3 in a row at home to end the year and then maybe they would get some "home cooking"
parcells is a goner i think
maybe art shell should coach the cowboys
there wasn't "conclusive" evidence, but there was evidence enough for a home team to get the call apparently. dallas can blame itself for losing 3 in a row at home to end the year and then maybe they would get some "home cooking"
parcells is a goner i think
maybe art shell should coach the cowboys
:chairshot
:mj15:
:nutkick
:mj04:
Do ever say anything like that again, not even in jest....
I almost puked at the thought...
go back to the SEA safety... the ball fumble into the endzone, the offensive player touch the ball while outbound then it a safety... if the defensive player touch the ball while out of bound wouldn't it be a touchback??? Either ways, I think this is a make for SEA SB lost last year by the REF.
