Books flush with pats money ----- refs decide the outcome ---- keep on doubting
- Thread starter T
- Start date
- Sep 1, 2012
- 11,023
- 1,438
- 113
Refs being on the take is much more plausible than lets say a Big Ben. I just wonder when the season will be when they script a Vikings Super Bowl. :shrug:
Maybe that is why all of the new rules, just keep adding rules so there are more ways to screw the gambler.
Personally I don't see why the NFL would care about Vegas, they would be risking a lot if they got caught. I mean a lot.
Maybe that is why all of the new rules, just keep adding rules so there are more ways to screw the gambler.
Personally I don't see why the NFL would care about Vegas, they would be risking a lot if they got caught. I mean a lot.
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
So the league covered up spygate because they are "The Patriots", yet they called down and told a ref to wave off a call against the "The Patriots" to assure they lost. Just making sure I have it right as I am not sure which conspiracy theory we are going with this week. Keep up the good fight guys:0074
I never believed in fixes, but I do believe in this:
I never believed in fixes, but I do believe in this:
Toby Moskowitz and Jon Wertheim compile the percentage of home games won by teams in all the major sports. It's hard to argue against the home-field advantage. But why does that advantage exist? In "Scorecasting", Moskowitz and Wertheim compile data to test a variety of popular theories.
Moskowitz and Wertheim found that home teams essentially get slightly preferential treatment from the officials. Moskowitz and Wertheim also make clear, however, an important nuance: official bias is quite likely involuntary.
What does this mean? It means that officials don't consciously decide to give the home team an advantage -- but rather, being social creatures (and human beings) like the rest of us, they assimilate the emotion of the home crowd and, once in a while, make a call that makes a whole lot of close-by, noisy people very happy.
Source: http://www.nfl.com/features/freakonomics/episode-7
I never believed in fixes, but I do believe in this:
Toby Moskowitz and Jon Wertheim compile the percentage of home games won by teams in all the major sports. It's hard to argue against the home-field advantage. But why does that advantage exist? In "Scorecasting", Moskowitz and Wertheim compile data to test a variety of popular theories.
Moskowitz and Wertheim found that home teams essentially get slightly preferential treatment from the officials. Moskowitz and Wertheim also make clear, however, an important nuance: official bias is quite likely involuntary.
What does this mean? It means that officials don't consciously decide to give the home team an advantage -- but rather, being social creatures (and human beings) like the rest of us, they assimilate the emotion of the home crowd and, once in a while, make a call that makes a whole lot of close-by, noisy people very happy.
Source: http://www.nfl.com/features/freakonomics/episode-7
Don't forget that the refs called a P.I. penalty on Carolina about 3-4 passes earlier in that drive. They must have done that "just to keep it interesting", so they could let the suspense play out til the last seconds!
******* let the hammer straighten this out !!!
******* let the hammer straighten this out !!!
PLEASE READ !!!!
The refs decided that there could be no penalty due to "in essence, the catchability of the ball due to its location," Blakeman told pool reporters afterward. "So it was determined at that point in time that when the primary contact occurred on the tight end that the ball, in essence, was coming in underthrown and in essence it was immediate at that point intercepted at the front end of the end zone."
If you're confused, you aren't alone.
A number of NFL rules experts took to social media to declare that whole thing was an inaccurate mess. It starts with the fact that under Article 6 (a) of Rule 12 (Section 1) of the NFL rule book, Kuechly's bear hug of Gronkowski qualified as defensive holding, not pass interference. As such, the catchability of the pass is not a factor in the infraction being called.
So the original flag was wrong. The reversal may have been correct (if the ball was, indeed, uncatchable) but only because the penalty being reversed was incorrect to begin with. If they?d gotten the first one right, they may have still blown the second one.
******* let the hammer straighten this out !!!
PLEASE READ !!!!
The refs decided that there could be no penalty due to "in essence, the catchability of the ball due to its location," Blakeman told pool reporters afterward. "So it was determined at that point in time that when the primary contact occurred on the tight end that the ball, in essence, was coming in underthrown and in essence it was immediate at that point intercepted at the front end of the end zone."
If you're confused, you aren't alone.
A number of NFL rules experts took to social media to declare that whole thing was an inaccurate mess. It starts with the fact that under Article 6 (a) of Rule 12 (Section 1) of the NFL rule book, Kuechly's bear hug of Gronkowski qualified as defensive holding, not pass interference. As such, the catchability of the pass is not a factor in the infraction being called.
So the original flag was wrong. The reversal may have been correct (if the ball was, indeed, uncatchable) but only because the penalty being reversed was incorrect to begin with. If they?d gotten the first one right, they may have still blown the second one.
was not decided by that last play Brady was flat this game he wants Manning more than anything this week and to remind him that he is the better QB of the two
that why i took panthers I knew thier defense would shut down Tom and sack him and hurry him up get him off his game I figured Pats would come back to win at 1 point but if it wasnt for Panthers massive penalties that game would be over after Panthers took lead 24- 20
The call was a judgement call by refs thats why they had meeting to discuss what happend Gronk was out of position the int happend 5 yards in front of him saw the review on nfl network top guy of refs was on video with them and said 10 times out of ten that same call would be made according to NEW rules !
that why i took panthers I knew thier defense would shut down Tom and sack him and hurry him up get him off his game I figured Pats would come back to win at 1 point but if it wasnt for Panthers massive penalties that game would be over after Panthers took lead 24- 20
The call was a judgement call by refs thats why they had meeting to discuss what happend Gronk was out of position the int happend 5 yards in front of him saw the review on nfl network top guy of refs was on video with them and said 10 times out of ten that same call would be made according to NEW rules !
- Nov 18, 2008
- 513
- 87
- 28
How many remember this one...
How many remember this one...
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Personal-Foul-The-NFL-Los-by-Anthony-Wade-081118-356.html
The most blatant example of game fixing ever by the refs...November 2008, Steelers 11-10 win over the Chargers that should have been 18-10. Pitt was minus 5 for the game.
How many remember this one...
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Personal-Foul-The-NFL-Los-by-Anthony-Wade-081118-356.html
The most blatant example of game fixing ever by the refs...November 2008, Steelers 11-10 win over the Chargers that should have been 18-10. Pitt was minus 5 for the game.
