I have been soo extremely angry that I could'nt come on here until now. I understand the rule that a judgement call cannot be reviewed based on it being subjective, but obviously this is a seriously flawed system because that was straight horseshit. Even if it would have happened to the browns I would still think it was a bullshit call. Granted people might argue that we should of never been in that position because of how bad we played, but we could have and probably would have stole this game if the correct call was made. PLAIN and SIMPLE the refs fucked up and it should at the very least be acknowledged by the NFL that the refs blew it. I really hope I don't lose it at work tommorrow
I can't name any either, and the Seattle in 1998 game really doesn't count because we were in the playoffs anyway. Even if it was ruled correctly and Vinny didn't score, it wouldn't have crippled us. nope, we never ever get these calls
I understand the rule that judgement calls are not reviewable. I just think its...bad judgement...on the league's part to make these types of plays un-reviewable. Ehh, whatever....It just bugs me.
It's still mindbogiling how the umps couldn't just call it a TD, and then review it. That way, both teams had a fair shot at the call going in their favor. That is what still makes me pissed like I am.
They should just do away with reviewing plays..PERIOD. If you cant review a play like that which determines who wins..and who loses...get rid of it. Now..not only were we subjected to a bullshit call like that...no..thats not enough. Tomorrow, the league will piss on us while we are tied to a tree....explaining that they defend the call..and that he made the right call. 3 times...3 damn times tonite in the cowboy game, receivers were pushed out of bounds with no feet in..and given the reception..EVERYTIME. Any angle you look at it...he had plenty of room to come down in bounds..and since he caught the ball..touchdown..plain and simple.
Does anyone else find it odd that this loss came almost 4 years to the day after that BS loss to the Browns in 2002? Look what happened after that. Helllloooo?
Like I said way back on page 1, it ain't no sweat off his balls. The officials single handidly almost handed a game to Indy in the playoffs last year. They then turn around and screw the Seahawks in the SB. Nothing has changed, nobody fired, nobody demoted. They make calls with reckless abandon with absolutely no fear of punishment. They have a green light to call whatever they want because there is no reprise or consecounse for screwing up. Until this changes you are gonna have piss poor referees. As far as the BS of we shouldn't have been in that situation anyway. Answer me this... Should the Patriots have been in the game at Foxboro when the tuck rule was invented? The bottom line is we played bad but were in position to send the game into OT but a horrible officiating call ruined that. Nothing else mattered to that point because nobody remembers how you play only the final score. Qualifying for the playoffs doesn't have an admissions policy, just that you win enough games not how pretty you play or how nice your stats are. At the end of the day you can throw for 3 picks and fumble 4 times but if you score more points than the other team it's all that matters. Does any Bear fan care how many turnovers Grossman had during their win 2 weeks ago? No; all that matters is the final score.
Exactly..give me a break. We have plenty of threads discussing why the Jets sucked today...teams can suck and still win..every team has a couple of those a year..especailly a good team. If you cant review that play..just get rid of the review. Get rid of it. Every damn play that is reviewed is because someone made a judgement call..bad or good. The league needs to take the judgement call crap and stick it up their ass.
I think the phrase "judgement call" is causing a whole lot of misinterpretation. The distinction here is that between a question of fact and a question of opinion. Whether someone landed inbounds or not is a question of fact - he either did or he didn't, and replay can (in theory) resolve the question. Whether someone would have landed inbounds if they hadn't been hit is not a question of fact, because it didn't happen - it's a question of opinion, and the league doesn't want the opinion of the replay official or head referee to be used to overrule the opinion of another official on the field. This is why penalties are not reviewable - they are not questions of fact, but rather of opinion. I am all for replay, but I understand completely why plays like this are not reviewable, even when they decide the game.
