If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
All: The new Billszone site with the updated software is scheduled to be turned on Tuesday, May 21, 2024. The company that built it, Dynascale, estimates a FOUR HOUR shut down, from 8pm Pacific, (5pm Eastern) while they get it up and running. Nobody will be able to post in any forum until they are done. Afterwards, you may need to do a web search for the site, as old links will not work, because the site is getting a new IP address. Please be patient. If there are bugs, we will tackle them one at a time. Remember the goal is to be up and running with no glitches by camp. Doing this now assures us of that, because it gives us all summer to get our ducks in a row. Thank you!
Please use this thread to report any issues you come across
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/forum/feedback-forums/billszone-q-a/6521455-upgrade-report-bugs-here
How many times are you going to ask this STUPID, IRRELEVENT question????????????????
If you're going to use this whistle argument, you have to understand that human error is part of the game. Unless, of course, they specify some sort of tolerance on the maximum time it takes to blow the whistle. I'm unaware of such a rule.
It's very relevant. There are plenty of plays in every NFL game that are over before a ref blows a whistle.
List them all. It does not matter, the play in question is not one of them. And even if a play is over before the whistle is blown, how is the length of time before the whistle is blown relevent?
When a player touches the out of bounds line, the play is over.
When a pass is incomplete and the ball hits the ground, the play is over.
When a player is tackled to the ground by an opposing player, the play is over.
The whistle is then blow after these events, as an indicator. The whistle ALWAYS ends a play, however a play is NOT ALWAYS ended by a whistle.
List them all. It does not matter, the play in question is not one of them. And even if a play is over before the whistle is blown, how is the length of time before the whistle is blown relevent?
As soon as a referee deems the player down by forward progress, the play is over. He then blows the whistle. The time between him making up his mind and him blowing the whistle is almost irrelevant.
If you're going to use this whistle argument, you have to understand that human error is part of the game. Unless, of course, they specify some sort of tolerance on the maximum time it takes to blow the whistle. I'm unaware of such a rule.
As soon as a referee deems the player down by forward progress, the play is over. He then blows the whistle. The time between him making up his mind and him blowing the whistle is almost irrelevant.
Well, here is where you are WRONG & you yourself pointed out refs were reluctant to blow the whistle because of a possible fumble.
Well, here is where you are WRONG & you yourself pointed out refs were reluctant to blow the whistle because of a possible fumble.
Holy christ, even if they don't blow the whistle and let the play continue, IF they deem that he was down by forward progress AFTER the play, it is unreviewable by rule.
How so? Refs make calls. They blow calls. How is any conclusion more logical than the other?
The fact that the Colts called a timeout after the play, gave the Bills and the refs time to look at it, and they still didn't review it? If I were the Bills, I would've been screaming at the refs after my guys upstairs looked at the replay. The Bills seemed pretty OK with it.
First of all, the Bills had no recourse other than screaming. Second, our coach is a dumbass who probably doesn't even know to this point that the play was in question.
This is your defense? The refs and the Bills coaches never make mistakes? Let me guess. You think that Brett Hull's goal was legit.
List them all. It does not matter, the play in question is not one of them. And even if a play is over before the whistle is blown, how is the length of time before the whistle is blown relevent?
Neither of you have ever seen a play that was over and then a few seconds later a rapid fire blowing of the whistle? Seriously?
Next Sunday when the Bills play watch the game and see if you can hear a whistle after every play of the game. Actually pay attention for it.
You'll notice there will be at least a handful of plays where you won't hear a whistle or you'll hear the whistle well after the play is done.
Neither of you have ever seen a play that was over and then a few seconds later a rapid fire blowing of the whistle? Seriously?
Next Sunday when the Bills play watch the game and see if you can hear a whistle after every play of the game. Actually pay attention for it.
You'll notice there will be at least a handful of plays where you won't hear a whistle or you'll hear the whistle well after the play is done.
Sure nuff. And as I have been trying to tell you folks, that is why we have review. There's no way anyone could say that Wayne's forward progress had stopped unless they had a frickin' surveyor's sight and a mothereffing gyroscope on his balls.
Sure nuff. And as I have been trying to tell you folks, that is why we have review. There's no way anyone could say that Wayne's forward progress had stopped unless they had a frickin' surveyor's sight and a mothereffing gyroscope on his balls.
What? Determining if something is logical doesn't involve statistics?
Not at all. All logic requires is a solid premise or chain of premises to make a conclusion. It can have infinitesimal probability and still be logical.
I'm actually the only one citing rules and links. You have nothing backing up your argument.
Speaking of logic...
Premise: The officials made the call that Wayne's progress was stopped.
Conclusion: Not reviewable.
So in order to judge whether that logic is valid, we need to examine that premise. That is why I asked you if you had evidence that this was the case. You don't. That doesn't make you wrong and it doesn't make me right. It doesn't make it logical either.
I just realized how little I actually care about whether you understand this rule. Think whatever you want, enjoy the world you live in.
I understand it just fine. I don't think he was down. I don't think his forward progress was stopped. I don't think any official signaled that it was stopped. I don't think anyone could possibly react that quickly to do so or even make a reliable subsequent judgement afterward without the aid of review.
Tweet
Comment