Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community (https://thetfp.com/tfp/)
-   Tilted Sports (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-sports/)
-   -   Super Bowl XLIII (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-sports/144382-super-bowl-xliii.html)

djtestudo 01-19-2009 02:16 PM

Super Bowl XLIII
 
Almost 24 hours and no thread about how the GODDAMN ARIZONA CARDINALS are going to the GODDAMN SUPER BOWL? :lol:

Too bad they have to play the Steelers, though. They were the better team last night against my Ravens, though they needed one ungodly lucky play by Santonio Holmes and an extremely dirty hit on Willis McGahee to actually win :(

Fortunately I've been a Cardinals fan ever since Madden 2003 (I'm a franchise re-builder :p), so I still have a team to root for.

Stare At The Sun 01-19-2009 02:45 PM

Ungodly lucky? Not so much, holmes is a playmaker.

big joe didnt do shit

that was a totally clean hit on willis

0-3 vs steelers should tell you something

Cross-Over 01-19-2009 03:24 PM

I am a Ravens fan and was at the game, and I wouldn't call the Holmes play lucky. Roethlisberger loves to break the pocket and wait until the play breaks down to find guys. He did it all game, and the Holmes play was an example. Holmes had a lot of open space and good blocking, which is heaven for a punt returner.

Though I don't know actual language of the rule, I have been hearing that sine Clark led with the shoulder, it is a clean hit despite the fact that there was helmet to helmet contact. Clark didn't try to spear the guy with his helmet, and I think it was a clean hit.

The Ravens still had an opportunity to take the lead, but the bonehead personal foul by Stone made it a long field and then Pittsburgh's D took over with a second down sack and a third down pick.

The Ravens' corners were the problem, and after being exposed by the Titans, the Steelers attacked them. Washington and Walker were backups coming into the season and only have started due to injury to the starting corners.


Pittsburgh is favored and they should be. Obviously you still have to play the game and there have been Super Bowl upsets this decade (Patriots over Rams, Bucaneers over Raiders, Giants over Patriots).

Redlemon 01-19-2009 05:14 PM

I'll be rooting for the goddamn Cardinals. I'd like the Super Bowl winner to be someone that the Patriots (my team) completely owned during the regular season, it would make me feel better about how things went.

I think the Eagles assumed that they were going to win, and were already preparing for the Super Bowl.

Glory's Sun 01-19-2009 06:45 PM

It's hard to bet against the defense of Pittsburgh.. but then again, Arizona has been counted out the whole post-season so who knows.

As far as the hit on McGahee goes, it was clean and legal.. just sucks that it happened like it did.

djtestudo 01-19-2009 07:23 PM

It was legal, but it was nowhere near clean. Leading with the helmet and not bothering making an attempt to tackle is dirty (and stupid for Clark, who was not only lucky he didn't get hurt worse than he did, but if McGahee had the time to make a move Clark would be unemployed today). He's the same guy who hit Welker a couple weeks back.

A legal hit was the block Limus Sweed threw on Corey Ivy on the long gain by Heath Miller. That was fantastic (and hopefully Hines Ward was watching so he knows what a legal block looks like :D).

And Roethlisberger threw the pass up in the air to no one, and got (yes) lucky that Holmes saw it and got back to it before a Ravens player. That play was all Holmes, and it sickens me that the media is so in love with "Ben" that he is getting most of the credit.

I won't argue about Flacco, though. He wasn't that good. And Stone won't be employed much longer.

Like I said, the Steelers outplayed the Ravens. But like the Titans last week it almost didn't matter.
-----Added 19/1/2009 at 10 : 31 : 28-----
EDIT: ProFootballTalk.com - NO FINE COMING FOR CLARK, BUT THERE SHOULD BE

Quote:

Per Rule 12, Section 2, Article 8(g) of the 2008 NFL rules, the concept of unnecessary roughness includes “using any part of a player’s helmet . . . or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily; although such violent or unnecessary use of the helmet and facemask is impermissible against any opponent, game officials will give special attention in administering this rule to protecting those players who are in virtually defenseless postures (e.g., a player in the act of or just throwing a pass, a receiver catching or attempting to catch a pass, a runner already in the grasp of a tackler, a kickoff or punt returner attempting to field a kick in the air, or a player on the ground at the end of a play).”

...

First, if Clark used “any part” of his helmet to “butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily,” the violation is unnecessary roughness, and the player is subject to a fine or a suspension.

Second, the spokesman who spoke to Reiss misstated the rule. Using the helmet to “butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily” always is a violation.

Third, contrary to what the spokesman told Reiss, defenseless players are not by definition only “a receiver in the process of making a catch or a quarterback in the act of passing.” The rule sets forth three specific other examples of defenselessness: a runner in the grasp of a tackler, a player fielding a kick or a punt, and a player on the ground.

Fourth, and here’s where precision in the reading of the rules is critical, the list of potentially defenseless players isn’t exhaustive. The list begins with the designation “e.g.,” which means “for example.” And this means that what follows are examples and not a full and complete list.

If the powers-that-be had intended the list to be exclusive, the parenthetical should have begun with the letters “i.e.”

So if the five examples aren’t intended to represent the complete list, more examples can be added to the concept of defenselessness.

Such as a player who doesn’t see it coming.

Stare At The Sun 01-19-2009 08:15 PM

Seriously, its a physical game, get over it.

That wes welker hit was brutal as hell too, but no fine over that. Clark throws mean blocks/tackles, welcome to AMERICAN FOOTBALL!

Go pansify a different sport, football is, and will remain, and should remain a hard hitting contact sport.

djtestudo 01-19-2009 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stare At The Sun (Post 2585468)
Seriously, its a physical game, get over it.

That wes welker hit was brutal as hell too, but no fine over that. Clark throws mean blocks/tackles, welcome to AMERICAN FOOTBALL!

Go pansify a different sport, football is, and will remain, and should remain a hard hitting contact sport.

"Pansify"?

Dude, I'm a Ravens fan. I love good clean hitting on defense, which is what the Ravens do.

If you don't think the NFL should follow it's own rules, and love watching guys come within pure luck of getting paralyzed because some prick decided to go for the highlight over the tackle, that's on you.

Destrox 01-20-2009 06:21 AM

Clean hit.

The head and shoulder hit within milliseconds of each other. He went down low and so did McGahee. They happened to collide in such a manner.

There are plenty of hits like this every week. They both happened to be a full speed and in the wrong angle. Shit happens.

Welker hit was clean as well, brutal yes, but clean.

NFL needs to chill the fuck out with these play-ground rules they keep adopting. NFL players know damn well they are in for a tough as nails sport and hard hits will happen.

special_k_77 01-20-2009 08:22 AM

It was a clean and legal hit. PERIOD. And a damn good one, he led with his shoulder like you are suppose to and that is it. It is football it is a violent sport, every player knows that before they suit up. Lets stop trying to make this the No Fun League. Some of you act like you would prefer it to be a two hand touch league.

Now about the super bowl, al long as both teams show up it should be a great game. I will be watching and I am sure there will be a few hard hit so some of you might want to turn away.

Anormalguy 01-20-2009 08:59 AM

I'll root for the underdog Cardinals, but the Steelers have been been solid and will probably win. The point spread I'll leave to others who follow the NFL closely.

Mister Coaster 01-20-2009 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djtestudo (Post 2585472)
Dude, I'm a Ravens fan. I love good clean hitting on defense, which is what the Ravens do.

Yeah right, you're telling me Ray Lewis NEVER has been in trouble for illegal hits? If his helmet could talk, I'm sure it could tell some stories. Get over it. McGahee will recover and your Ravens will have a lovely off-season.

Clark's hit was clean, he wasn't flagged, fined or anything. You are the only one saying it wasn't.

djtestudo 01-20-2009 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Coaster (Post 2585607)
Yeah right, you're telling me Ray Lewis NEVER has been in trouble for illegal hits? If his helmet could talk, I'm sure it could tell some stories.

What does that have to do with anything? If he got into trouble over illegal hits, I have no problem.

BECAUSE THEY WERE ILLEGAL HITS! :lol:

And again, even if you want to call it a legal hit (which it wasn't according to the rules, but lets leave that aside for the moment), that doesn't make it a CLEAN hit.

And for the record...

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/6540/helmetcc9.jpg

Mister Coaster 01-20-2009 05:12 PM

What does that have to do with anything? I'll spell it out for you if needed... You said "...I love good clean hitting on defense, which is what the Ravens do." Ray Lewis is well-known for delivering cheap-shots. Ray Lewis is a Raven's defensive player. Therefore your statement about the Ravens being a clean hitting defense is questionable.

I've seen the replays. Yes, the helmet hit first, but it was incidental because of the angles at which they collided. As Clark moved forward, he was leading with his shoulder. And I'll go ahead and stand on the fact that there was no fine or flag. Legal hit, period.

djtestudo 01-20-2009 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Coaster (Post 2585788)
What does that have to do with anything? I'll spell it out for you if needed... You said "...I love good clean hitting on defense, which is what the Ravens do." Ray Lewis is well-known for delivering cheap-shots. Ray Lewis is a Raven's defensive player. Therefore your statement about the Ravens being a clean hitting defense is questionable.

Hines Ward is known league-wide as a dirty player. Ryan Clark has delivered several hits that have been at the very very least extremely questionable and likely dirty. Both play for the Steelers. Therefore the Steelers as a team are a group of dirty players.

See the logical disconnect?

Quote:

I've seen the replays. Yes, the helmet hit first, but it was incidental because of the angles at which they collided. As Clark moved forward, he was leading with his shoulder. And I'll go ahead and stand on the fact that there was no fine or flag. Legal hit, period.
It doesn't MATTER if it's incidental. And Ryan Clark hasn't earned the benefit of the doubt as to whether or not it was intentional.

Stare At The Sun 01-20-2009 06:29 PM

^ No flag, just get over it man. Most everyone agrees it was a legal hit, and this isn't 2 hand tap, just move on.

CinnamonGirl 01-20-2009 06:33 PM

Ugh...the Steelers.

I'm not much for the Cardinals, either. Guess I'll just be watching the commercials again.

Ilow 01-20-2009 06:44 PM

There is a difference in the way that Clark and other hard hitters hit. Players who were renowned for delivering hard often borderline illegal hits, like Ronnie Lott, Rodney Harrison, or even Polamalu usually lead with their forearm or shoulder not their helmet. As i detailed in an earlier post the Welker hit was illegal (and flagged so) and simply because he led with the head so was the Mcgahee hit. It was certainly questionable whether mcgahee was "defenseless" as he was a ballcarrier, not leaping for a catch, but it was close. Anyone who knows who Daryl Stingley was knows that as much as hard hits are fun and part of the game, Clark is crossing the line.
As for the game, i can't help but think that the Steeler's db's are up to the task of shutting down Fitzgerald, which is the biggest key to stopping the Cardinals. I can't believe that the stupid Cardinals with their 8-8 record are in the big game, while the 11-5 Patriots, who spanked the Cardianls like a bad baby, didn't even get into the playoffs.

Mister Coaster 01-20-2009 07:18 PM

djtestudo: I don't give a squat about the Steelers or whether or not they are "dirty players" in your mind. I never said that they weren't. I'm commenting on the ONE hit.

But if you are going to sit back and claim that the Raven's D is squeaky clean, then you're just watching them through rose-colored glasses. You're a Raven's fan, and that's fine, (I don't even have a football team) but don't tell me that they don't walk the fine line of what's legal and what's not.

djtestudo 01-20-2009 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Coaster (Post 2585858)
djtestudo: I don't give a squat about the Steelers or whether or not they are "dirty players" in your mind. I never said that they weren't. I'm commenting on the ONE hit.

But if you are going to sit back and claim that the Raven's D is squeaky clean, then you're just watching them through rose-colored glasses. You're a Raven's fan, and that's fine, (I don't even have a football team) but don't tell me that they don't walk the fine line of what's legal and what's not.

I didn't realize I was.

*Goes back and re-reads posts*

Oh, that's because I wasn't.

Nice strawman, though. Nicely dressed. Doesn't scare any birds, though ;)

Mister Coaster 01-21-2009 07:44 AM

Well, I guess that line that YOU typed in that previous post doesn't count? You can pretend that you didn't say it, but plugging your ears and shouting "I can't hear you" doesn't work after 3rd grade. What's next, a "do-over?" :thumbsup:

:confused: Straw man? Hardly. Everything you say ill about the Steelers in this whole post is based on the fact that you are a Ravens fan and you are crying sour grapes over a tough loss. (understandable, but don't make shit up) Your statement about their defense being a clean hitting one just made me literally laugh out loud when I read it, I just couldn't let that go.

Glory's Sun 01-21-2009 10:58 AM

so umm.. is thread about a questionable hit.. or the superbowl?? I'm a bit confused as the title of the thread reads Super Bowl XLIII.

yournamehere 01-21-2009 02:18 PM

Looks like we need a Whiney Losers Forum. Then perhaps someone could start a real Superbowl thread . . . . .

My Gawd!!!! A hard hit in a Steelers / Ravens game!!! I'm so shocked!!!!! :rolleyes:
What's next - overpriced tickets??!! :eek:

And as far as, "Hines Ward is known league-wide as a dirty player," that's just plain bullshit, and you know it. Some linebackers and defensive linemen just don't like it when they get blocked by someone half their size.

In fact, I believe it was one of your team's players - Bart Scott -who said a few days before the game, they were going to try to take out his knee.

crewsor 01-21-2009 02:50 PM

Let me join in what you will refer to as whining I'm sure. What Scott said was,

"His time will come. He'll get his... He'll come across the middle one day, and someone will hit him or take out his knee. The guy will be fined and [Ward] will be gone. No one will even care. No one will send him any cards saying they're sorry. Not to that guy... You reap what you sow."

So he did talk about Wards knee, but didn't say the Ravens were going to do anything of the sort. I can definitely see it happening. He is not very well like around the league by his own admission. You can come to your own conclusion as to why.

As for the Superbowl, you better believe I'll be rooting for Arizona.

roachboy 01-21-2009 03:03 PM

i was surprised at how effectively the cardinals were able to attack the eagles defense in the first half. someone earlier said they thought the eagles assumed they'd win and so were ambushed a bit by the cardinals early.

the steelers will not be surprised.

i don't think the cardinals have a prayer.

djtestudo 01-21-2009 03:17 PM

Interesting perspective I saw from Tuesday Morning Quarterback on ESPN.com.

Whenever teams with opposing dominent sides (a dominent offense vs. a dominent defense) play in the Super Bowl, the two tend to cancel each other out and the weaker sides for each team determine the game.

For example, last year the Giants had the defense and Patriots had the offense, but the game came down to the Giants offense vs. the Patriots defense.

So this year could come down to a Pittsburgh offense that has stuggled through parts of the season and post-season (as TMQ mentions, offenses based around your QB scrambling to create big plays have a low chance of success) vs. an Arizona defense that has given up 40-plus points on several occasions (and 56 to the Jets).

I think if that ends up being the way the game plays out, Pittsburgh wins by two scores. However, if they cover Larry Fitzgerald the way the NFC teams did (maybe I should put cover in quotes...), and they really don't have anyone who can cover him one-on-one, I think the Cardinals win in a shootout with Roethlisberger making a critical mistake near the end.

Cross-Over 01-21-2009 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djtestudo (Post 2585437)
...And Roethlisberger threw the pass up in the air to no one, and got (yes) lucky that Holmes saw it and got back to it before a Ravens player. That play was all Holmes, and it sickens me that the media is so in love with "Ben" that he is getting most of the credit.

My opinion on the play is different. The Raven's defender had his back turned, which is a mistake. However, it is not that surprising, because as I mentioned in my initial post, Ben scrambled all game until plays broke down and waited for guys to get open. Yes he was about to get hit on that play, but I strongly disagree that he was throwing it up to no one. I think Ben saw an opening at the last second and put the ball in there. Good throw, good catch, great run after the catch. Improbable and fortunate? Yes. Lucky, as if he was throwing it to no one or throwing the ball away? No.

djtestudo 01-22-2009 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cross-Over (Post 2586337)
My opinion on the play is different. The Raven's defender had his back turned, which is a mistake. However, it is not that surprising, because as I mentioned in my initial post, Ben scrambled all game until plays broke down and waited for guys to get open. Yes he was about to get hit on that play, but I strongly disagree that he was throwing it up to no one. I think Ben saw an opening at the last second and put the ball in there. Good throw, good catch, great run after the catch. Improbable and fortunate? Yes. Lucky, as if he was throwing it to no one or throwing the ball away? No.

Watch it again. There wasn't anyone within ten yards of where Roethlisberger was aiming when he threw it. Holmes had to reverse course and run back to get the ball, and get lucky that the defender covering him didn't recover in time.

95 times out of 100 that ball is incomplete or a pick, and if Flacco had thrown that pass people would be using it as evidence of his being a rookie.

guyy 01-22-2009 08:29 AM

RB -- i do think the Cards have a chance because if the Cards get out ahead, can the plodding Steelers catch up? The Cardinal defense is up to the task of stopping P-burgh's offense. And yeah, the Steeler defense looks tough, but they played a lot of really crappy offenses: Baltimore x 2, Cleveland x 2, (Bengals, who are just plain crappy)x2, the Deadskins... They did manage to beat the Colts and NE so i'll give them credit for that. They are not unbeatable.

It's a shame the Ravens and the Steelers couldn't have both lost.

Destrox 01-22-2009 09:04 AM

This is going to be a great superbowl for my self and my friends.

Old home just a few months back: Pittsburgh region.

New home: Phoenix region.

I mean damn.

Still a Steelers fan and will not be switching to the cards. But its nice to move from one area with such a awesome fan base to another.

There are just a lot of bandwagon Cards fan I've seen out here.

Mister Coaster 01-22-2009 10:41 AM

I also think the Cards have a chance. Let's face it, they were supposed to be out in the first round, Carolina and Philly are believers now.

I would have told you 5 years ago that Warner had no business even suiting up as a backup, but without a doubt he proved otherwise this season. And since he's throwing to Fitzgerald & Boldin (arguably the best 1-2 WR punch) that makes for a brilliant combo. The wildcard is Polamalu, if that guy gets into Warner's head, then it's going to be all over but the shouting.

I agree that Rothlesberger is overrated, or at least gets more praise than he deserves. He's a fairly solid QB, but has a touch of Favre's disease. It's a crap shoot whether or not AZ's defense will show up, but even then, Steelers win with their defense.

Should be a good game. I'll go ahead and root for the underdog Cards.

telekinetic 01-22-2009 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Destrox (Post 2586476)
But its nice to move from one area with such a awesome fan base to another.

There are just a lot of bandwagon Cards fan I've seen out here.

Phoenix: Home of the fairweather fans. And why not? Between the Suns, Diamondbacks, Cards (now!)...maybe the Coyets is stretching things...anyways, we've almost always got one team who is having an interesting season...why not watch the interesting games and cheer the home team?

Cross-Over 01-23-2009 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djtestudo (Post 2586423)
Watch it again. There wasn't anyone within ten yards of where Roethlisberger was aiming when he threw it. Holmes had to reverse course and run back to get the ball, and get lucky that the defender covering him didn't recover in time.

95 times out of 100 that ball is incomplete or a pick, and if Flacco had thrown that pass people would be using it as evidence of his being a rookie.


I just watched it again several times and in slow motion. Again, I strongly disagree with your depiction. I see Holmes in the area. Holmes did not reverse course. He stopped and waited for the ball, but he never reversed course and came back on the play. I would not call it an under thrown ball necessarily, because the defender was so out of position and Roethlisberger was under so much pressure, he just had to get the ball there, and he did.

I disagree with your initial statement about Ben not throwing it up to anybody. It is clear that he was throwing it to Holmes.

djtestudo 02-01-2009 07:53 PM

Hell of a game.

I would love to come in here and say that Roethlisberger played a nice game, especially in the fourth quarter and DOUBLE-especially considering his offensive line was an embarrassment. I would love to talk about how Holmes channeled Lynn Swann for the game and completely deserved that MVP. I would love to come in here and talk about how Pittsburgh's defense stopped Fitzgerald for most of the game and got one critical big play, which was exactly what they needed to do to win the game.

However, a game officiated that poorly between the personal fouls on that one Pittsburgh drive (the roughing the passer was a p---y call and what the HELL is roughing the HOLDER?), James Harrison channeling Hines Ward and the fact that the officials blew two forward-pass calls (and only reviewed, let alone overturned, one) should overshadow everything else.

Pittsburgh deserved to win tonight. Arizona, however, did NOT deserve to lose.

Stay classy, Pittsburgh.

http://i40.tinypic.com/whbja8.gif

Stare At The Sun 02-01-2009 10:00 PM

^ It's in the record books man, just let it go.

The Steelers deserve the win, and just because you're still sore about the Ravens sputtering out that doesn't mean you need to downplay the best Superbowl in memory.

Pittsburgh is a physical team, Harrison got the penalty, what more do you want?

djtestudo 02-01-2009 10:07 PM

Officiating dictates Super Bowl XLIII to the unreviewed end - Shutdown Corn... - NFL - Yahoo! Sports

Quote:

After Santonio Holmes' game-winning touchdown catch he did an imitation of LeBron James' chalk move. Using the ball as a prop is an automatic 15-yard penalty on the kickoff.
One I forgot.
-----Added 2/2/2009 at 01 : 09 : 15-----
Quote:

Originally Posted by Stare At The Sun (Post 2590488)
Pittsburgh is a physical team, Harrison got the penalty, what more do you want?

How about an ejection from the game. That's unacceptable behavior, especially from the goddamn defensive player of the year.

At least Ryan Clark is doing dirty stuff in the midst of plays (if you can really say "at least").

Glory's Sun 02-02-2009 06:25 AM

It's bad when even John Madden says a player should be ejected from a game.

Anyway, the game was a snooze fest until the 4th quarter. Pitt probably deserved the win, but I was hoping the Cards' would come back and seal it..they should have stayed no huddle longer.

and now, I'm betting that Warner retires.

roachboy 02-02-2009 07:33 AM

i enjoyed the game---it didn't turn out exactly as i expected, simply because the cardinals were only able to move the ball systematically in the 4th quarter.

this, however, is hilarious:

Quote:

Porn interrupts Super Bowl TV coverage
Arizona fans tuning in for climax of American football season get 30-second view of Club Jenna cable channel

Since Janet Jackson's bejewelled right nipple popped out during the half-time show at the 2004 Super Bowl, the term "wardrobe malfunction" has become part of the rich history of American football's showpiece event.

Yesterday, as this year's clash between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Arizona Cardinals neared a thrilling climax, TV viewers in Tuscon, Arizona, witnessed an intimate exposure of a completely different order.

Shortly after 7.30pm, with less than three minutes to play in a tightly fought final, the Cardinals had taken the lead with a crucial touchdown. Fans watching in Arizona would have been forgiven for scenting a victory for their team against the odds. Then the pictures from Tampa disappeared.

Instead, viewers in the Tuscon area were astonished to see a woman unzipping a man's trousers to reveal "full male nudity" followed by what was described as "a graphic act" between the couple. Somehow, the feed from Super Bowl XLIII had been mixed up with a 30-second excerpt from Club Jenna, an adult cable TV channel featuring Jenna Jameson, one of America's most famous porn actresses.

"I just figured it was another commercial until I looked up," Cora King, of Marana, told the Arizona Daily Star newspaper. "Then he did his little dance with everything hanging out."

Another viewer, Jeanene Piek, said she was outraged that her granddaughter had seen the clip. "I was in a state of shock. I am totally disgusted," she said.

The Tucson-based KVOA-TV said it was "dismayed and disappointed" at the interruption, which affected viewers taking a cable feed from Comcast, a cable television company.

"KVOA will investigate what happened and make sure our viewers get answers," said the company president, Gary Nielsen. "When the NBC feed of the Super Bowl was transmitted from KVOA to local cable providers and through over-the-air antennas there was no pornographic material."

Once the pictures from the Super Bowl returned, Cardinals fans did not get the climax they were looking for. The Steelers pipped them 27-23, scoring with only 35 seconds left on the clock.
Porn interrupts Super Bowl TV coverage | World news | guardian.co.uk

did anyone experience this?
things this great have a way of not really happening...

Glory's Sun 02-02-2009 08:27 AM

I remember seeing an article not too long ago where something similar happened.. something to do with an older man, and then the porn showing up on his tv.. think it was comcast..

I'm starting to think that some college interns are sneaking into the control room and doing it on purpose..

at least..that's what I would do.

Strange Famous 02-02-2009 01:20 PM

The guy should have got a straight red, or whatever the equivalent is.

No 92 who threw the punch on the guy who was already down.

Im not saying that its the worst thing Ive ever seen - but even in a physical game and rough game like NFL, if you throw a punch in a cowardly way like that you deserve to be sent off.

Its a shame, cos it does taint what was up to that point a great performance by the lad.

I watched the whole game, BBC coverage was pretty good, except for the fact that the host called a TD a try a couple of times.

Oh, and I respect every sport has its own traditions - but isnt a bit ridicolous that each team needs 4 players (and an army general!) to toss the coin at the start of the game???

Glory's Sun 02-02-2009 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous (Post 2590721)
The guy should have got a straight red, or whatever the equivalent is.

No 92 who threw the punch on the guy who was already down.

Im not saying that its the worst thing Ive ever seen - but even in a physical game and rough game like NFL, if you throw a punch in a cowardly way like that you deserve to be sent off.

Its a shame, cos it does taint what was up to that point a great performance by the lad.

I watched the whole game, BBC coverage was pretty good, except for the fact that the host called a TD a try a couple of times.

Oh, and I respect every sport has its own traditions - but isnt a bit ridicolous that each team needs 4 players (and an army general!) to toss the coin at the start of the game???

he should have been thrown off so yeah it would be the equivalent of a red.. although in American football, it's yellow flags for fouls.. not cards.

I can only imagine what Frank Fucking Lampard is thinking if he saw this incident with no dismissal hahaha

Strange Famous 02-02-2009 02:07 PM

Almost as bad as this from the same game!


Kind of similar in regard to how blatant it was...

I knew that the flags were only for penalties, but I didnt know if there was an equivaleng of the sin bin (as in Rugby or Ice Hockey) - I've probably seem 100 NFL games in my life I guess, and Ive never seen a player sent off/excluded that I can rememer.

Glory's Sun 02-02-2009 03:26 PM

it's a rarity that NFL players are sent off, but penalties just have different yard infractions.. so, that penalty would have been a personal foul and 15 minus yards..

About your youtube post, Bosingwa in a lucky boy to not have a card, and then to not have the FA be able to do anything about it because the assistant ref's report has that he saw it. How can Lampard get a straight red for a challenge that didn't even deserve a yellow..and bosingwa(sp?) not get a straight red or 3 match ban for that shit?

even worse.. how or why in the fucks name am I defending a fucking chelski bum??

Leto 02-02-2009 06:22 PM

That was a decent game. Played almost as exciting as a Grey Cup tilt, except that having that extra down (4 downs) is rather luxurious.

Locobot 02-02-2009 10:00 PM

Quote:

Porn interrupts Super Bowl TV coverage | World news | guardian.co.uk
did anyone experience this?
things this great have a way of not really happening...
I was watching in Tucson on Comcast at a neighbor's house, but it didn't happen on the hi-def broadcast that we were watching, only the regular-def. It was hilarious watching the granny they got on the local news tonight "I was mortified!"

Quote:

it's a rarity that NFL players are sent off, but penalties just have different yard infractions.. so, that penalty would have been a personal foul and 15 minus yards..
True, ejections occur more often in college football. NFL players are eligible for major fines (tens of thousands) if they commit personal fouls. The fines have become increasingly more common recently too. Also I think if NFL players are ejected they're automatically eligible for being suspended for the season. The fines are peanuts for most players, but being suspended without pay ends up being a massive amount of lost revenue.

Strange Famous 02-04-2009 11:07 AM

I think giving someone a season long ban for something like that would be too much, but he shouldnt have been on the field lifting the trophy after what he did, and something like a 2 or 3 match ban would seem fair. And stands to reason he'll be fined, but as you say - when youre making that sort of dough what does it mean to you.

I thought Arizona were unlucky in a way because a couple of key plays (the interception that came back for a TD mostly) made the difference in the end, but Steelers did have more of the game.

blktour 02-04-2009 11:22 AM

and to think it is only a game? hehe.

I didn't watch it, nor cared to. But about the roughness with #92, he should have gotten thrown out. there is NO excuse for that type of play.

It is understandable though. To see how the people who WATCH sports get passionate about it, imagine the people who PLAY it. haha

SteelGlider 02-23-2009 08:28 PM

Did any of you guys actually watch the play with Harrison or just listen to Madden? Harrison doesn't even use a clenched fist....all of the hits are open handed, which are perfectly legal. Watch any punt in any game and you'll find players doing the same type of stuff to keep a guy down or out of the play, it's what they're taught to do. By the way, the Cardinal dove at Harrison's knees, which is not legal, I'm sure that added to his desire to not let him off the turf. There has been NO FINE issued to Harrison after the game either. The only reason there was a flag thrown on the play was because the ref thought he was throwing punches, he wasn't. And listening to Madden overreact to that play is crazy, he was head coach of the 70s Raiders, perhaps the roughest, and cheapest, teams of all time. He'd have a heart attack on the field if any of his head hunters back in the day were ejected in a playoff or super bowl game.

On the Steelers: SB XLIII ... Truths, lies & misconceptions

Quote:

• John Madden's call for James Harrison to be thrown out of the game for "punching" Arizona safety Aaron Francisco after a punt was over the top. First of all, Harrison did not punch him; he pushed him down with an open hand. Also, Harrison reacted because Francisco had tried to cut him by throwing a block below his knees. He's lucky Harrison responded in such a restrained manner.
Incidentally, the league saw fit to fine Holmes for using the ball as a prop. And the media reports constantly on how the officials missed the 15 yard penalty. Yeah, the same media that reports and questions whether the league is too tough on Chad Johnson for all of his childish behavior I guess now wants the biggest game of the year to potentially be affected by a 5 second ball shake after the potentially game winning score in possibly the biggest moment of a young man's life. Um, OK. The NHL is so refreshing to watch when guys like Ovechkin can celebrate great goals (while gesturing with their sticks and everything else) and then have a group celebration immediately right after and not only does everyone not care, they expect it and enjoy it. The NFL though throws out penalties and fines. Um, er, duh. Just imagine if the NHL handed out power plays to the other team because of excessive celebration....pathetic.

By the way, instant replay is killing the NFL. Fans can't cheer big plays anymore because a bunch of guys not at all involved in the play have to stop and discuss it while one stares at a screen under a hood to try and come up with potential reasons why what everyone just saw happen didn't really happen. Go watch some of the old Super Bowls from the 60s and 70s, they flowed so much smoother with fewer stops and without TV announcers who agonized and theorize over every mundane detail.

djtestudo 02-23-2009 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteelGlider (Post 2600015)
Incidentally, the league saw fit to fine Holmes for using the ball as a prop. And the media reports constantly on how the officials missed the 15 yard penalty. Yeah, the same media that reports and questions whether the league is too tough on Chad Johnson for all of his childish behavior I guess now wants the biggest game of the year to potentially be affected by a 5 second ball shake after the potentially game winning score in possibly the biggest moment of a young man's life. Um, OK. The NHL is so refreshing to watch when guys like Ovechkin can celebrate great goals (while gesturing with their sticks and everything else) and then have a group celebration immediately right after and not only does everyone not care, they expect it and enjoy it. The NFL though throws out penalties and fines. Um, er, duh. Just imagine if the NHL handed out power plays to the other team because of excessive celebration....pathetic.

I'll assume for a second that you are a Steelers fan based on your screen name and the content of your post. If not, let me know and I will gladly apologize for heaping such a terrible insult upon your good name ;)

There is nothing worse than a fan whose team won at least in part because of calls made by an official declaring that the rules should not have been followed.

If you don't like the rules, than do what you can to get them changed. But don't act like because you think they are bad they shouldn't be followed.

If in that final drive the Cardinals had scored quickly and the refs ignored a celebration penalty on the Cardinals that could have placed the Steelers in position for a last-second tying field goal, the city of Pittsburgh would have had an armed insurrection attacking NFL headquarters the next day. Don't even try to deny it.

As for Harrison, look at the .gif file I had found and posted. The very first thing you see is a straight downward punch onto the Cardinal player's shoulder. I really have to question if you actually bothered to watch it.

SteelGlider 02-24-2009 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djtestudo (Post 2600029)

There is nothing worse than a fan whose team won at least in part because of calls made by an official declaring that the rules should not have been followed.

? Declaring the rules should not have been followed? Where did I say that? Just pointing out the hypocrisy in the media. You can't go heavy against the league saying they're too harsh on some guys (i.e. Chad Johnson) during the regular season and then raising complaints about a no call in the Super Bowl. By the way, the refs never saw the celebration that's why there was no flag. Even TV missed it when it happened live. Only on replay was it viewed because it happened so late after the play. Having said that, I think the league needs to lighten up. As a huge fan of football, the games are becoming painful to watch and to listen to with all the second guessing and crying over nothing.





Quote:

As for Harrison, look at the .gif file I had found and posted. The very first thing you see is a straight downward punch onto the Cardinal player's shoulder. I really have to question if you actually bothered to watch it.
I've seen it several times in Hi Def on the NFL Net's various replays, he hits him with the base of his open hand. Perfectly legal. That's why there was NO FINE. That's right, NO FINE. It's also why there was no open complaints or derision of the play by Cardinal coaches or players after. Only John Madden and those who watch one football game a year and think Madden's word is gospel are upset. That and people who hate the Steelers.

djtestudo 02-24-2009 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteelGlider (Post 2600382)
? Declaring the rules should not have been followed? Where did I say that? Just pointing out the hypocrisy in the media. You can't go heavy against the league saying they're too harsh on some guys (i.e. Chad Johnson) during the regular season and then raising complaints about a no call in the Super Bowl. By the way, the refs never saw the celebration that's why there was no flag. Even TV missed it when it happened live. Only on replay was it viewed because it happened so late after the play. Having said that, I think the league needs to lighten up. As a huge fan of football, the games are becoming painful to watch and to listen to with all the second guessing and crying over nothing.

The league definitely needs to lighten up, but that doesn't mean you ignore the rules in place. That's why your hypocrisy argument doesn't hold water; you can dislike the rule while understanding that it needs to be followed. Whether or not it was noticed at the time (and you can't tell me out of all the officials on the field not one saw it as it happened), it definitely lowered the Cardinals' chances for a win.

Quote:

I've seen it several times in Hi Def on the NFL Net's various replays, he hits him with the base of his open hand. Perfectly legal. That's why there was NO FINE. That's right, NO FINE. It's also why there was no open complaints or derision of the play by Cardinal coaches or players after. Only John Madden and those who watch one football game a year and think Madden's word is gospel are upset. That and people who hate the Steelers.
If Bart Scott did the same thing to a Steeler, he would have been led off the field in handcuffs.

SteelGlider 02-24-2009 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djtestudo (Post 2600471)
The league definitely needs to lighten up, but that doesn't mean you ignore the rules in place. That's why your hypocrisy argument doesn't hold water; you can dislike the rule while understanding that it needs to be followed. Whether or not it was noticed at the time (and you can't tell me out of all the officials on the field not one saw it as it happened), it definitely lowered the Cardinals' chances for a win.

Official review of SBXLIII

It doesn't get anymore obvious than that, the ref is walking away with his back to the celebration. So yeah, nobody saw it. You know what really lowered the chances for the Cards win? Giving up an 82 yard drive with just over 2 minutes to go. Oh yeah, and a 100 yard INT return and fumbling on the final play. And, again, I never said anything about ignoring the rule.

Quote:

If Bart Scott did the same thing to a Steeler, he would have been led off the field in handcuffs.
OK, obviously you're not up for a serious discussion. Drop the blind hate and fanaticism then I'll discuss the problems of the game with you. Till then, I'm out.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360