LOL @ it MUST be enforced. Not every face mask gets called, not every holding gets called, but this one obscure interpetation of a hardly known rule...yes, that one MUST be enforced.
Yeah, you know you're right. The refs just had it out for the Lions, it must be a corrupt Chicago thing. They very easily could've forgotten about that rule, just let it slide. Don't do your jobs refs, selectively enforce the rule book. Its such an obscure rule anyway, totally not knowing these things is in your job description. Yeah, facemasks and holdings only get called when the refs feel like it too. The Cowboys got robbed as well.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Garcia_Vega said:
HarveyCanal said:
LOL @ it MUST be enforced. Not every face mask gets called, not every holding gets called, but this one obscure interpetation of a hardly known rule...yes, that one MUST be enforced.
Yeah, you know you're right. The refs just had it out for the Lions, it must be a corrupt Chicago thing. They very easily could've forgotten about that rule, just let it slide. Don't do your jobs refs, selectively enforce the rule book. Its such an obscure rule anyway, totally not knowing these things is in your job description. Yeah, facemasks and holdings only get called when the refs feel like it too. The Cowboys got robbed as well.
Dude, you have to be some sort of anal retentive freak to not acknowledge that the Lions got robbed. I'll leave it at that.
For the record, the Lions weren't robbed, they just enforced a really shitty rule.
LOL @ it MUST be enforced. Not every face mask gets called, not every holding gets called, but this one obscure interpetation of a hardly known rule...yes, that one MUST be enforced.
Rule on paper=injustice. The only other person I can think of with a comparable thought process is Idi Amin. The idea of Harvey in charge of anything is truly frightening. This is the NFL, not the Jim Crow south homie.
[del]Dude, you have to be some sort of anal retentive freak to not acknowledge that the Lions got robbed. I'll leave it at that.[/del] You can either agree with me or you're wrong
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
DrWu said:
Rule on paper=injustice. The only other person I can think of with a comparable thought process is Idi Amin. The idea of Harvey in charge of anything is truly frightening. This is the NFL, not the Jim Crow south homie.
I see a touchdown as a touchdown, so I'm the equivalent of a cannibal tyrant??? And the Jim Crow South???
Alright, here's where you internet nerds need to stay on the internet...as NEWSFLAH, real life is 100% subjective. Sometimes late fees get waived. Sometimes policemen let people who have actually committed crimes off the hook. Sometimes parents tell their kids, if you do this again you will have this taken from you and the kid does it again but the thing never indeed gets taken away. That's life, bitches, and we're all better off for it.
Being such a stickler for rules is far more tyrannnical than anything that I'm endorsing here. Those referees coulda just called it a touchdown and that's what it would have been. They have that power as they are the ones on the field and they shouldn't relinquish that power to some idiotic notion that a badly written rule should be enforced to the tee of its idiocy. Enforcing rules to the strictest measure shouldn't ever get in the way of common sense.
But oh yeah, welcome to dumbed-done, no-balls modern day America...where so-called men subordinate themselves to rule books.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
[del]Dude, you have to be some sort of anal retentive freak to not acknowledge that the Lions got robbed. I'll leave it at that.[/del] You can either agree with me or you're wrong
Has nothing to do with me...you were wrong and are choosing to remain wrong from jump.
Regarding the end to the Bears-Lions game. It's splitting hairs to say they got "robbed" or not. On the first viewing, my initial thought was, Damn he let go of the ball pretty quickly. Didn't think for even a split second that it wasn't a catch, only that it was another instance that a receiver started the celebration a little prematurely. What was that one game a few years ago where that rookie actually let go of the ball before officially crossing into the end zone? It's like hold onto the ball for benefit of the doubt. That's what I would do.
All of which is beside the point. The Bears turned the ball over four times. The Lions had plenty of opportunities to win and the fact that they needed a last-second play to do so means they didn't deserve to win anyway. Bears played solid despite the turnovers (second overall in total yards of offense and pretty high up on the defensive categories, too). Yeah, they played the Lions.
Shitting on the Bears this year is just about as common as picking the Ravens and/or the Packers to win the Super Bowl. It just one of the tired "themes" that gets beaten into the ground. But I'm not mad. Really, I'm not.
Rule on paper=injustice. The only other person I can think of with a comparable thought process is Idi Amin. The idea of Harvey in charge of anything is truly frightening. This is the NFL, not the Jim Crow south homie.
I see a touchdown as a touchdown, so I'm the equivalent of a cannibal tyrant??? And the Jim Crow South???
Alright, here's where you internet nerds need to stay on the internet...as NEWSFLAH, real life is 100% subjective. Sometimes late fees get waived. Sometimes policemen let people who have actually committed crimes off the hook. Sometimes parents tell their kids, if you do this again you will have this taken from you and the kid does it again but the thing never indeed gets taken away. That's life, bitches, and we're all better off for it.
Being such a stickler for rules is far more tyrannnical than anything that I'm endorsing here. Those referees coulda just called it a touchdown and that's what it would have been. They have that power as they are the ones on the field and they shouldn't relinquish that power to some idiotic notion that a badly written rule should be enforced to the tee of its idiocy. Enforcing rules to the strictest measure shouldn't ever get in the way of common sense.
But oh yeah, welcome to dumbed-done, no-balls modern day America...where so-called men subordinate themselves to rule books.
Yeah but not really -- football is a game of inches. Maybe you'd be better off watching soccer.
pick Washington. Their nickname is a racial slur which cannot be spoken in public (genocide-R). Perfect for an Aussie!
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
white_tea said:
HarveyCanal said:
DrWu said:
Rule on paper=injustice. The only other person I can think of with a comparable thought process is Idi Amin. The idea of Harvey in charge of anything is truly frightening. This is the NFL, not the Jim Crow south homie.
I see a touchdown as a touchdown, so I'm the equivalent of a cannibal tyrant??? And the Jim Crow South???
Alright, here's where you internet nerds need to stay on the internet...as NEWSFLAH, real life is 100% subjective. Sometimes late fees get waived. Sometimes policemen let people who have actually committed crimes off the hook. Sometimes parents tell their kids, if you do this again you will have this taken from you and the kid does it again but the thing never indeed gets taken away. That's life, bitches, and we're all better off for it.
Being such a stickler for rules is far more tyrannnical than anything that I'm endorsing here. Those referees coulda just called it a touchdown and that's what it would have been. They have that power as they are the ones on the field and they shouldn't relinquish that power to some idiotic notion that a badly written rule should be enforced to the tee of its idiocy. Enforcing rules to the strictest measure shouldn't ever get in the way of common sense.
But oh yeah, welcome to dumbed-done, no-balls modern day America...where so-called men subordinate themselves to rule books.
Yeah but not really -- football is a game of inches. Maybe you'd be better off watching soccer.
Bet I've played more football than you've ever watched.
Alright, here's where you internet nerds need to stay on the internet...as NEWSFLAH, real life is 100% subjective. Sometimes late fees get waived. Sometimes policemen let people who have actually committed crimes off the hook. Sometimes parents tell their kids, if you do this again you will have this taken from you and the kid does it again but the thing never indeed gets taken away. That's life, bitches, and we're all better off for it.
Being such a stickler for rules is far more tyrannnical than anything that I'm endorsing here. Those referees coulda just called it a touchdown and that's what it would have been. They have that power as they are the ones on the field and they shouldn't relinquish that power to some idiotic notion that a badly written rule should be enforced to the tee of its idiocy. Enforcing rules to the strictest measure shouldn't ever get in the way of common sense.
But oh yeah, welcome to dumbed-done, no-balls modern day America...where so-called men subordinate themselves to rule books.
A-nar-chy! A-nar-chy! A-nar-chy!
We wouldn't need rules if people just stopped being so stupid and used common sense!
You know Harvey, I'm kind of suprised at your line of argument here. I could have sworn I've read your tirades against how laws are only selectively enforced in America. Sure, maybe we should have less rules. But the ones we have, should be enforced on everyone equally right?
Alright, here's where you internet nerds need to stay on the internet...as NEWSFLAH, real life is 100% subjective. Sometimes late fees get waived. Sometimes policemen let people who have actually committed crimes off the hook. Sometimes parents tell their kids, if you do this again you will have this taken from you and the kid does it again but the thing never indeed gets taken away. That's life, bitches, and we're all better off for it.
Being such a stickler for rules is far more tyrannnical than anything that I'm endorsing here. Those referees coulda just called it a touchdown and that's what it would have been. They have that power as they are the ones on the field and they shouldn't relinquish that power to some idiotic notion that a badly written rule should be enforced to the tee of its idiocy. Enforcing rules to the strictest measure shouldn't ever get in the way of common sense.
But oh yeah, welcome to dumbed-done, no-balls modern day America...where so-called men subordinate themselves to rule books.
A-nar-chy! A-nar-chy! A-nar-chy!
We wouldn't need rules if people just stopped being so stupid and used common sense!
You know Harvey, I'm kind of suprised at your line of argument here. I could have sworn I've read your tirades against how laws are only selectively enforced in America. Sure, maybe we should have less rules. But the ones we have, should be enforced on everyone equally right?
Dallas only if you are able to handle disappointment.
Chicago only if you are a long time fan (otherwise you could get frustrated. I am that long time fan)
You could get on the new Colts, Vikings or Saints bandwagons.
Eagles if you hate the Cowboys.
Patriots if you like a bit of drama.
Detroit if you like to feel as though your team could get cut at any moment.
Green Bay and Pittsburgh are not bad choices...
...or you could pick a team based on their uniform colors.
"You make the call!"
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Garcia_Vega said:
HarveyCanal said:
Alright, here's where you internet nerds need to stay on the internet...as NEWSFLAH, real life is 100% subjective. Sometimes late fees get waived. Sometimes policemen let people who have actually committed crimes off the hook. Sometimes parents tell their kids, if you do this again you will have this taken from you and the kid does it again but the thing never indeed gets taken away. That's life, bitches, and we're all better off for it.
Being such a stickler for rules is far more tyrannnical than anything that I'm endorsing here. Those referees coulda just called it a touchdown and that's what it would have been. They have that power as they are the ones on the field and they shouldn't relinquish that power to some idiotic notion that a badly written rule should be enforced to the tee of its idiocy. Enforcing rules to the strictest measure shouldn't ever get in the way of common sense.
But oh yeah, welcome to dumbed-done, no-balls modern day America...where so-called men subordinate themselves to rule books.
A-nar-chy! A-nar-chy! A-nar-chy!
We wouldn't need rules if people just stopped being so stupid and used common sense!
You know Harvey, I'm kind of suprised at your line of argument here. I could have sworn I've read your tirades against how laws are only selectively enforced in America. Sure, maybe we should have less rules. But the ones we have, should be enforced on everyone equally right?
I've had too many tirades on here, but not sure what you mean about me saying anything about rules that are only selectively enforced. Too many people in jail for victimless crimes. Too many pages of laws written to the point that nobody even bothers to read them. Too many know-it-alls sticking their noses in where they don't belong.
So no, IMO most of the laws we have now need to be thrown in the garbage can where they belong and definitely not enforced ever.
So basically shitty rules exist, and should therefore not be enforced on anyone. Deciding which rules are shitty is based on common sense. So then it follows that common sense says Calvin Johnson scored a touchdown, although the rule book says he didn't. The refs then should've declared it a touchdown and said fuck it to the rule book. You realize this doesn't make any logical sense?
At work, didn't realize this turned into such a battle. My .02: Lions got screwed, but Calvin Johnson made a stupid move. Refs obviously HAD to rule that incomplete; it's not their job to set a precedent. It'd be like setting a precedent to set a precedent... and that's like, META-REFING!!!
So basically shitty rules exist, and should therefore not be enforced on anyone. Deciding which rules are shitty is based on common sense. So then it follows that common sense says Calvin Johnson scored a touchdown, although the rule book says he didn't. The refs then should've declared it a touchdown and said fuck it to the rule book. You realize this doesn't make any logical sense?
No, he and Idi Amin don't think that rules should be applied unless they think so.
My reference to Jim Crow, was to highlight the difference between morally reprehensible laws versus rules for games.
If you follow Harvey's logic then Rand Paul's railing against the Civil Rights Act starts to make sense.
At work, didn't realize this turned into such a battle. My .02: Lions got screwed, but Calvin Johnson made a stupid move. Refs obviously HAD to rule that incomplete; it's not their job to set a precedent. It'd be like setting a precedent to set a precedent... and that's like, META-REFING!!!
Ok, thank you. I was getting close to pulling a Walter Sobchak, "Has the whole world gone crazy? Am I the only one around here who gives a shit about the rules? Mark it zero! "
I am on both sides of this one. Refs are suppose to be on the field to uphold all of the rules of the game. That is their job. They are not the rules themselves but they enforce the rules. But if a call is made that is so determinate on a games' outcome despite the fact that common sense should lead you to see that it was a touchdown, then carefully the refs should consider a call that is more appropriate. There needs to be a clause in the rule book to allow for these type of subjective circumstances.
That is why we don't have computers ruling games, we have real life people. They are there to make judgment calls on unforeseen circumstances. I am a Bears fan here so obviously I shouldn't take this side, but fact is that the Lions should have had a touchdown. Not necessarily saying they should have won the game because the Bears would have gotten the ball back but it was a touchdown.
according to this thread, the packers AND the steelers have won the most all time superbowls..... which is hilariously soulstrut,
secondly, i live in toronto but i refure to cheer for the bills because...... fuck...... they're the bills. they play 4 or 5 games a year in toronto now and people will ask who they're playing before you can GIVE them a ticket.
thirdly, i say anyone outside of amurrica should cheer for the raiders. their fans are absolutely insane and the taem may actually have something in the way of a good team this year.
I was never much of a football fan so when I was about 20 I decided I would pick a team to route for. I chose the worst team in the NFL from the previous season. I'm now a NY Jets fan.
If you want to show up in America, land at any given airport, and find fans of your team, you should pick the following:
Dallas
or
PIttsburgh
Oakland used to be like that. Boy did Al Davis blow it.
A lot of outside-of-Dallas Cowboys fans shut up about them when the team is down. Steelers fans seem more loyal.
Ratings for Dallas games are always the highest of any team. Fox pregame will always outdraw CBS b/c the basic fact that NFC cities include NYG, Chicago, Dallas-and fans, and Green Bay fans (another national following).
If SF is good, throw them in as well.
CBS and the AFC have the NYJ (2nd team in a 2 team market), Pittsburgh, and they lament the loss of the bay area/national following with the demise of the Raiders.
(the relative watchability of those two shows is not a factor; I think they are both pretty equal, and will abstain from any further commentary.)
Teams like NE and whatnot cycle through the ratings as they are good, but no one will care about NE when Brady leaves and they go 4-12.
Teams like NE and whatnot cycle through the ratings as they are good, but no one will care about NE when Brady leaves and they go 4-12.
Unless they've really found the magic formula and can continue being relevant without him.
Going 11-5 with Casell as QB was a really underrated achievement. And they have Oakland's 1st round pick next year to continue to build a very young defense.
If the good seasons continue I could see them picking up some national appeal, especially with all those Red Sox fans out there. But they're not there yet and may never be.
Comments
Yeah, you know you're right. The refs just had it out for the Lions, it must be a corrupt Chicago thing. They very easily could've forgotten about that rule, just let it slide. Don't do your jobs refs, selectively enforce the rule book. Its such an obscure rule anyway, totally not knowing these things is in your job description. Yeah, facemasks and holdings only get called when the refs feel like it too. The Cowboys got robbed as well.
Dude, you have to be some sort of anal retentive freak to not acknowledge that the Lions got robbed. I'll leave it at that.
I see a touchdown as a touchdown, so I'm the equivalent of a cannibal tyrant??? And the Jim Crow South???
Alright, here's where you internet nerds need to stay on the internet...as NEWSFLAH, real life is 100% subjective. Sometimes late fees get waived. Sometimes policemen let people who have actually committed crimes off the hook. Sometimes parents tell their kids, if you do this again you will have this taken from you and the kid does it again but the thing never indeed gets taken away. That's life, bitches, and we're all better off for it.
Being such a stickler for rules is far more tyrannnical than anything that I'm endorsing here. Those referees coulda just called it a touchdown and that's what it would have been. They have that power as they are the ones on the field and they shouldn't relinquish that power to some idiotic notion that a badly written rule should be enforced to the tee of its idiocy. Enforcing rules to the strictest measure shouldn't ever get in the way of common sense.
But oh yeah, welcome to dumbed-done, no-balls modern day America...where so-called men subordinate themselves to rule books.
Has nothing to do with me...you were wrong and are choosing to remain wrong from jump.
All of which is beside the point. The Bears turned the ball over four times. The Lions had plenty of opportunities to win and the fact that they needed a last-second play to do so means they didn't deserve to win anyway. Bears played solid despite the turnovers (second overall in total yards of offense and pretty high up on the defensive categories, too). Yeah, they played the Lions.
Shitting on the Bears this year is just about as common as picking the Ravens and/or the Packers to win the Super Bowl. It just one of the tired "themes" that gets beaten into the ground. But I'm not mad. Really, I'm not.
:comedy_gold:
Yeah but not really -- football is a game of inches. Maybe you'd be better off watching soccer.
Bet I've played more football than you've ever watched.
A-nar-chy! A-nar-chy! A-nar-chy!
We wouldn't need rules if people just stopped being so stupid and used common sense!
You know Harvey, I'm kind of suprised at your line of argument here. I could have sworn I've read your tirades against how laws are only selectively enforced in America. Sure, maybe we should have less rules. But the ones we have, should be enforced on everyone equally right?
Except in the NBA.
Chicago only if you are a long time fan (otherwise you could get frustrated. I am that long time fan)
You could get on the new Colts, Vikings or Saints bandwagons.
Eagles if you hate the Cowboys.
Patriots if you like a bit of drama.
Detroit if you like to feel as though your team could get cut at any moment.
Green Bay and Pittsburgh are not bad choices...
...or you could pick a team based on their uniform colors.
"You make the call!"
I've had too many tirades on here, but not sure what you mean about me saying anything about rules that are only selectively enforced. Too many people in jail for victimless crimes. Too many pages of laws written to the point that nobody even bothers to read them. Too many know-it-alls sticking their noses in where they don't belong.
So no, IMO most of the laws we have now need to be thrown in the garbage can where they belong and definitely not enforced ever.
No, he and Idi Amin don't think that rules should be applied unless they think so.
My reference to Jim Crow, was to highlight the difference between morally reprehensible laws versus rules for games.
If you follow Harvey's logic then Rand Paul's railing against the Civil Rights Act starts to make sense.
Ok, thank you. I was getting close to pulling a Walter Sobchak, "Has the whole world gone crazy? Am I the only one around here who gives a shit about the rules? Mark it zero! "
That is why we don't have computers ruling games, we have real life people. They are there to make judgment calls on unforeseen circumstances. I am a Bears fan here so obviously I shouldn't take this side, but fact is that the Lions should have had a touchdown. Not necessarily saying they should have won the game because the Bears would have gotten the ball back but it was a touchdown.
secondly, i live in toronto but i refure to cheer for the bills because...... fuck...... they're the bills. they play 4 or 5 games a year in toronto now and people will ask who they're playing before you can GIVE them a ticket.
thirdly, i say anyone outside of amurrica should cheer for the raiders. their fans are absolutely insane and the taem may actually have something in the way of a good team this year.
The Packers have won the most championships
The Steelers have won the most Super Bowls
The Super Bowl didn't start until 1967, after the AFL and NFL merged. Before that, it was just the NFL Championship, which the Packers won a bunch of.
Dallas
or
PIttsburgh
If you want to pick out any other team for whatever reason, go nuts. But, do not pick:
Jacksonville
or
Charlotte
"The Memphis Grizzlies of the NFL"
Oakland used to be like that. Boy did Al Davis blow it.
A lot of outside-of-Dallas Cowboys fans shut up about them when the team is down. Steelers fans seem more loyal.
because of this:
Ratings for Dallas games are always the highest of any team. Fox pregame will always outdraw CBS b/c the basic fact that NFC cities include NYG, Chicago, Dallas-and fans, and Green Bay fans (another national following).
If SF is good, throw them in as well.
CBS and the AFC have the NYJ (2nd team in a 2 team market), Pittsburgh, and they lament the loss of the bay area/national following with the demise of the Raiders.
(the relative watchability of those two shows is not a factor; I think they are both pretty equal, and will abstain from any further commentary.)
Teams like NE and whatnot cycle through the ratings as they are good, but no one will care about NE when Brady leaves and they go 4-12.
Unless they've really found the magic formula and can continue being relevant without him.
Going 11-5 with Casell as QB was a really underrated achievement. And they have Oakland's 1st round pick next year to continue to build a very young defense.
If the good seasons continue I could see them picking up some national appeal, especially with all those Red Sox fans out there. But they're not there yet and may never be.