And there you have it. (Monday Night Football update.)
Dannymac Send a noteboard - 25/09/2012 05:18:37 AM
Your refusal to listen to the real reasons that the real refs need to be brought back (lack of understanding of the basic rules, lack of control of the game, etc) is just your style... you couldn't make an argument that might be construed as being pro-union if your life depended on it.
But now, with the Packers getting jobbed on Monday Night Football, the refs have cost a team the game. yeah, the regular refs might have made the same mistake, the basis of all your arguments has been that the refs haven't cost anyone a game yet. Now they have, in egregious, embarrassing form.
The league needs to overturn that decision. They won't, it would be conceding defeat against the union and the NFL has already shown that they are willing to sacrifice the quality of their product in order to flex their financial muscles.
But you are out of excuses. As of now.
But now, with the Packers getting jobbed on Monday Night Football, the refs have cost a team the game. yeah, the regular refs might have made the same mistake, the basis of all your arguments has been that the refs haven't cost anyone a game yet. Now they have, in egregious, embarrassing form.
The league needs to overturn that decision. They won't, it would be conceding defeat against the union and the NFL has already shown that they are willing to sacrifice the quality of their product in order to flex their financial muscles.
But you are out of excuses. As of now.
Eschew Verbosity
A good point regarding the replacement officials
- 24/09/2012 02:55:12 PM
1022 Views
"still doesn’t understand how timeouts or challenges work. Advantage: replacement refs." REALLY?!
- 24/09/2012 07:21:41 PM
747 Views
You see what you did, Cannoli? You made me agree with Joel
*NM*
- 24/09/2012 07:41:02 PM
216 Views
*NM*
- 24/09/2012 07:41:02 PM
216 Views
Only fair; you and rt made me agree with Cannoli in the Eli vs. Romo threads.
- 24/09/2012 11:35:22 PM
623 Views
- 24/09/2012 11:35:22 PM
623 Views
And here's a straight-up "caused one team to be able to win" situation:
- 24/09/2012 09:39:33 PM
768 Views
"it's a basic expectation of any referee to maintain an accurate line of scrimmage."
- 24/09/2012 11:43:06 PM
735 Views
And there you have it. (Monday Night Football update.)
- 25/09/2012 05:18:37 AM
534 Views
That was the right call. "Union" has nothing to do with it.
- 25/09/2012 11:37:39 AM
654 Views
why the union comments at the end of your post if it had nothing to do with your argument?
- 25/09/2012 03:38:28 PM
543 Views
It was a sideline from the major point and not my motivation, as Dannymac insinuates.
- 25/09/2012 04:09:48 PM
548 Views
The replay officals are not replacements. Maybe Rodgers just isn't a clutch QB *NM*
- 25/09/2012 11:44:29 AM
229 Views
Hmm?
- 25/09/2012 05:01:26 PM
516 Views
He was being sarcastic. See our earlier posts about Romo and Eli Manning *NM*
- 25/09/2012 05:21:16 PM
215 Views
Maybe Rodgers should have played at his apparent high level of play the entire game. *NM*
- 26/09/2012 01:52:40 AM
224 Views
maybe people should rate QB simply by which team wins the game *NM*
- 26/09/2012 05:43:04 PM
224 Views
QBs should in part be rated on wins. I mean, that is afterall the result desired.
- 27/09/2012 02:36:04 PM
574 Views
I agree with Cannoli, sadly. These officials are not much worse if at all.
- 26/09/2012 01:51:30 AM
723 Views
there is a huge difference between blowing a call and not understanding the rules of the game
- 25/09/2012 03:35:44 PM
521 Views
