It's probably the only break we'll get all year.
well if it is, that's fine with me, it would have been a disaster to lose to the lions on opening day, the lions are now on a 21 game road losing streak. were fortunate are defense is intact, they played superb.
i agree we should have lost that game, it was a bit bizzare to watch, as far as benching forte and olsen, i see where your coming from. But those two guys really are premiere young players at their postion(forte had 200yd's and 2 td's at critical moments).He should be fired for not benching Forte and Olsen, and that call too. How can he let them continue to play without covering up the ball? It's not like these are new problems. We deserved to lose that game.
Yes, but they were both of turnovers, and he was inside the ten yd line on both scores, if im not mistaken.Except for those two rushing touchdowns where Best was untouched.
the refs had money on the bears..lolo.k., fine i admit it was a td, thank god the refs were bears fans.:2razz:
i was wondering what the hell he was thinking, or if he let martz make the call...that was forkin' stupid, you are a chipshot away from the lead, detroit hadnt moved the ball at all with hill at qb.....it was a no brainer, kick the damn ball...What's your guys take on lovie not going for the fg to take the lead? personally i was shocked.:shock:
i was wondering what the hell he was thinking, or if he let martz make the call...that was forkin' stupid, you are a chipshot away from the lead, detroit hadnt moved the ball at all with hill at qb.....it was a no brainer, kick the damn ball...
Yes, but they were both of turnovers, and he was inside the ten yd line on both scores, if im not mistaken.
Which makes it worse.
Un.
Touched.
It's not like they were fooled.
What do you mean untouched on both touchdowns? The second one was reviewed and was very very close to not being a touchdown.
As far as the robbery at the end of the game goes, the call was correct according to the letter of the rule. It wasn't a touchdown. The refs actually did their job correctly.
But the fact that this didn't qualify as a touchdown according to the rules is pure idiocy on the NFL's part. They need to incorporate some common sense into the rule. The Bears deserved to lose that game and the Lions got robbed by the NFL's rules.
What do you mean untouched on both touchdowns? The second one was reviewed and was very very close to not being a touchdown.
As far as the robbery at the end of the game goes, the call was correct according to the letter of the rule. It wasn't a touchdown. The refs actually did their job correctly.
But the fact that this didn't qualify as a touchdown according to the rules is pure idiocy on the NFL's part. They need to incorporate some common sense into the rule. The Bears deserved to lose that game and the Lions got robbed by the NFL's rules.
He had both feet down, a knee, his ass, and made three controlled movements with the ball firmly in hand all before the ball touched the ground. Thats possession by any reasonable standard.
He had both feet down, a knee, his ass, and made three controlled movements with the ball firmly in hand all before the ball touched the ground. Thats possession by any reasonable standard.
the refs had money on the bears..lol
No, the refs ruled according to the rules of NFL. It's not the first time this has come up, it's been noted several times. The NFL has not changed the rules on it. Should it have been a touch down? It certainly feels like a touchdown. But it's not like the refs were biased on this call or anything; that is the rule as written by the NFL. There is a difference between a catch on field and one in the endzone, and that rule is there to make that difference. In essence they want you to be able to take the ball to the ground. If you caught a ball in the endzone, drug your foot on the way out to get two feet in, fell to the ground out of bounds, and lost the ball; not a touch down. Thus by the rules, the call was correct. It sucked, but Detroit had other opportunities too. And people want to get on the refs for this call; all it would have taken was for the receiver to bring the ball into his body and hold on. The players know the rules too. Or should.
A player who goes to the ground in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball [with or without contact by a defender] must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, there is no possession. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, it is a catch, interception or recovery.
Cutler nominated for Fed Ex Player of The Week. I think he has a good chance for the pro bowl this year.
I hate to quote myself, but this is our game plan .Looking forward to the Dallas game, i think that is a very winnable one. The Cowboys receiving threats consist of Austin and witten. If we can handle Calvin Johnson, we can handle Austin.As far as Witten, if i'm not mistaken one of our elite line backers will shadow him when he goes out for a pass(most of the time). We should concentrate on snuffing the run and getting pressure on Romo. I have faith in our D on all three levels. On offense, this is a game where will see the benefit of martz, instead of running at a brickwall, he's going to decimate their inferior secondary with precison timing routes. The x factor is no turnovers.
Actually, the rule is the same regardless of where it happens on the field.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?