***Official SNF PHI/NE thread*** - Page 37

vhawk01 · #**361** 11-25-2007, 10:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
why are people arguing over why a play wasnt reviewed that was (upon review) clearly a TD

[/ QUOTE ]

Its halftime?

rafiki · #**362** 11-25-2007, 10:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
why are people arguing over why a play wasnt reviewed that was (upon review) clearly a TD

[/ QUOTE ]

Because we all say it 6 times in slow to come up with that conclusion. My FIRST reaction (go back and check) was that there is no way he was in. It took me 4 replays to change my mind. That's why.

vhawk01 · #**363** 11-25-2007, 10:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
pretty hilarious that all the pats haters have to cling to is a non-review of a play that was called correctly on the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty hilarious that when all you have is a hammer, everyone is a Pats hater.

NT! · #**364** 11-25-2007, 10:59 PM

they showed what, 4 replays on the live broadcast before the kick? how many times do you think the crew in the booth had time to check it, with probably six TV's, one for each camera, and surely at least a couple different guys watching?

Assani Fisher · #**365** 11-25-2007, 10:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
you're right, i didn't know that coaches can't challenge inside 2 minutes,

[/ QUOTE ]

LOLOLOLOLOLicypotsOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

89,LOL and counting

IggyWH · #**366** 11-25-2007, 11:00 PM

Yeah, you're right... the mdeia would jump all over their golden boy. Must be nice living in that dreamland.

rafiki · #**367** 11-25-2007, 11:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
you're right, i didn't know that coaches can't challenge inside 2 minutes, but i am at least not so blind and deaf that i still think the issue was that his KNEE didn't get in. after the announcers talked about it twice and the replay clearly showed him dragging his foot.

lol at the 'mike vanderjaqt liquoured up kicker award' halftime show. gold.

[/ QUOTE ]

NT, the issue is when his knee touches the white, because it did. Did it touch before the top of his other foot comes down, or not. And that happened impossibly fast. We're talking about something you can't possibly determine in real time.

Triumph36 · #**368** 11-25-2007, 11:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
they showed what, 4 replays on the live broadcast before the kick? how many times do you think the crew in the booth had time to check it, with probably six TV's, one for each camera, and surely at least a couple different guys watching?

[/ QUOTE ]

there have certainly been plays that were more obvious that've been booth reviewed.

rafiki · #**369** 11-25-2007, 11:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
they showed what, 4 replays on the live broadcast before the kick? how many times do you think the crew in the booth had time to check it, with probably six TV's, one for each camera, and surely at least a couple different guys watching?

[/ QUOTE ]

But the guy always comes out and say "there will be a booth review" or something. They always say that.

ZeTurd · #**370** 11-25-2007, 11:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Reid can't challenge within 2 minutes of the half. Has to be a booth review.

Obviously he was in, but that is exactly the kind of play they need to be reviewing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really can't understand why everyone thinks it wasn't reviewed. You think the booth guys just went to lunch 30 seconds early? You don't think they looked at the replay a hundred times before the refs even gave an explanation of the flag?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, this is pretty silly. It should be a non-issue, but it seems like a lack of understanding of the rules and the process of a booth review, coupled with anti-pats bias, is causing it to still be debated. And I'm saying this as someone who don't even like the pats.