Patriots got hosed on Two touchdowns

[JimKelly12203 33,155]

What goes around comes around.

 

Fuck them. Ever since this "is it a catch?" BS became a thing they've all been catches in my mind.

 

fuck you robert kraft. go get your ring back from Putin you little bitch. (good luck with that).

[StraightJ 9,524]

What goes around comes around.

 

Fuck them. Ever since this "is it a catch?" BS became a thing they've all been catches in my mind.

 

fuck you robert kraft. go get your ring back from Putin you little bitch. (good luck with that).

 

I dont want to argue tonight, but Putin is a man's man and far more deserving of an avatar than that mass murderer who killed my ancestors..."lol". But anyhow I mostly agree....bleep crafty Kraft.... I doubt he's hurt too much, but I want to see that dynasty have the stake driven through it's heart once and for all! Hell, I'd love to do it to the embalmed corpse of that murderer as well, though it would only be cathartic and not practical, especially if I were caught. They actually have good rule of law there now and I'd likely be punished, even though I'd be a hero to most who were liberated from that BS by the current government. :) Go freedom, go Bills!!!

[bv 9,263]

just give it to em

[machu46 5,659]

I get the whole "re-positioning the ball" argument...that's the same one that explained why Kelvin Benjamin's catch against New England should have been ruled a catch. But in this scenario, the ball leaves Clement's hands entirely as he's doing so; it got wedged in his forearm without his hands even being on it. I don't really see how they can say that the ball leaving his hands is not him losing possession, even if briefly. That play has been called incomplete all year long.

 

The illegal formation was pretty obviously illegal formation.

 

They got the Ertz TD right.

[LiterateStylish 10,412]

I get the whole "re-positioning the ball" argument...that's the same one that explained why Kelvin Benjamin's catch against New England should have been ruled a catch. But in this scenario, the ball leaves Clement's hands entirely as he's doing so; it got wedged in his forearm without his hands even being on it. I don't really see how they can say that the ball leaving his hands is not him losing possession, even if briefly. That play has been called incomplete all year long.

 

The illegal formation was pretty obviously illegal formation.

 

They got the Ertz TD right.

 

Bingo.

 

That’s 14 points in a 6 point game.

[HipKat 2,464]

Who cares? The and justifies the means and the end result was a NE loss. That's ALL I care about.

[StraightJ 9,524]

If youre going to talk refs, Jacksonville should have been there instead of NE to begin with. Blake Bortles would be Super Bowl MVP, lol!!!!

[Coach'sUncle'sSon 21]

On the Foles reception TD, Al Michaels said right after the play that the formation was legal because he was in Shotgun formation. I don't know what the rule says...

[cba fan 5,089]

On the Foles reception TD' date=' Al Michaels said right after the play that the formation was legal because he was in Shotgun formation. I don't know what the rule says...[/quote']

 

That has to do with Foles or QB being am eligible receiver.

 

To be so they must be in shotgun or pistol.

 

If under center for some unknown reason they are not eligible.

 

The question was if a WR was on the line of scrimmage and covering up the last OL on that side. NFL says lineman was covered up even though it was close, that it was judgment of official lineman on that side was covered so it was not an illegal formation. Call was correct.

[CBennett 15,970]

I hear the Pats forum is looking for a new, ummmmmm, owner....

 

Just sayin

 

Yup, go to YOUR team Lit ...the Pats are calling out to you.

[CBennett 15,970]

Not that I’m complaining, but the patriots really did get hosed on two touchdowns.

 

First, that long touchdown, all year long the league has been calling it incomplete when the ball moves and you don’t get 2 feet in balance. The ball clearly moved after his first step, and the third step went out of bounds. Therefore no 2 feet in bounds. All throughout the year, that would’ve been incomplete. It was funny watching the announcers be so shocked that it wasn’t overturned though LOL.

 

Second, the touchdown right before the end of the first half where Nick Foles caught it. That was an illegal formation all day. Refs didn’t call it.

 

You can even argue the last touchdown. They call that exact play incomplete in Pittsburgh. But that’s just bullshit. That should’ve been a touchdown .

 

All were good TD's all counted just as they should have.

[Bleedzbillz 43]

You don’t know what illegal formation is, do you?

 

Why was it illegal? I really don’t know...

[Topas 5,268]

Why was it illegal? I really don’t know...

 

It was not illegal. Two aspects are important. Foles was allowed to catch a pass because he did not line up under center. And the second thing that is discussed is that a team must place 7 players on the line of scrimmage. Some argued that the Eagles had 8. But the player at the top of the screen checked with the ref prior to the play, that he is not on the line and the ref confirmed it. And TV replays show that the player was indeed about 2 yards off the los. So no illegal formation.

[Bleedzbillz 43]

It was not illegal. Two aspects are important. Foles was allowed to catch a pass because he did not line up under center. And the second thing that is discussed is that a team must place 7 players on the line of scrimmage. Some argued that the Eagles had 8. But the player at the top of the screen checked with the ref prior to the play, that he is not on the line and the ref confirmed it. And TV replays show that the player was indeed about 2 yards off the los. So no illegal formation.

 

Thanks!

[StraightJ 9,524]

It was not illegal. Two aspects are important. Foles was allowed to catch a pass because he did not line up under center. And the second thing that is discussed is that a team must place 7 players on the line of scrimmage. Some argued that the Eagles had 8. But the player at the top of the screen checked with the ref prior to the play, that he is not on the line and the ref confirmed it. And TV replays show that the player was indeed about 2 yards off the los. So no illegal formation.

 

Good stuff Topas, thanks. I was too inebriated to notice the details at the time. :rockon:

[BertSquirtgum 6,045]

What kind of faggot butt fucking loser is arguing for an Eagles touchdown to be ruled incomplete? Fuck you.

[The Beef 2,269]

It's actually funny to see those calls go against New England.

 

It shows you how hard it is to win when every close or questionable call goes against you.

 

600 yards of total offense and a loss.

 

Also the Butler benching and the botched XP and chip shot FG were great to see. Dumb shit almost never happens to the Pats.

[pkschul 3,563]

"But a league source tells Pro Football Talk that the NFL views the play as a judgment call, not one that is clearly right or wrong. More from PFT:

The question is whether the wide receiver was on the line of scrimmage, in which case the formation was legal, or behind the line of scrimmage, in which case the Eagles only had six players on the line and were in an illegal formation. The official thought the wide receiver was lined up close enough on the line to be covering the right tackle, and as a result the league doesn't believe the Eagles got the benefit of a bad call."

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/should-eagles-have-been-flagged-for-illegal-formation-on-foles-td-catch/

[Buffalo13 21,693]

Not that I’m complaining, but the patriots really did get hosed on two touchdowns.

 

First, that long touchdown, all year long the league has been calling it incomplete when the ball moves and you don’t get 2 feet in balance. The ball clearly moved after his first step, and the third step went out of bounds. Therefore no 2 feet in bounds. All throughout the year, that would’ve been incomplete. It was funny watching the announcers be so shocked that it wasn’t overturned though LOL.

 

Second, the touchdown right before the end of the first half where Nick Foles caught it. That was an illegal formation all day. Refs didn’t call it.

 

You can even argue the last touchdown. They call that exact play incomplete in Pittsburgh. But that’s just bullshit. That should’ve been a touchdown .

 

I wouldn't say they got hosed. I would say all those calls, except the formation call (although I heard he motioned to the ref to check), were correct in my opinion. They stood as called on the field b/c it wasn't obvious. Luck just finally ran out on the Pats b/c the refs made the right calls.

 

I know what you're saying though.

[LiterateStylish 10,412]

It was not illegal.

 

As usual, Topas is wrong.

 

Two aspects are important. Foles was allowed to catch a pass because he did not line up under center.

 

Literally irrelevant as no one is questioning this.

 

And the second thing that is discussed is that a team must place 7 players on the line of scrimmage. Some argued that the Eagles had 8.

 

Wrong.

 

You must have 7 and the Eagles had 6.

 

And TV replays show that the player was indeed about 2 yards off the los. So no illegal formation.

 

Hahahahahahah.

 

That’s what makes it illegal!!

 

The fact that he is off the line of scrimmage!

 

Hahahahahaha.

 

Topas is that guy who tries to act like he knows what he is talking about by reading a couple articles quick.

 

Only problem is that he doesn’t have the basic football knowledge to understand the articles.

 

So as Topas noted, the Eagles receiver was 2 yards off the LOS.

 

Him being 2 yards off the LOS, is what makes it an illegal formation.

 

There was no 7th guy.

 

Lmao Topas.

 

Never change.

[LiterateStylish 10,412]

Why was it illegal? I really don’t know...

 

You must have 7 players on the line of scrimmage.

 

Eagles only had 6.

 

[LiterateStylish 10,412]

Good stuff Topas, thanks. I was too inebriated to notice the details at the time. :rockon:

 

And then you have even bigger idiots believing the wrongness that Topas posted.

 

Hahahahahah.

[LiterateStylish 10,412]

On the Foles reception TD' date=' Al Michaels said right after the play that the formation was legal because he was in Shotgun formation. I don't know what the rule says...[/quote']

 

Two different things.

 

Foles can catch the ball due to shotgun.

 

The illegal formation is totally seperate.

[LiterateStylish 10,412]

Yup, go to YOUR team Lit ...the Pats are calling out to you.

 

Not a Pats fan.

 

Gross.

[StraightJ 9,524]

And then you have even bigger idiots believing the wrongness that Topas posted.

 

Hahahahahah.

 

We will not tolerate the xenophobia towards someone, even if he lives in a cuckhold nation! It's just not right! lol At least your post to him was humorous, it made it a more enjoyable read, despite the intolerance of his foreign antics.