Of course you do. Your biased since the Seahawks are battling the Saints for the top seed. And the Brees hit was the correct call according to the rules unlike the call last night.
Eh, subjective tbh. With all that carving they only scored 23 points. 3 of which may or may not have been on the board. Bend don't break, right? LOL. After the turnover, the Niners would have had excellent field position. Would they have scored a FG? Possible. If so, the game is totally different and the Saints have to get 7 with not a lot of time against a good defense.
Of course you do. Your biased since the Seahawks are battling the Saints for the top seed. And the Brees hit was the correct call according to the rules unlike the call last night.
Have you looked at both plays?![]()
That missed holding call was one of a quite few aggrecious calls that game, but the Saints still deserved to lose that one. They should have put the Pats away sooner.
Of course, and everyone agrees that the Brees hit was illegal according to the rules. Not the same case with this pass interference call which looked like pass interference. Not sure why you can't see that.
Its also subjective saying the Niners would have won the game if they ruled the Brees hit a fumble. Saint still had plenty of time to stop the clock and stuffed the Niners most of the game. The Saints did move the ball well most of the game which is why they almost had 400 yards of total offense.
Hey, look, I know you're going to vigorously defend your team to the death, but he hit Brees in the upper chest area. It's not Brooks fault that his neck snapped around tbh. Damn that was a nasty hit tbh...
Never said the Niners would've won, I just said it would've been significantly harder with less time against a very good defense. That's a fair statement, right?
that hit on most other qbs never gets called, I think it was a bad call.
It would have been harder, but the game wasn't clearly in doubt.
I'm not vigorously defending them. I didn't think it was a good call when I saw the replay, but the last two days mostly everyone on TV and radio from former officials to former GMs etc. have been saying the call was correct according to the rules since he did end up hitting him in the neck after he first him in the chest. Is it a bad rule? Probably, but according to the rules, it was the correct call.
Oh, the neck graze after the ball was out? Gotcha. I think we all know that's not being called in Frisco.
It's obvious this difference in opinion isn't going to end. I'll just say this: A team that was outgained by double in total yards really has no room to blame officials for a loss. They need to look in the mirror for getting dominated on the field.
Agree. I never said the Niners would've won the game.
I'm just saying these two calls are bad calls. No more, no less. And, it's my opinion that one is worse than the other. BTW, our game in two weeks may be the game of the year.
Yeah I'm looking forward to it. I just hope the Saints don't lay an egg in 2 days in Atlanta. This is pretty much Atlanta's Super Bowl and they would like nothing more than to up our season.
It's a must win for you guys imo. But, the Jets did pull off a win in ATL so it's looking like a sure thing. ATL can't hang in a shootout with no weapons. It would have to be a catastrophe of epic proportions. Special Teams turnovers etc
I don't think that should've been a penalty but in the world of protecting the players, it was going to be called no matter what side of the issue you reside. The bigger issue for the 49ers is that boneheaded play by Kassim Osgood on that punt. It almost deflated the SF defense and you knew that Brees was going to drive them down for Hartley to make that kick. To me, that was the one they should've stayed away from...
So ing delusional. That angle is beyond ty for any use other than making Gronk look closer to the ball than he really was.
You still using myspace angles for your profile pic?
![]()
Good Lord " " Newton. What a lame nickname Fabbs came up with that one ill bet
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)