Reply With Quote
I'm amazed. Almost 2 weeks after the game the discussion continues.
let this pathetic thread die already.
I'm amazed. Almost 2 weeks after the game the discussion continues.
If the NE Patriots, winners of 3/4 of the last SB les had gotten the calls that Seattle did, they would have steeled themselves and risen above the ty calls and made the plays. You would NEVER see Tom Brady making bad passes or mismanaging his clock that way, NEVER. Why? Cus he and the Pats are champions. And if they didn't rise above it? Bill Bellichick would never go back to Foxboro whining like a little beyotch. Holmgren can learn a little something from that.
The Seattle Seahawks got rattled and cuold not get past the calls (some of which were admittedly crapy). It's one thing if you get victimized by bad calls. It's another thing altogether if you compound them with ty play. If they were truly champions, they would have found a way to win, that game was still very winnable before they started playing like a JV team that forgot about clock management. Therefore, they don't deserve to be champions anymore than the Steelers do. But somebody had to win, and Pitt got it done when it counted. Case closed.
There. Fixed that for ya.
Sadly, we have no idea of the comment you've made about the Patriots is true or not. It is merely conjecture.
Just like it is conjecture that the Seahawks would have won if some of those (mostly correct) calls would have been made?
And if you have been watching the last four SBs, you know damn well that is not conjecture. The Pats and any team with TRUE championship mettle would never have let those calls rattle them like that. Inexcusable.
Conjecture.
if you cry about the refs, you're a pussy.
CASE CLOSED
So what does it make you when you refer to a ref as a "dumb ass" after making a bad call?
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthre...hlight=referee
do i complain weeks later?
he is a dumb ass who made a dumb ass call.
crying about it? i don't think so.
if it would have changed the outcome of the game and then i ed about it, then you have permission to call me a pussy.
Move on, Mr. Labia.
Did you miss the game against Denver? the Pats got screwed on a couple calls and got beat down by the broncos! how many INTs did brady throw in that game?
So if a bad call changes the outcome of a game, and people take issue with it, they're considered pussies? Wow. That's some pretty skewed logic. I guess we're supposed to just bend over and take it like you? Sorry, not for me. But keep me informed on how that works out for ya.
Yep. You know a thread has run its course when the mental midgets come rolling in with the 5th grade "oh yeah, well you're a pussy" logic.
Last edited by IceColdBrewski; 02-19-2006 at 01:49 AM.
By no means is there an * on the Steelers Championship, the officiating just proves the league is crap but it's the only game in town.
I'm still talking about the game because it reminds me of what I lost as a true NFL fan.
I don't get onto the boards every day, so if it takes me a few days to see a thread I'm still going to respond to it. I noticed that you posted seven times since I did so you obviously aren't tired of crying about the officiating. It certainly proves my point.
By the way, the teams I root for are the Browns and the Cowboys, so there's no single team I hate more than the Steelers. Asterisks are for losers, just accept it.
You just can't let it die can you.
I've already accepted it. Accepted the fact that this Super Bowl will be forever tainted because of bad officiating. And there's nothing you can do or say to change that. Don't like it? Tough .
Last edited by IceColdBrewski; 02-24-2006 at 01:00 PM.
Looks like I've struck a nerve.
I think it shows how pathetic you are.
Looks like I've struck a nerve.
More 5th grade logic. What a shocker.I think it shows how pathetic you are.
Debating Football obviously isn't your thing. Maybe you should stick to the Club forum where you can brag about getting high some more. That definitely seems more your speed.
coming from the guy who has "pass the brew" as their le.
pathetic.
Psst. A heavy dose of laughing emoticons (coupled with childish insults) is usually a classic indication that someone has really gotten under your skin. It's just football talk sparky. Don't take it so personal. Oh, and the "pass the brew" le just appeared there one day. I'm guessing timvp put it there, because it wasn't me.coming from the guy who has "pass the brew" as their le.
pathetic.
Anyway, I'm done with this debate. It was going fine, until the other side of the arguement decided it was time to resort to name-calling and insults. Not sure why. Maybe just bitter about being part of the minority opinion. Whatever the reason, it only proves that they never had much of an arguement to begin with. I've stated my opinion, and there were obviously a great majority of fans, writers, broadcasters, etc who saw it the same way. But like I said, I'm done with it. I'll just leave with a USA Today article I found that pretty much summed up my Super Bowl thoughts exactly.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colum...onnor-xl_x.htm
Super Bowl referees foul, but then so was everything else
If officials, umpires and referees are forever charged to rise to the standards of world-class athletes and coaches, nobody should be any more shocked than Claude Rains was in Casablanca when they sink to those standards, too.
Yep, the officiating stunk Sunday. Bill Leavy, former cop and firefighter, must have done a better job directing traffic and putting out whatever gameday fires were started by overzealous moms and dads during his days refereeing games in the San Jose PAL.
But good luck finding anyone or anything that didn't stink in and around Super Bowl XL. Mike Holmgren stunk. Ben Roethlisberger stunk. Jerramy Stevens stunk. Mick Jagger stunk. The commercials stunk.
So it stood to reason that the officiating crew would spend a largely forgettable evening in Detroit making that overturned Troy Polamalu interception in Indianapolis look like the call of the century. Zebras are human, after all.
Sometimes they can watch a college basketball coach with a heart condition collapse face-first onto the court, be taken off on a stretcher while wearing an oxygen mask, and still assess Houston's Tom Penders a technical foul. For, what, not having a better defibrillator implanted in his chest?
These are imperfect creatures, their live-action flaws measured against a zillion slow-motion truths. Fact is, officials, umps and refs are affected by the same variables that would affect you and your next-door neighbor if you were asked to spend a national holiday serving as on-site judge and jury before 68,206 spectators and 90.7 million of their closest friends watching from home.
To wit: Ford Field might as well have been Heinz Field. Dan Rooney never saw so many Steelers fans in his five previous Super Bowls, and we all know what a home crowd can do to a mere mortal armed with a whistle and flag.
It can turn him into Bob Waggoner, back judge, reaching awfully late into his pocket to wipe out a 7-0 Seahawks lead on a ticky-tack foul that should never get called in a high-stakes game. Was Waggoner influenced by the protesting Chris Hope? By that raging yellow sea of Terrible Towels?
"I'm not in a position to comment at this time, unfortunately," Waggoner said Monday by phone.
Only a fool would suggest that Waggoner, a Pittsburgh native, was scoring one for the home team. He was doing the best he could under pressure that can't be simulated by the three-hour psychological exam he passed to earn his NFL stripes.
The pressure gets to the best of 'em. Holmgren lost track of the downs in his previous Super Bowl appearance, and ordered his defensive unit to let the Broncos score a late touchdown (in order to get back the ball) when he should've ordered it to make a stand. This time around, Holmgren did a terrific job running out the clock at the close of the first and second halves despite the fact he was trailing at the time. How could a championship-caliber coach like Holmgren decline to kick a field goal in the game's final seconds when his only chance amounted to a three-pointer, a recovered onside kick, a touchdown and a two-point conversion? Good question, just like this one:
How could the head of a Super Bowl crew tell the world that Matt Hasselbeck was guilty of an illegal block after he tackled the Steeler who had just intercepted his pass?
Like Holmgren, Leavy makes mistakes. Leavy and his crew made some big ones Sunday, all at Seattle's expense. The lame holding call on Sean Locklear that negated a huge (and rare) Stevens catch might've prevented Holmgren from becoming the first coach to win Super Bowls for different franchises. Then again, Holmgren might've prevented Holmgren from becoming the first coach to win Super Bowls for different franchises, with an assist from Stevens, whose grip proved to be as loose as his lips.
Leavy could've helped matters earlier by overturning Roethlisberger's non-touchdown. But once ABC showed that Leavy likes overturning calls as much as Polamalu likes trips to the barbershop, you knew the referee wasn't really examining the replay anymore. He was actually studying a hidden-camera view of The Rolling Stones' green room, looking for evidence of illegal motion.
It's time for Jagger to ride off on Jerome Bettis' Bus, and for Madison Avenue to come up with something better than the ad showing a woman on an airline, landing in a stranger's lap. (Note to ad execs: If viewers recall the commercial but not the product the commercial promotes, try again.)
So in the end, the sideshows were as lousy as the players, coaches and refs, as lousy as the officiating has been throughout the playoffs. NFL misery loves company. That's a Super Bowl slogan that merits a yellow flag.
Last edited by IceColdBrewski; 02-24-2006 at 04:45 PM.
The super bowl made some people super es. It wasn't that great of a game, and that's all I'll remember about it. Please post a poll showing this great majority of people that think the referees stunk. I just don't want a few rambling, bitter old men to become instant majority.
thank you
Laughing emoticons = I'm laughing at you, not with you.
Childish insults = you're a sensitive
So did timvp come up with your IceColdBrewski name or were you a big boy for once and thought of it yourself?
Oooh. That's good psychology there. I suppose you're going to say something bad about my mother next?
Save it. Save it for the other pubescent-minded potheads. They might actually fall for it.
P.S. The "sensitive " in any arguement is always the guy who loses his cool with " " and "pussy" insults. Not the guy who kept his cool while trying to stay on topic. I'll leave it to you to figure out which category you fell under in this one.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
