Game Thread Week 4 - New England@Washington (1 Viewer)

[JZilla]

No onside kick. That was a mistake IMO.I never said the Skins were the second coming of the early 90's Cowboys.... I just said they were for real - as opposed to recent years.

yea how big of a mistake was it?

Well, if the Patriots had onsided and recovered it, they would have had the ball.

 

[Resik]

difficult call.. you have to have full possession, and it looked like he did... with the ground causing the fumble.

 

[bostonfred2]

The ruling on the field stands.

 

[jonboltz]

what bs

 

[JZilla]

bull#### call.

 

[JZilla]

Skins are loving those false starts.GB my newfound ability to jinx the Redskins

 

[bostonfred2]

Redskins third false start in a row on the punt. Patriots get the ball on the 46 with 1:39 left.

 

[Mario Kart]

i thought that was a bad call as he had two feet down way before he went out of bounds. i thought a catch was "2 feet in bounds" not "4 feet in bounds without a fumble from out-of-bounds". i am no fan of either but i think that was a bad call... now we will have Oakland and Washington fans complaining about New England... TUCK RULE ANYONE??

 

[bostonfred2]

Patriots say thank you for the gift, but no thanks. 4th down is not a good time for a 20 yard pass. Larry Centers was open just past the first down marker. Game over.

 

[XNOUGHT]

:( :( :( :( :( :( ARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!NOOOOOOOO#%$^&@*&$^#

 

[JZilla]

Well that was a pretty anticlimactic finish. You pay Vinatieri for a reason, dummies.edit for spelling - XNOUGHT is rubbing off on me

 

[Mario Kart]

bad play calling from new england

 

[FFDetroitCommish]

The NFL will come out later and admit that was the wrong call on the Coles play. That new rule about 2 feet in bounds + possesion is confusing people. THAT WAS THE WRONG CALL!!!!

 

[XNOUGHT]

There will be ALOT of second guessing here.

 

[bostonfred2]

i thought that was a bad call as he had two feet down way before he went out of bounds. i thought a catch was "2 feet in bounds" not "4 feet in bounds without a fumble from out-of-bounds". i am no fan of either but i think that was a bad call... now we will have Oakland and Washington fans complaining about New England... TUCK RULE ANYONE??

Apparently, if you get two feet down, but juggle it before you land, that's still an incomplete pass. That happens all the time in the middle of the field, where a player will get hit going across the middle, choke the ball up and the D recovers and scores... only to have the refs rule that the pass was incomplete. In many of those cases, the player has gotten two feet down, but was hit before they could continue forward with the ball. The idea here is that two feet, AND possession must occur. Not just the appearance of possession as the second foot lands. In the end zone and on the sideline, however, possession is rarely held to this scrutiny, as the question is usually whether the player was in bounds (defined by both feet landing in bounds), not whether they had control of it as they went out of bounds.

 

[dgreen]

Um, refs, Coles had three feet in. What the heck does he have to do? If they the right call according to that confusing rule, then the rule absolutely SUCKS!Oh well, 3-1! But, they need to play a whole lot better. Philly next week, then TB, then Buffalo.