Boy is Rodgers a CRYER

He is don’t worry.

Quote:

---

He is don’t worry.

---

X2

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

He is don’t worry.

---

X2

---

X3

Big G,

I’m not sure what you are saying, can you explain it again?

Are you saying the review should not have occurred or the penalty should not have been called?

ET

Quote:

---

pug, you seem like an a**hole!

---

On your forth post? Man, you are insightful! Took Targa like 3 years.

I prefer to think of myself as a smartrear. Maybe I am just bad at it.

When we going fishing so you can see the real side of pug?

Packers by 1413

if a team “commits a foul” (IE throwing a challenge flag when it is not challengeable by a coach) they lose the review and get a 15 yard penalty

Quote:

---

He is don’t worry.

---

HAAAA!!!!

It must be true that players feed off of the fans emotions…sure are alot of crybaby packfans on this thread!!!

Comin to gitcha!!!! SKOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

thats why i said seem. You SEEM like an a**hole, dont know for sure.. i guess

---

Nah, I just like tweaking people in the name of good fun. Most people get it. My online persona is quite different than real life. In real life I am more self deprecating. Even when I fish with BK. In fact, I think that is why he takes me out.

Oh and I like talking whimsically about myself apparently.

G,

If I remember the play correctly, the ruling on the field was fumble, Vikings ball.

Aren’t all turnovers reviewed automatically? So I think what stripes was saying was that GB didn’t need to throw the flag, the review was going to occur anyway.

So they reviewed it, reversed the call, but still penalized GB. I don’t see the harm here (and I’m a Vikes fan). What am I missing?

ET

GO PACKERS

SUPERBOWL BABY

Quote:

---

G,

If I remember the play correctly, the ruling on the field was fumble, Vikings ball.

Aren’t all turnovers reviewed automatically? So I think what stripes was saying was that GB didn’t need to throw the flag, the review was going to occur anyway.

So they reviewed it, reversed the call, but still penalized GB. I don’t see the harm here (and I’m a Vikes fan). What am I missing?

ET

---

Not sure why we’re all up in arms over this anyways. The issue I had, was after review…I have no clue how they decided that he broke the plane for the TD?!?!?! It looked rather obvious that the ball was short when his knee went down.

Alas…VIKES WIN!!!

Quote:

---

G,

If I remember the play correctly, the ruling on the field was fumble, Vikings ball.

Aren’t all turnovers reviewed automatically? So I think what stripes was saying was that GB didn’t need to throw the flag, the review was going to occur anyway.

So they reviewed it, reversed the call, but still penalized GB. I don’t see the harm here (and I’m a Vikes fan). What am I missing?

ET

---

Yes auto “booth” review, they will then let the ref know if he should review. The issue is, the ball should have been placed at the 35, because the on-field ruling was, fumble, Vikings recovery in the end zone. The ball should have been Vikes ball on the 20….(meanwhile the booth is reviewing, to see if they should buzz the on field ref, this is hwere ou have offenses trying to snap the ball quickly) if the refs have time to place the ball at the 20 and the Vikes snap it, too bad, the booth obviously didn’t see enough to buzz the ref in a reasonable amount of time… problem is GB challenged an unchallengeable call, because it is auto booth reviewed. That then should have resulted in “loss of review and 15 yard penalty” if McCarthy does not challenge, the flow is, refs start placing ball at 20, booth buzzes down to “review” the plast play… ref signals that a review will take place… that is what should have happened, but since GB challenged, it should have been “no review and 15 yard penalty”… instead it was “review, reverse call and give the 15 yard penalty” which is what it sounds like the rule will be in 2013, if the ref is buzzed down on the field, “BEFORE” the illegal challenge is made… WOW what a mess, but clear as day to me

My problem with this whole thing is if you go to the NFL website for rules it says regarding throwing a challenge flag on a non reviewable play it is a 15 yard unsportsman like penalty, that’s it. Unless I am missing something on the website’s rules then Detroit got jobbed on Thanksgiving. I looked under section 15 of the rules regarding challenges and I can’t see anything regarding a team losing that ability to get a play looked at if their coach throws the challenge flag before or after the booth has the review. If nobody has anything better to do, please look at the rules because I don’t see anything on their rules site regarding this. Yes, I did have too much free time myself. If there are any current or former NFL referees lurking, please chime in.

see underlined…

Quote:

---

If there are any current or former NFL referees lurking, please chime in.

---

Every Viking fan on this entire thread is an armchair referee

kinda hard to see, so word for word…

He must initiate a review before the next legal snap or kick and cannot initiate a review of any ruling against a team that commits a foul that delays the next snap.

So you believe the rule reads that because he is being penalized for the unsportsmanlike penalty from throwing the challenge in the first place that prevents the coach from being able to get a review? If so, I didn’t read it that way but looking at it I can see how it could be interpreted that way. Could of been worded differently but I aint no wordsmith either. Didn’t mean to start WWIII with this.

yes, any delay to the next play is penalized by no review and 15 yards. pretty simple. You didn’t start the war, Carey did. IMHO he is lucky the Vikings won…

think of it this way, if the Pack didn’t get screwe! out of the Seahawks game (and the rules were actually used) then Rogers wouldn’t have even been on the field. And if I see two dogs in the aviator I don’t even bother reading it. Therefore that guy can go on doing what he does best. Problem solved!

I get that but when somebody throws a challenge flag it isn’t usually meant to delay the game. I understand if somebody jumps off side or creates some sort of penalty to not start the next play that delays the last play. Either way it sounds like this part of the rule will be eliminated next year.

Look at it this way …. IF the world would have ended on 12/21/12 like it was supposed to, none of this would have ever happened.
D4mn Mayans got their calendar as screwed up as an NFL rule book

I thought the mayan calendar was based on the Packers relevence…

We’ll see how relevant the vikings are after tomorrow

Twinsfreak you crack me up. You can back a crappy MN baseball team but you can’t back a halfway decent MN football team?
DT

I live in minnesota, always have. As a kid i was babysat by a couple packer fans, so i watched them every sunday. I looked up to my older cousins (baby sitters) so i just wanted to fit in. I have loved my packers ever since. I love all sports, and all of my favorite teams are minnesota teams… except the packers. Is that okay with you? Didnt know i needed your approval for it.

You didn’t but now that I know the back story I approve. I just thought that it was funny that you are a MN sports fanatic then switch and root for the Pack.
DT

I’d find new cousins myself…

Quote:

---

You didn’t but now that I know the back story I approve. I just thought that it was funny that you are a MN sports fanatic then switch and root for the Pack.
DT

---

Haha no im not bandwagoner. I live and die by sports, gotta stick to the best team around

Pack by 277, but it won’t matter. Seahawks are the team of destiny.