MarcusRock
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 15,770
- Reaction score
- 18,597
Not a stretch, Marcus. The NO noncall is extreme proof. The stretch in this case is actually not believing/seeing it. I would imagine if you can't see it, then you can see this love child!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Got any pics?)
Whoa, extreme proof? Not even close, ksk. Holy Toledo. No, no, no. Extreme proof would be there was an investigation done and in the process it came out that the ref bet on the game, had some other conflicting interest, or was bearing a grudge, etc. Even then he could lie about those things to implicate himself for some unknown reason (like to hide a larger operation). But someone blowing an extremely easy call is not extreme proof, or even simple proof of something nefarious in the slightest. Any number of things could have happened:
1. He simply just wasn't paying attention
2. He had some medical occurrence that caused him to lose concentration
3. He was high on drugs
4. He had an incident with gas and was preoccupied with not pooping his pants
5. He was daydreaming about the hot time he had with a hooker the night before
6. He heard a noise behind him that made him think he was about to get hit by something/someone and diverted his attention
(don't know if there's video of him the whole way but if so, these could easily be disproved)
7. He could have thought he heard a whistle in the crowd, maybe thought the play didn't happen
Every single one of these options are more plausible than what you and others claim was conspiracy, and this was just me brain-storming. There are probably tons more options to consider. This is why these conspiracies are dangerous, especially when people get so tunnel-visioned that they can't see any other possibility but one where they're "being done wrong and need to do something about it." I hope the start to this year at least taught that. I think you need to reconsider the case of that call.