Twitter: Post Game Tweets 10/23/2022

[Booger]

Apparently. He's been tweeting crap for weeks now.

He ain't all there. One taco shy of a combo plate kinda deal.

 

[lwehlers]

Blame the owners and competition committee. The refs are told to be extra safe with the QBs.

yeah but the officals are being stupid with the penalty they are not doing what the rule call for. they are making up there own rules.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

Felt so bad for Noah, but he made some plays later.

 

[Dre11]

That's a cop out because there wouldn't be a need for someone to go "under the hood" if the booth can just make the call.

The process is pretty-well defined. The booth initiates the review and the on-field judge makes the determination. If we're going to allow the booth to just make the determination (and do you want that?), then get rid of the time-wasting review that occurs on the field. At that point, we're stopping the game all for show.

That was a play that deserved further review. Anyone who says it wasn't is lying to themselves.

The process is for New York to review the turnovers if there is an issue the field refs are told. Obviously there was no issues. What's so hard to understand

 

[Boyzmamacita]

I do not take this man for granted. If not for the 50+ yard attempts, his stats would be awesome this season.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

Other teams can beat Tampa.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

 

[Hoofbite]

The process is for New York to review the turnovers if there is an issue the field refs are told. Obviously there was no issues. What's so hard to understand

That New York failed on this one. That's the issue. It was not a clean interception and it should have at least been reviewed. You can't go wrong by getting the call right. You can go completely wrong by failing to at least try to get it right. Don't get me wrong I'll take it, but it is what it is. It wasn't clean, he double-clutched, and likely had help from the ground to secure the ball. That deserves an on-field review by any definition. If they had reviewed it and determined he caught it, so be it. The failure is that there was no review on a questionable catch. What's so hard to understand?

 

[Boyzmamacita]

 

[TheMightyVanHalen]

Stop it, Dak.

That throw in the 1st half into triple coverage to Lamb was thing of beauty. It was a rope! Romo said it should've been intercepted but Lamb got scared of a big hit and alligator armed it. Romo and the other guy was OBVIOUSLY pulling for the Lions.

 

[BAT]

This.

Cowboys fans just need to accept this.

Our offense is best in 2 RB system.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

 

[Vanilla2]

????? Nobody's perfect.

Maybe he means it like more touches?

 

[viman96]

yeah but the officals are being stupid with the penalty they are not doing what the rule call for. they are making up there own rules.

They are calling like they have been instructed. It has mentioned on a few broadcasts. The owners have a vested interest with their own teams, post career medical claims and potential law suits.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

 

[Dre11]

That New York failed on this one. That's the issue. It was not a clean interception and it should have at least been reviewed. You can't go wrong by getting the call right. You can go completely wrong by failing to at least try to get it right. Don't get me wrong I'll take it, but it is what it is. It wasn't clean, he double-clutched, and likely had help from the ground to secure the ball. That deserves an on-field review by any definition. If they had reviewed it and determined he caught it, so be it. The failure is that there was no review on a questionable catch. What's so hard to understand?

How did they fail, he caught the ball and they saw no issue. New York didn't fail. What's so hard to understand?

 

[Boyzmamacita]

Maybe he means it like more touches?

Oh. OK. I think you're right.

 

[LandryFan]

I do not take this man for granted. If not for the 50+ yard attempts, his stats would be awesome this season.

If I’m not mistaken, both of hiss misses were from 59 yds. Both had the distance, but were wide. I wouldn’t bet against him making half of those over time.

 

[Vanilla2]

That's a cop out because there wouldn't be a need for someone to go "under the hood" if the booth can just make the call.

The process is pretty-well defined. The booth initiates the review and the on-field judge makes the determination. If we're going to allow the booth to just make the determination (and do you want that?), then get rid of the time-wasting review that occurs on the field. At that point, we're stopping the game all for show.

That was a play that deserved further review. Anyone who says it wasn't is lying to themselves.

I thought They do it like that on all score and turnovers? And only send the obviously questionable down to the field.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

But but but he's a stat padder. I read it right here.