Twitter: Post Game Tweets 10/23/2022

[gimmesix]

Another angle.

I like how Biadasz went chasing after him.

 

[lwehlers]

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.

thank you for your reponse. i guess i am used to the old days i think that the rule sucks now.

 

[Hoofbite]

If you guys are arguing about the Diggs INT, it was reviewed according to Dan Campbell. The refs told him it was reviewed and they saw no evidence it was not a catch.

It should have been given the full treatment. That's really all I have to say about it.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

I like how Biadasz went chasing after him.

Me too. I wonder what happened when he caught him.

 

[Dre11]

It was ruled he caught the ball and it should have been reviewed. If the review showed he caught the ball, then he caught the ball. That was definitely close enough to garner a review. I don't understand how you can't at least admit that a review should have occurred. Questionable possession going to the ground is almost ALWAYS reviewed.

IT WAS REVIEWED. WHAT DONT YOU UNDERSTAND GEESH

 

[BAT]

Good grief. Jerry is such a buffoon. We struggled to three quarters with one of the worst teams in the league but yea we like our guys and there’s no room for improvement. Jerry is cringeworthy. Have another Scotch Jerry.

Buffoon is being kind.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

 

[Vanilla2]

What's with the comparisons?

One is a genius and the other is waiting to be upgraded from?

 

[Dre11]

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

Exactly. I don't know what this fool is talking about...lol

 

[slick325]

Great news.

Thankful to hear that. I thought it was either an Achilles or a foot fracture.

 

[Dre11]

If you guys are arguing about the Diggs INT, it was reviewed according to Dan Campbell. The refs told him it was reviewed and they saw no evidence it was not a catch.

Been trying to tell this dude that.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

 

[Hoofbite]

IT WAS REVIEWED. WHAT DONT YOU UNDERSTAND GEESH

If the booth can just review it, why is there an on-field review?

 

[lwehlers]

Saw a few of these today including a crucial one in the Giants-Jags game. What bothers me is they did not call the hit on Rush last week by Graham, but I saw two just like that today in different games called.

i said that in another post the officals are making there own rules up and not following what the rules committe is telling them to call it.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

 

[Boyzmamacita]

 

[Boyzmamacita]

 

[ElGatoGrande]

Thankful to hear that. I thought it was either an Achilles or a foot fracture.

That must have been a helluva strain...

 

[Dre11]

If the booth can just review it, why is there an on-field review?

They do that on all turnovers that way. And have been for years.

 

[BAT]

Easily could have been 3.