Don't know if the Jets did the lining up intentionally but they were exactly where the Side Judge was on the sideline so it's likely they looked where he was and just lined up there even if he spotted them back a yard from where they should have been. Either way, it guaranteed the least amount of time coming off the clock and that was the difference.
Well the one that's on my memory is the Seahawks game that Romo fumbled the field goal hold however the play before that went and clear they got a first down how is it when they went and looked at that that was not a first down it should have been first in goal that field goal attempt should have never happened... So many plays during romo's career that changed the narrative of his career literally was the referees and imagine if he just had a few of those plays back how he would be thought of right now probably more like Kurt Warner... I know we're sitting here crying like Cowboys fans but I remember all these it's like a my dog got kicked these moments they add up and at some point you're pretty angry that they just keep calling the games different for other teams...
This is it in a nutshell. Look to the Side Judge and line up with him, period. The official does need to touch the ball but if you're lined up when the official also looks to see if you're aligned with the Side Judge, he can touch it and you can go. The Cowboys were ahead of their Side Judge so the official went to re-spot but then did just leave it there in the interest of time and gave the Cowboys the extra yard as evidence by the Side Judge hopping forward one yard before the snap. Don't give the officials the chance to think and make it as easy for them as you can. They didn't, and hence you have this revisionist history whine.
So you only want to slander me, not the evidence I presented. Sure fire sign of one who knows the other is right. Lots of you do this and I have fanbois like you because at one time they actually did try to debate the topic and it didn't turn out well because you can't debate video evidence. Well, you can but then you look like a conspiracy loon denying the reality of your eyes even as you try to claim others deny the reality of their eyes (as you've created). Freud would be proud of your pristine projection example.
Lol. It takes a while because it's always quicker to cry victim than it is to compile actual evidence for people to see and then start a discussion. Those without evidence go the "i have seen ..." route. I'm partial to actually backing up my case with hardcore examples or the rules themselves which many don't want to look at because they know it doesn't say what they claim. You see here how direct counter-evidence gets glossed over and people just continue to believe what they want to believe without ever addressing it directly. I just find that part interesting.
Forgot his name but the ref of that Superbowl said they helped Pittsburgh on purpose, they cheated to make sure Pittsburgh won.
Bro, you're just mad because I thrashed you in the Dez catch debates. That was years ago and you still fanboi harder than the rest. Do you remember how when you were getting embarrassed you actually went into my PMs to call me names because you were mad? Lol. You try to rebrand yourself as all calm now but I know you're still the same unhinged individual that can't get over that. Someone take away my internet if I'm on here trying to take shots at people repeatedly because they hurt my feelings years ago.
Yes or no. Does the ref by the rules have to spot the ball. In other words TOUCH the ball?
These are the spoils of not having a powerhouse team. So then people need to resort to all sorts of compensation for why they're not. The "Hey ma, no fair!" defense just looks wimpy for grown men to be doing it though.
Maybe he felt the ball was spotted in the right place. He could have looked at the side ref who indicated the ball was correctly spotted. Maybe the NFL rule on this has changed, or doesn't specifically dictate that a ref has to pick up the ball and set it back down in that situation. Or maybe there was just a screw up - refs make mistakes too.
That's asking alot. The rules are too complex and the game moves too fast to expect the same every week from the refs. You don't even get that in a court of law.
Even if that's true, the very simple explanation could be that the ball was spotted incorrectly. In the case this weekend maybe the refs felt the ball was where it needed to be.
Totally agree with this and have said it before. Controversy sells. Why would you need to rig a game that natural human error will garner controversy for on its own anyway over time? But people take this so seriously that they need to have something against their team as an adversary to complain about "injustice" as a compensation for not being winners (as well as personally by extension). Every team's fans does this.
I explained the difference between the Jets and Cowboys situation but no one wanted to hear it, lol. The Jets were aligned with the Side Judge, therefore no need to re-spot. The Cowboys were a yard ahead of the Side Judge, therefore he tried to re-spot, and still gave the Cowboys the extra yard anyway. Gotta make it easy on them. The Jets learned from our mistake.
Sadly, a lot of fans need drama and controversy to be entertained. Of course, that's not just in sports. It's why tabloid journalism is so profitable.
