What it proves is that there is no going to be a substantial movement to oust Dean Blandino as a result of a call that most fans out Dallas agreed with.
I used the phrase "according to the rules in place at the time" and, for some reason, you called that a disclaimer. If we are not supposed to use the rules in place at the time the game was played, what should we be using?
Seriously. Let it go.
Yes, you're right. We should be discussing how that play is a catch circa 1984 - as if that has some sort of relevance.
First, you shift the goal posts, scratch the field goal attempt, and PUNT the unquantified "vast majority" discussion point out of the conversation. Next, you stay firmly planted on the road to 1973ville.
Yes, you're right. We should be discussing how that play is a catch circa 1984 - as if that has some sort of relevance.
I am not going to address something as ridiculously unscientific as a voluntary internet poll. People upset by the call are far more likely to voice their opinion than those who aren't. And that's a fact.
Quantifying overall popular opinion takes a little more work than simply reading comments on a few websites and commentary on television programs. Now, if in your opinion, you can accurately convey what no one is saying, some people are saying, most people are saying, or everyone is saying based on such simple methods, I will respect your way of assimilating information and leave it as such.
First, read these:
What part of "set aside" do you not understand?
If you must set aside something you say, why are you compelled to say it at all?
I never said I wanted the guy fired, so I'm not really sure to whom you're responding.
For every team that lost a completion to this rule, there is a defense that gained an incompletion.
Eh, when you consider that instant replay challenges are viewed on TV monitors, it doesn't really matter if the guy viewing the monitor is in the stadium or not.
