NFL 2017 Season

Purdy said:
GOAT shouldn’t be choking like that :D

Great game and right result
Click to expand...

Wasn't really a choke, he got a good hit and fumbled :p

Great game that was; however, one of the commentators got it right saying that the game was playing out like a pair of drunk cousins on Madden :D it was just step back and toss it up insanity with useless D on both ends for 60mins. It made for an amazing game though!

Be interesting to see what happens next with Foles or if they go back to Wentz, personally I would say Foles.
 
Thank **** the Pats didn’t win, I’m not a fan of the Eagles myself but glad they won.

Didn’t bother watching the game itself as I had no interest in either team.

But congrats to the eagles, first Super Bowl win in their history.
 
Broad street is rammed and absolutely should be. Back at the hotel for beer and the roads are rammed with cars, horns going. There will be no sleep, Its finally our time :D:D:D.

E-A-G-L-E-S
EAGLES!!!
 
As I left work on Friday I said to my boss (who likes a flutter) if you can get decent odds on the Eagles by 5 or more... take it! I hope he did :)

Amazing game, really not what I imagine anyone expected, with two pretty good defences giving up the most combined yards in any game ever!

It was frustrating me the Eagles weren't making more effort to pressure Brady. Take some risks, send some blitz's, he's going to score anyway, try and make a play! Then they did it with a 4 man rush. Fair play.

Yeah, not Brady choking, just a good play by the D. I personally would also cut him some slack on heading off the field. That's a tough game to loose.

A little surprised the one Eagles TD stood, where the back caught it, but then lost the ball adjusting it's position as he fell out of bounds, to then gain control again when it was too late. Was getting annoyed when Colinsworth kept going on about Ertz's TD catch, which to me was clearly a catch, then a football move, meaning it was a TD when it crossed the plane.

Weird game, as a Redskins fan I wanted them both to lose. I don't hate the Eagles like the Cowboys though, so was relatively pleased the Pats didn't win. Great game though, really enjoyed it.
 
That one could have gone either way to be honest. He got one foot down when he initially caught it and then got a 2nd foot inbounds. Obviously his next step was out of bounds and then he lost the ball. This whole rule needs a serious overhaul as it is happening too many times.

Really glad for the Eagles though as it is nice to see a new team winning it for a change.
 
lee32uk said:
That one could have gone either way to be honest. He got one foot down when he initially caught it and then got a 2nd foot inbounds. Obviously his next step was out of bounds and then he lost the ball. This whole rule needs a serious overhaul as it is happening too many times.
Click to expand...

Yes, but if you're going to the ground, you need to maintain possession all the way through, which he did not.
 
Milkybk said:
Similar to our football, I think you have to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team.
Click to expand...

With NFL you go with the call on the field unless their is undisputed evidence to the contrary in the replay. The ref said something along the lines of 'the call will remain' rather than 'the call is confirmed' which means there wasn't enough to see in the replay to change the call, but at the same time the replay couldn't back up the call, so it's left with what the call on the field was.
 
AndyCr15 said:
Yes, but if you're going to the ground, you need to maintain possession all the way through, which he did not.
Click to expand...

That is why the rules need changing. I mean so what if the ball bobbles ? As long as the player doesn't drop the ball then it should be irrelevant whether it moved or not. Too many overcomplicated rules in the NFL.
 
Not really. How far would you go with your version? He taps it as he's going out of bounds, runs on and catches it... now out of bounds? How can that be a catch? If we say the instance he has control it's a catch then there's going to be a lot of unhappy offences giving away fumbles as their receivers get hit having 'caught' the ball and it pops out.
 
AndyCr15 said:
Not really. How far would you go with your version? He taps it as he's going out of bounds, runs on and catches it... now out of bounds? How can that be a catch? If we say the instance he has control it's a catch then there's going to be a lot of unhappy offences giving away fumbles as their receivers get hit having 'caught' the ball and it pops out.
Click to expand...

This is what Dean Blandino said on his twitter:

Issue is control. Looks like he has it initially and gets both feet down in bounds. There is some movement of the ball, but don’t think enough to say loss of control. Call should stand.

https://www.sbnation.com/2018/2/4/1...ents-catch-ruled-a-touchdown-in-super-bowl-52

That is how I see it when you look at the replay.
 
I would say there shouldn't be varying degrees of movement to decide if there is control or not. That does make it complex. To me there's movement, so there's not control. Simple. That's how I've seen it called previously too.
 
I've just got in from a weekend in Philly watching the game at Xfinity. The scenes were unreal.. I certainly will never forget this... chaos doesn't come close top describing it.. but everyone I saw was happy and having fun!

/poor grammar
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom