The NFl Responds

[mmmdk]

Laughable but not suprising. Another CYA moment the NFL.

NFL = National Football League...it's a national problem and not just football or some league.

"I'm not a crook".

[ThunderDan]

Sounds like a crackhead saying he will just take one hit on Sundays.

Well, my dealer wont be as happy since my consumption went down 75%.

[mmmdk]

Sounds like a crackhead saying he will just take one hit on Sundays.

Hmm!

[Freak Out]

Sitton just hammered Tate and Pretty Pete on the Rome show.

[LEWCWA]

Agreed Sharpe but are they really the stupid ones? We are still going to watch the games, even if it just the Packers ones like Thunderdan said the NFL still wins.

The only way to make a point us by watching nothing NFL.

I don't know if I can do it.

Thats just it, I am done with the NFL....that isn't/wasn't entertaining, so why be distraught about something that didn't entertain me.

[HowardRoark]

Result of the game is final? As opposed to what, we're going to have a do over? Overturn the play the next day? We all knew that it was 'final'.

Section 2, Article 1

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/20_Rule17_Emergencies_UnfairActs.pdf

[Patler]

So, which of us couldn't have written that press release last night? On rare occasions they have acknowledged serious errors the next day, but in view of the lockout, and their decision to go with replacement officials, it was obvious what their response would be.

They appeased GB fans by saying; yes, you should have won because of the pass interference. But we all know penalties are missed regularly, so while it is wrong, we already have and will put up with it. They totally ignored the catch/interception issue by skipping over everything that determines it. They went directly from Tate shoving Shields to the players being on the ground. They never explained what acts constituted possession by Tate, and that is the crux of the issue.

I wonder what their explanation is to the Packers. Unfortunately, we will not be told.

[Guiness]

Section 2, Article 1

http://static.nfl.com/static/content...UnfairActs.pdf

Has the 'extraordinary unfair acts' section EVER been used? I'm not aware of it.

I'm thinking Testaverde's helmet TD...that was even more clear than this.

[ThunderDan]

So, which of us couldn't have written that press release last night? On rare occasions they have acknowledged serious errors the next day, but in view of the lockout, and their decision to go with replacement officials, it was obvious what their response would be.

They appeased GB fans by saying; yes, you should have won because of the pass interference. But we all know penalties are missed regularly, so while it is wrong, we already have and will put up with it. They totally ignored the catch/interception issue by skipping over everything that determines it. They went directly from Tate shoving Shields to the players being on the ground. They never explained what acts constituted possession by Tate, and that is the crux of the issue.

I wonder what their explanation is to the Packers. Unfortunately, we will not be told.

I knew what was coming from the NFL. I hoped they would be big enough to admit that Jennings had the ball.

[MadtownPacker]

Well, my dealer wont be as happy since my consumption went down 75%.

Or he can raise the price of that one hit (ala carte games someday?). But he knows it is a dirty habit and you will eventually want some more.

[ThunderDan]

Or he can raise the price of that one hit (ala carte games someday?). But he knows it is a dirty habit and you will eventually want some more.

In a sense they already do that with the ESPN and NFL Network games.

I was mad when they put games on ESPN. I was furious when they put games on a newly created NFL Network to make network providers purchase their product.

[Badgerinmaine]

They appeased GB fans by saying; yes, you should have won because of the pass interference. But we all know penalties are missed regularly, so while it is wrong, we already have and will put up with it. They totally ignored the catch/interception issue by skipping over everything that determines it. They went directly from Tate shoving Shields to the players being on the ground. They never explained what acts constituted possession by Tate, and that is the crux of the issue.

I wonder what their explanation is to the Packers. Unfortunately, we will not be told.

I totally agree. I was at least glad to see the acknowledgement that there should have been offensive pass interference. And I'm still royally p****d off. But allow me to play devil's advocate: I can't think of a single case in the NFL where the outcome of the game was reversed by the league office. In fact, the only thing I can think of (other than things like forfeiting games won, as Penn State had to do, for rules violations unrelated to play on the field) that even comes close is the Pine Tar baseball game between the Royals and Yankees, where they ordered a replay from the point of the disputed, reversed call on George Brett's home run. No league wants to be in a position where they've set a precedent that teams can expect to get losses overturned routinely. If they said yes to the Packers in this case--and I wish as a Packers diehard they had--they'd get pressure to overrule in every game ending in a controversial call based on this precedent. The NFL has done a bunch of things wrong here, but I can see why they wouldn't want to open that box.

[Badgerinmaine]

Okay, I'm ducking now

[mmmdk]

Thank you, fucking Goodell & NFL, it feels like putting on a plaster dipped in ass water and applied on a severe wound with salt in it. FUCKING THANK YOU!

Furthermore, I may piss in Stubbys ear, but he's my coach, my team and I'm fucking gonna stand by them! FUCK!

[Badgerinmaine]

In a sense they already do that with the ESPN and NFL Network games.

I was mad when they put games on ESPN. I was furious when they put games on a newly created NFL Network to make network providers purchase their product.

They just got a big win there, too--Time Warner Cable, which had been a holdout from the start of the NFL Network (NFL demanded they offer it as part of a basic package; TW wanted to put it in a sports tier that only the people who wanted those would pay for) finally cut a deal together last week. I'm glad I'll finally get NFLN but I agree with you...but there is always national radio on those games, anyhow.