s game?


Did that ref just openly cheat?

Or does he really not know the rules of the game of football?

Either way how did he get this job?

He must be somebody's pussy.

9/23/2007 3:11:21 PM

nice explanation

9/23/2007 3:11:40 PM

I saw it, and yes it was a b.s. call


I'm having a hard time figuring out how someone can be someone else's pussy

like, can I be somebody's leg?

9/23/2007 3:14:20 PM

^



?

9/23/2007 3:15:21 PM

horrible call
definitely a wtf moment

9/23/2007 3:17:30 PM

^^nice

^^^^^you can't be someone's pussy. You can be their bitch.

[Edited on September 23, 2007 at 3:18 PM. Reason : x]

9/23/2007 3:18:00 PM

what was it? thats the one game I'm not watching ahha

9/23/2007 3:18:24 PM

what happened?

9/23/2007 3:18:47 PM

i wanted to bump the steelers thread about it

it was definitely a catch in my opinion

player caught it, got hit, ball comes out, steelers get it, san fran challenges, its ruled incomplete...technically it couldnt be incomplete if it never hit the ground according to fox

[Edited on September 23, 2007 at 3:20 PM. Reason : .]

9/23/2007 3:19:25 PM

wow... it never hit the ground?

9/23/2007 3:21:40 PM

thats what the dumbasses on fox say...when he gets hit it definitely hits the ground though while its in his possession...shoulda been ruled a catch

9/23/2007 3:23:52 PM

it never hit the ground

and he called it incomplete

the ref actually said:

"the second foot barely hit the ground"

BARELY HIT THE GROUND

can there be an investigation into staggeringly bad calls such as this?

suspensions or something?

i mean it was truly amazing to watch and listen to

9/23/2007 3:24:02 PM

worthless without video

9/23/2007 3:25:06 PM

it hit the ground while it was in his possession...shoulda been ruled a complete pass

9/23/2007 3:25:09 PM

wrong thread

[Edited on September 23, 2007 at 3:34 PM. Reason : asdf]

9/23/2007 3:29:50 PM

definently one of the worst calls i've seen in a while

his elbow was definently down and they never said a word about that on fox

[Edited on September 23, 2007 at 3:40 PM. Reason : ridiculous]

9/23/2007 3:37:21 PM

but i could go for interception, because if its incomplete it didnt look like it hit the ground therefore if he didnt catch it, it bounced up to the steelers player for an int

9/23/2007 4:40:25 PM

yeah well the new rule is all it takes for a catch is two feet down, and as mentioned before in the thread the ref said himself that the guy got both feet down. shoulda been a fumble.

9/24/2007 5:18:28 AM

how was it a fumble when he had possession?

9/24/2007 6:44:12 AM

it wouldnt be a fumble since i dont think the ball hit the ground, watch it, he's holding it and it flips up off his elbow right into our hands...im saying it should be an interception if the ref called it an incomplete pass (which he did)

9/24/2007 9:43:56 AM