Refs Strike Again at Michigan

[m.knox]

They didn't. Fleck claims they did

They admitted it AND acted on it.

 

[PurposePitch]

How do you think that is stupid?
How often is a rule changed due to a missed call? They correct the error jot the rule

I don't think it's stupid. I know it's stupid.

I know it's stupid because the procedural rule change happened exactly due to the fact that the call was messed up. It's literally the opposite of what you claimed. And this has been explained to you many times already, and you're still on here stating the opposite of reality.

You don't see that a correct call was made, and then suddenly say "hey, as a result of this correct call being made, we're going change the longstanding procedure and we're going to bring in another set of eyes to watch for this call from now on. The procedure worked so well, we're going to change it!"

No, instead, if you're a normal, functioning human being (sorry to exclude you, Lando), you see that a mistake in applying the rule was made, and you say to yourself "how do we avoid this mistake being made again?" And maybe you say "hey, we could bring a second set of official's eyes down here and that would help avoid the mistake in the future." BECAUSE IT WAS A FRIGGIN MISTAKE. At which point, the Village Idiot (or as it will now be known, the LandoComando, comes in and says "you changed the procedure because it was a correct call!"

 

[ryoder1]

As you always do, you're conflating issues. You've attached the "Big Ten is rigging things for OSU and Mich" line to whether or not this particular call was the correct call.

Since you are so adamant that there isn't any rigging going on, you feel the need to poo-poo every claim that you think could somehow give that claim of rigging credence.

That's why you can't give in and admit that the video evidence clearly doesn't support a finding of offsides ... you see the video ... you see the stills ... you read and hear everyone that watched the video saying that wasn't offsides ... and, yet, there you are ... saying, "that's offsides."

Because you think admitting it wasn't offsides means you're conceding there's a pro-Michigan conspiracy. And you can't have that. You essentially turn yourself into Shaggy in the "Wasn't Me" song.

And then it gets worse, because we then have the conference stepping in and, in an unprecedented manner, letting everyone know that they admit the call was messed up.

So now you have to concoct yet another nonsensical position ... that if the league didn't utter the words "the call was wrong," they're not admitting the call was wrong.

You feel like you're trapped, and this is the only thing you can do ...

-------

But here's the thing ... you could, instead, just admit what the video and the subsequent words and actions of interested parties clearly tell you ... and that would be that the call was wrong.

And you can also still claim that OSU and UM are not the beneficiaries of some officiating plot.

It can happen. The two things aren't tied together. You CAN be reasonable. But you chose to be an unbearably obstinate troll, instead.

As I've said, this isn't the first time this kind of thing has happened. You have this bigger picture issue and you have a stance on it. Then subsequent information and/or actions come to light, and you simply can't look at them objectively, because now you feel like everything related to that bigger picture issue needs to be exactly one way, or you lose with regard to your bigger picture stance. For example, if you announced that dogs are the nicest creatures on the planet ... rather than deal with information about dogs being not so nice in certain situations like a normal human and just say "yeah, but they're still, overall, the nicest creatures," you'd feel compelled to fight with that person giving those anecdotes, and claim that the dog wasn't mean in that situation. There's just absolutely no rationality in your thought patterns.

You go full Shaggy ... and you just do it over and over again, hoping you'll wear everyone out, and if everyone stops correcting you, you think that means you won.

You haven't.

A rules expert, Mike Pereia, says he was not offsides. If you asked him do you believe he was offsides he would say "no" every day of the week and twice on Sundays. Don't hide behind semantics. You are desperate and pathetic. If Mike was officiating then no flag thrown. He is the foremost rules expert. Bad call end of story.

 

[knickslions]

10 pages and still going lol

 

[m.knox]

10 pages and still going lol

I'm thinking we can easily get this to 20.

 

[m.knox]

 

[knickslions]

I'm thinking we can easily get this to 20.

lol Lando will keep going if he has posts to respond to. This will be West Virginia all over again

 

[GSPMax]

You keep saying that but it's not on Amy national release

Bull sheet. Hint, more than espn covers sports.

 

[ryoder1]

10 pages and still going lol

Entertainment! It will be hilarious to have this go all the way into the off season and longer. Just keep it at the top with everyone chiming in against Lando.

I just thought of this....I would bet Lando thinks...check that...knows for sure without one iota of doubt that Penix scored. I should start a new thread on that and see how many pages we can get. 4 years later! LOL!

Also remember that horrific call against the Saints vs Rams in the playoff game about 5 years ago? It was a no call of PI and it was about as bad a no call in the history of the game. I wanted the Rams to win and was even embarrassed by it. I can't remember the specifics but it was a very crucial call that prevented the Saints from winning. Maybe they would have run out the clock or chip shot FG, something like that. Something tells me Lando says it was the correct call and had no bearing on the outcome. LOL.

 

[PSUSignore]

 

[PurposePitch]

A rules expert, Mike Pereia, says he was not offsides. If you asked him do you believe he was offsides he would say "no" every day of the week and twice on Sundays. Don't hide behind semantics. You are desperate and pathetic. If Mike was officiating then no flag thrown. He is the foremost rules expert. Bad call end of story.

You’re replying to the wrong guy.

 

[GSPMax]

Question for posters other than mando. Even if mando does find the link that has a big conference official referencing the specific time in the specific game which caused the protocol change, he will not post it.
Should I provide the link? Will that humiliate him enough so he will stfu?
I think push back on his assholery should continue. With no pushback he will continue with his idiocy. He has demonstated that.

 

[GSPMax]

You keep saying that but it's not on Amy national release

Has Amy ever released anything nationally?

 

[bdgan]

And this photo proves the call was right. What are you looking at--their feet?

What are you looking at? This photo shows the ball had moved forward by 1/2 yard and the guy who was called offsides had his feet a foot behind the 35 yard line and his hand even with the plane of the 35 yard line.

This is your proof?

 

[LandoComando]

They admitted it AND acted on it.

Provide the link of them admitting it--it doesn't exist

 

[LandoComando]

Bull sheet. Hint, more than espn covers sports.

Correct--more than ESPN--none of the national ones have anything more

 

[LandoComando]

lol Lando will keep going if he has posts to respond to. This will be West Virginia all over again

I'm fine with that--I don't know why anyone thinks this bothers me
I enjoy arguing

 

[LandoComando]

Question for posters other than mando. Even if mando does find the link that has a big conference official referencing the specific time in the specific game which caused the protocol change, he will not post it.
Should I provide the link? Will that humiliate him enough so he will stfu?
I think push back on his assholery should continue. With no pushback he will continue with his idiocy. He has demonstated that.

How is that humiliating? If you have it I'd gladly admit I was wrong and then continue to argue about the actual issue
If they did say something I can't wait to see how it help my argument

 

[GSPMax]

Correct--more than ESPN--none of the national ones have anything more

You are wrong. A national outlet has a direct quote from a big conference official about the protocol change after this game. You either found it and are too humiliated to post it or can't find it and won't admit your poor research skills.

 

[GSPMax]

How is that humiliating? If you have it I'd gladly admit I was wrong and then continue to argue about the actual issue
If they did say something I can't wait to see how it help my argument

You lost this argument. Find the quote and use it for your argument. LMAO.

 

[m.knox]

Provide the link of them admitting it--it doesn't exist

The Big Ten reviewed the call. Their comments on the call are linked as well as the actions they took so bad calls like that don't happen again.

And yes, you are humiliating yourself. Repeatedly.

Big Ten makes officiating change following controversial onside kick penalty in Gophers' loss to Michigan​

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ot...-against-michigan-head-coach-says/ar-AA1rub21

During the FOX broadcast of Saturday's game, rules analyst Mike Pereira said he didn't think Kingsbury was offsides. The play was not reviewable and could not be challenged.

The Big Ten later admitted that there was an officiating mistake on the play, saying it was "too tight" to throw a flag in that situation.

The conference also confirmed in a statement that it had received immediate approval for an officiating alignment change on onside kicks. Now, the head line judge and line judge will need to be positioned on the 35-yard line of the kicking team — meaning there will be two views down the line.

 

[m.knox]

I'm fine with that--I don't know why anyone thinks this bothers me
I enjoy arguing

You enjoy losing an argument. That much is evident.