Correct--a call can be correct or incorrect without me worrying about it or being upset
This call was correct but I wouldn't have complained if it wasn't called either--simple logic.
Refs Strike Again at Michigan
- Thread starter ryoder1
- Start date
This call was correct but I wouldn't have complained if it wasn't called either--simple logic.
He is saying it could have gone either way
Pereira is wrong fairly often as this board often complains about him. His opinion doesn't make something a fact
Sparky ... he was mocking you for saying "intentionally lied." There's no other way to lie, therefore the "intentionally" before it is redundant.
Lando reminds me of Osgood, the guy who in the final scene, linked below, of Some Like It Hot simply refuses to be dissuaded by the clear evidence of his own eyes.
For that matter, this thread should be renamed Lando Strikes Again.
Meanwhile, time is running out on our goal of 20 pages. UCLA kick is at noon tomorrow, so I'm done toying with Lando in less than 19 hours. The clock is ticking.
For that matter, this thread should be renamed Lando Strikes Again.
Meanwhile, time is running out on our goal of 20 pages. UCLA kick is at noon tomorrow, so I'm done toying with Lando in less than 19 hours. The clock is ticking.
"Think" is a key word, and you never do it. Intelligent people often provide "think" before their opinion. Even if they're convinced they're correct. Idiots state things definitively, without a modifier of any sort. He's not ruling on anything - he's giving his opinion ... ergo, "I think" is proper and does not decrease the conviction of what he is saying. Knock it off.
Actually, it's more oval. Technically, they refer to it as an "oblate spheroid." It's actually more pear-shaped than a pure oval.
That one just zoomed over your tiny little noggin. No surprise. You don't understand the implications of your words. This much has been proven over and over again. You're like a child in that respect. And not a bright one.
Fleck stated unequivocally and unambiguously that Bill Carullo, the B1G Coordinator of Officiating, told him "the flag should not have been thrown" during a formal B1G Conference Call to discuss the Onside Kick at the end of the Minny - scUM game. Again, Carullo was speaking in an Official capacity for the B1G Conference. Pea-brain has stated multiple times that he does not believe Carullo said this to Fleck (IOW Peabrain does not believe Fleck [and has stated this as well] and believes Fleck is knowingly and grossly misrepresenting what Carullo said), but he isn't calling Fleck a liar because he didn't use that specific term??? He has stated multiple times that Fleck is grossly misrepresenting the truth (to the tune of 180 degrees according to assmunch as according to him Carullo informed Fleck it was a 100% correct call and flag) as to what Carullo actually said to him, but somehow this is not tantamount to calling Fleck a liar??? This @sshole is either just playing a game or he's severely mentally deficient along with having some form of mental impairment.
Let alone the fact that HandoCommando can't count. Here is Pereira's X Post:
Pereira said "think" twice in that 5-word sentence? Really? LMFAO, along with everything else, he might be the dumbest mf'er to ever troll the board
First of all, he says, "he's not offsides" (referring to Minny player Referee referenced on the call). Here's FOX Sports / Pereira's X-Post on the topic:
So because Pereira refers to the player who the flag was thrown on (rather than the overall play - i.e., "it's"), this means Pereira believes it was a good call??? Huh? WTF? This dude is either putting on an act or a rare form of crazy. LMFAO.
"it's so technical to me, he's not (offside)."
Very definitive. I hadn't listened to the clip. My guess Lumbo hasn't either.
Correct. He's either an extremely bored, lonely troll, or he's legitimately neurodivergent.
Sad part is, he claims to be a graduate of Northwestern's law school (Pritzker) when he can't formulate basic logical arguments. Everything's whacky, extreme and unsupportable. How do you not know that you don't have the acting chops to pull that off? His contributions - his thinking patterns and his expression of thought - are so far off from someone capable of graduating from NW Law that he'd have to be completely oblivious to attempt to make that claim. Or just saying the wildest crap he can because he's in full troll mode. If he was a grad of NW Law, he's suffered brain trauma since and doesn't resemble that prior person.
The only issue with my arguments is you can't accept facts as stated. If you're truly an attorney you aren't (or weren't) very successful.
You're also here all day. I check in occasionally and posted a lot when I do
I'm not the one that has to "interpret" everything because nothing says what I want it to say
Progress. No one has to say what you want them to say to help you know the truth.
Well he is correct that nothing says what he wants it to. In fact, everything says what he doesn't want it to say..... so he just goes into denial. It's really pretty comical when he says stuff like "Pereira never says it's not offsides" when Mike Pereira in his official capacity as the FOX Rules Expert absolutely and unequivocally says the Minnesota player flagged for offsides is "not offsides". His continued denial of proven reality is really concerning - if this isn't an act, he's got serious mental issues.
Nope he is not saying that. He is the expert. Certainly not you. If the call can go either way then does that mean it is both a correct and incorrect call?
No, like almost every call--being called or not is fine. See Ronnie Stanley for example continually getting called for lining up offside. They also let him get away with it sometimes. We all know they're not going to call everything and we (i'd hope) understand why
The reality is--people just like to attack officials. It allows them not to blame their own team for their failures. Refs make far less mistakes than coaches or players.
You can't create what you want their words to mean--words have meaning and anything outside of that is irrelevant
The Big Ten will never admit the call was wrong--never--because it wasn't
You can't create what their words mean.
The Big Ten already agreed the call was wrong in two ways.
1.) Telling PJ Fleck it was wrong
2.) Changing the rule so it never happens again.
That is their admission. Everyone knows it but you. That's what makes these 17 pages so damn funny.
Edit: correction, 18 pages and counting.
Fleck can't speak for the Big Ten
They didn't say "so it never happens again"
Yet again you're proving my point
Not only did they change the Officiating Mechanics in direct response to Fleck's/Minnesota's submission (and told him they were going to do it as part of their Conference Call with Fleck where they also told Fleck "no flag should have been thrown"), but they also used stated in the release that the changes were being made "to ensure" the correct call is consistently made in the future - logic dictates that if their rationale for making the changes is to ensure that it is called correctly in the future that it means it was called incorrectly in the present.
Fleck can most certainly speak to the conversation he had with the Big Ten. This is your most ignorant comment yet.
We make rules to correct errors. This is common sense which now makes sense that you cannot understand.
100% guarantee you have a flat spot on the top of your head though.
That was a non answer.
Pereira and B10 believe wrong call was made. You don't like it because you like officials. All you are doing is semantics and injecting ridiculous interpretive opinions (Fleck misrepresented a B10 statement) to fit your God awful narrative.
Like a little child who doesn't get their way. Time for bedtime.
You check in occasionally? Dude, you are all over this board. You're literally a problem.
Pereira is FOX Sports paid broadcast "Rules Expert" - all he is doing with the use of the terms "I think" followed by his definitive position/opinion on the topic is identifying it as his opinion, acting in his Official capacity as Rules Expert. Chris Petersen already opined that he thought it was a horrid call and the Official made it up out of thin air.... so Pereira isn't saying he agrees..... or feels similarly..... etc.... - he is distinguishing his opinion on the topic in his capacity as "Rules Expert" by using the phrase "I think.....". He is simply trying to set his Official opinion apart from what else is being said by using the phrase "I think". But he is not ambiguous in any way as to what his Official opinion is - i.e., the Minnesota player called offsides on the play "is not offsides". Period..... end of story - can't be much more clear than that.
To be fair, Peirera does also say “I don’t think he’s breaking the plane”
As many have argued and as a logical person understands, the use of the word “think” each time is only Peirera attributing his comment to himself
Yes we all know this except you know who.
I actually don't think Lando's position has to do so much with him being a Michigan apologist/schill/troll although you never know and you do have to wonder given his stance. He/she clearly has this bizarre attachment and infatuation with officiating in that he thinks it is always flawless and always correct. And it never impacts a game at all and every call is correct, no matter the circumstances. I mean I think an official could call a penalty on one team on every play in a game and none on the other team all being blatantly wrong calls and he would side with the officials.
In this particular case and play he wants to spin it into a situation where everyone except him is an emotionally out of control Michigan hater who want to blame officials in a non-sensical way. We are all conspiracy theorists. He is the voice of reason and logic to tell us all that the officials did nothing wrong. Remember he is the smartest guy in the room/on the board.
Here's the problem he has. The actual call on the onsides kick is wrong. The officials may have done a good job the rest of the game although not calling on the field a TD for that last Minny TD and having to go to the booth was weak. However, this onsides kick call was an incorrect call and so much so that...
1) The Fox head rules analyst and a foremost authority on football rules states his opinion on the play and "thinks" as in my opinion is I "think" the player is not offsides. Lando has a problem here because a leading expert from a group/organization that he clearly worships (officials) is saying a call is incorrect. Oh what to do but try to say he doesn't know. Huh?
2) P.J. Fleck spoke with the B10 office and then states publicly that the B10 office said the call was "too tight to flag". Another fact that the call was incorrect. Oh what to do again but say Fleck is misrepresenting or not remembering what the B10 told him about the call and the B10 believes the call is correct. What?? Oh, they never have said the call was correct but according to Lando logic they don't have to despite all this controversy swirling they feel no need to reinforce that the call was "correct". Okay.
3) The B10 implements a rule change following the fall out from this call to help the officials in the future. Why? Because the call was wrong and they don't want this to happen again. According to Lando they just decided to do this on a whim and the call was 100% right. Yet they never state the call is correct despite numerous opportunities to do so.
His rebuttals are clearly desperate and pathetic with no merit but he is too arrogant or stupid to admit he is wrong.
Despite all this evidence he just childishly clings to his uninformed and wrong opinion and as a result we have an almost 20 page thread of his jibberish nonsense.
Yup, that pretty much covers it.
Very disappointing that Lando didn't put in the effort to get this to 20 pages before the deadline of today's kick.
He can share his take on it but he doesn't speak for the conference
We don't make rules to correct errors--we make rules to correct rules. Errors are corrected without rule changes.
It's not a "non answer"
False--the Big ha never said the call was wrong. When the Big Ten says they were wrong publicly let me know--we both know that will never happen
Again, this thread was started to cry about how everyone's against us. It's pathetic.
Look at when i respond and when they respond--then I come back a couple hours later and they immediately respond
I'm never the problem
He quoted what the commissioner said. The commissioner hasn't refuted what was reported. It's true. The commissioner agreed it was a bad call and put precautions in place to prevent such a horrible call again.
