1. Pereira didn't say it was wrong
2. Fleck's quote means nothing
3. A rule change isn't for a missed call--it's to correct a bad rule
Name one rule change that ever happened because a ref missed a call--just one
Refs Strike Again at Michigan
- Thread starter ryoder1
- Start date
2. Fleck's quote means nothing
3. A rule change isn't for a missed call--it's to correct a bad rule
Name one rule change that ever happened because a ref missed a call--just one
You believe the quote someone. That doesn't make it an exact quote
There's no reason to correct it--their statement corrected it.
Doesn't have to be a quote. It's the meaning that matters. The meaning was not corrected. The meaning stands. The Big Ten recognizes it as a bad call. Rightfully so.
It does have to be a quote. The meaning doesn't need to be corrected--again, they released a statement which is the only thing that is relevant.
No it doesn't have to be a quote. Only you believe that which makes you foolish. The Big Ten's words and actions spell it out for you. You are just too thick to admit it. It was a bad call.
Keep spinning.
Lando steps up on the porch and starts ringing his crush's doorbell. She says "I'm not interested." He keeps ringing the doorbell, nonstop, for hours ... and then days. Eventually she screams "I'm calling the police."
When the police come and question him, he states "she never said 'go away' ... words have meaning and if she didn't want me here, she would have said 'go away'."
Lando now posts from jail, convinced of his innocence.
Two days ago, you posted nonstop the entire day. Never took a break. There wasn't more than 20 minutes between your posts the entirety of the day. You often post like that. Others pop in occasionally and make a post or two. Maybe they're here for an hour or so stretch making posts and responding to others. You're often on here, literally, nonstop, from the time you wake up, until you fall asleep ... posting a response as soon as someone posts something, meaning you're sitting here, waiting ... and then pouncing.
Bad rules result in bad calls. Correct the rule to get better calls.
This protocol was changed because of this bad call.
Geez.
It does need to be a quote. The actions say nothing about it being a bad call--you just want it to mean that.
No it doesn't need to be a quote to appease you. You are nothing. The Big Ten has acknowledged it was a bad call and acted accordingly. It's a fact. They did both of those things. They acknowledged it, and they acted on it. Those are the facts.
Yes.
He meant:
Said a hip-hop, the hippie to the hippie
The hip, hip-a-hop and you don't stop rockin'
To the bang, bang the boogie, say up jump the boogie
To the rhythm of the boogie, the beat
Right, @LandoComando?
This thread was started to highlight an egregious officiating mistake. You have no idea what the B10 said. Are you in their offices, on their emails, in every text thread? It's so pathetic you keep this thread going. You are wrong and have no clue. That is pathetic.
In the Georgia-Auburn game, their "expert official" said "I think it was a touchdown and I say think because I'm not sure"
Exactly--thank you. Same thing with Pereira. When they know they are definitive with their statements.
Exactly--thank you. Same thing with Pereira. When they know they are definitive with their statements.
That has to do with the Georgia vs. Auburn game. Has absolutely nothing to do with what happened a week ago.
Totally meaningless, albeit, it is funny watching you become more and more desperate to try to prove your perspective is correct to over a dozen people who not you are barking up a tree.
Not at all. Just pointing out how it's obvious when someone says think in that scenario it means they're not sure
Absolutely nothing to do with last week. A total non sequitur. A total reach because your argument has been destroyed for 8 days and counting, and by several people.
Has everything to do with it. It's exactly what think means. No one has even put a small dent in my argument let alone destroyed it
Nothing at all. You are cherry picking from an entirely different situation and attempting to apply it to what happened last week. Pure desperation.
Hate to break it to you, but you don't have an argument. You have a vague assertion that the offside call was right even though the preponderance of evidence suggests otherwise. You have not presented any argument other than the call was made. Yes the call was made. And it is the wrong call.
This is where you are spinning round and round we go.
Sooooo, your position has clearly been it is "the correct call". A no doubter. But wait....if and this is a ridiculous if, to get to the point here, Pereira was saying "I think" because he was unsure then that certainly proves the call was not definitely correct. If it was definitely correct he would not use the "I think" language that you are desperately trying to use to your advantage. He also would not use that language to state the exact opposite position you so dearly hold on to.
So what do we have here? One of the foremost rules experts who studied the play and concluded the player was not offsides.
In your world if he actually is saying "I am not sure" (which he is not) then he is NOT saying the call is definitely correct. Pereira knows more than Lando.
It's unfortunate when those kinds of things get twisted in your little argument and you get lost.
Not cherrypicking. Using reality to help you.
I've won the argument as soon as you Ll resorted to childish attack. You have nothing other than opinions while ignoring the facts. I'm not the desperate one.
Yes it was the correct call
Yes Periera said I think because he's not sure. Thank you. You're all claiming he said it was wrong which he didn't.
I never said Periera agreed with me.
You are so desperate and pathetic it is laughable. Like a little boy trying to punch his older brother but can't reach his body.
I'm not the desperate one. You all bring the discussion into other threads because you incorrectly believe I'm wrong for once. That's desperate
Who brings this topic up in other threads?
The reason is you all INCORRECTLY believe I'm wrong and are DESPERATE to finally prove me wrong. The Big Ten statement not saying there was an error was the end of this. I won.
He knows he's wrong ... all he wants is attention. Don't give it to him. He'll say whatever he can to try to draw attention to himself, even if that attention is only negative.
The reality is that your comment is a non sequitur. Nothing to do with anything. There is no childish attack, just facts. We know you hate facts, and you are the desperate one.
The Big Ten PROVED there was an error by changing the rule so it never happens again. You've lost.
Oh there's been plenty of childish attacks but that's all you're capable of doing
Desperate for right--the Big Ten's statement won this battle for me and you know it that's why you're "interpreting" everything. Poorly interpreting things.
False--a rule change is fixing a rule not a call--for the 100th time.
If a rule change ever happens because of a bad call, which it never has, that would be an overreaction. Just get the call right
The preponderance of evidence supports my argument. Your opinion does not support yours.
True. If the Big Ten really believed it was the right call, they would have said such and not changed the rule.
The rule change isn't about a bad call--it's about a bad rule
You're wrong but you usually are
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
FB Recruiting Six Penn State commits ranked in latest Rivals250- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley
-
-
-
Basketball Penn State Basketball receiving votes in latest AP Top 25 poll- Latest: NittanyFrank
-