Posted on 01/11/2005 6:18:33 PM PST by malakhi
| Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. |
After a nine month hiatus, The Neverending Story, the granddaddy of daily threads, has returned to Free Republic. Originally begun on March 24, 2001, as a religious discussion thread, the NES evolved over time into a daily thread spanning a wide variety of topics. The new and improved Neverending Story will feature conversation on religion, politics, culture, current events, business, sports, family, hobbies, general fellowship and more. We welcome you to hang your hat in our little corner of FR. We ask you to abide by the FR posting rules and, even in the midst of serious debate, to keep the discussion friendly and respectful. Those who wish to "duke it out" are asked to take it over to the Smoky Backroom. I placed this thread in "General/Chat" for a reason, so play nice and have fun! :o)
In a small way I'm glad the Patriots lost by more than 7 points. The "interference" call against Asante Samuel was terrible, wrong, horseshit! There was interference but it was on Ashlie Lelie. Who knows what would have happened without that call???
In any event the Broncos played a smart game and the Patriots played poorly. Having said that I don't think the Broncos are a very good team. They can't expect another team and the officials to do all they can to see the Broncos win.
I just watched the incredible finish of the Colts - Steelers game. You get your wish to have a home game but, frankly, I think you'll get crushed.
Good luck. Dave will be insufferable if the Steelers go all the way. :-)
BTW - the officials made a couple of lousy calls against the Steelers today. It's almost like they were rooting for the home team just like they did in Denver. :-)
dang...didn't expect sour grapes from you.
Its my opinion the Pats were beaten by the better team. The Patriots moved the ball well but couldn't finish drives. That's the style of defense Bronco fans have witnessed and become accustomed to this season. Believe it or not there is a reason for the 14-3 record (including two convincing wins vs the Pats). It's obvious to me and I would like to think obvious to others as well that the Pats weren't the same "great" team this year that they have been in the previous four.
As far as the interference call is concerned, a no-call was probably in order. I've seen worse. Conversley I thought the Pats #25 got away with interference TWICE in the 2nd half.
I thought Jerome Bettis said it best after the game that both Denver and Pittsburgh are good teams that have been flying under the radar. The Steelers win was very impressive. On the road vs a great team. I thought the Steelers were the better team in their game as well which was surprising. I just hope they're not able do it two weeks in a row. Wouldn't surprise me tho. I do like the fact that the Broncos get the additonal home game. They lost in first round at Indy the past two years so something different is preferable. :-)
That was a terrible call on the long haired dude. Probably the worse replay effort I've seen all season. So bad in fact that I thought it could be a huge Dungy sympathy call. It bothers me that he couldn't see what the rest of America was looking at.
Allow me to repeat myself :
"Well----the Patriots didn't deserve to win the game. You have to give credit to the Broncos for an excellent game plan. When their pressure didn't cause Patriot errors the Patriots did it for them. :-("
That said, I see Pittsburg BIG!
We'll see. Hey did you know Shanahan is 8-3 vs Belichek?
No kidding. That was a totally bogus call. I was also amazed at the non-call when the entire Colts defensive line jumped offside. In that situation, either the offense flinched or the defense violated the neutral zone and were heading "unabated" to the QB. You can't just say "nothing happened."
I have very little respect for the NFC and figure this week's game to be the true test. It should be a good one.
SD
To the Pats credit they are blaming themselves for the loss. Not pointing fingers at each other or at the officials. Even Asante Samuel says "I have to figure out what I did wrong and learn from it". (Belichick brainwashing at work?)
Did you notice Peyton Manning complaining about "protection problems" as a big reason for his problems? You don't get this kind of stuff from Brady.
I can't tell you how happy I was to see Vanderchoke miss that field goal at the end. He did the same thing against the Pats a few years ago after he had been quoted as saying (paraphrase) "The Pats aren't that good".
I really don't care who wins the AFC championship but I do care who wins the SuperBowl. Whichever of you guys loses don't injure any key players on the other team. O.K.?
Probably so, but i can't help thinking if it were the other way around we'd get a 60 minute special about it on cbs. lol.
I find it ironic that Patriots fans would be sqawking about an officials' call when their little "dynasty" got started on a snowy night in foxboro with a call that resulted in instituting the new "tuck" rule. :-)
PITTSBURGH (AP) -- Talk about a heart-stopping game between the Pittsburgh Steelers and Indianapolis Colts.
Terry O'Neill, 50, of Pittsburgh, was watching the game at a bar and had a heart attack seconds after Jerome Bettis fumbled trying to score from the 2-yard line late in the fourth quarter. Quarterback Ben Roethlisberger prevented the Colts' Nick Harper from returning the recovered ball for a touchdown and the Steelers hung on for a 21-18 win.
O'Neill said Bettis is his hero.
"I wasn't upset that the Steelers might lose," he told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. "I was upset because I didn't want to see him end his career like that. A guy like that deserves better. I guess it was a little too much for me to handle."
O'Neill, who was recovering at a hospital, credits two firefighters with saving him.
"The Steelers won the game and I'm still alive, so I guess I'm doing pretty good," he said.
He will have a pacemaker implanted to control an irregular heartbeat and he was prescribed medication to deal with the hypertension.
While he would like to go to the bar Sunday for the game against the Denver Broncos to thank the guys who saved him, O'Neill said, "I guess I should probably take it easy and watch the game at home."
When a Team A player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his hand starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.[1]
[1] Official Rules of the NFL, Rule 3, Section 21, Article 2, Note 2
FYI the rule was written in 1999 because there had been too many instances where it was unclear whether the Quarterback had fumbled or thrown an incomplete pass. This rule was intended to take the officials "judgement" out of the equation.
The NFL has "reconsidered" this rule and has decided to keep it on the books.
Any more false stories you wish to bring up?
(I have had the same type of argument with misguided historians on Religious threads who claim such things as "Martin Luther invented Sola Scriptura".) I usually suggest they do some research before making dumb statements.
As an aside, arent you glad I provided occasion for you to bitch slap me. I bet it felt good. :-)
It's a dumb rule.
SD
But after reviewing replays, Coleman changed his mind and ruled an incomplete pass, determining that Brady's arm was moving forward when he was hit by Woodson.
Also, proove that the rule was written in 1999 and I'll make all necessary apologies and lick your boots.
Look here.
And here.
You could also buy the 2005 NFL Official Rules but I doubt you'd be willing to pay the price. Besides, you can trust the Old Geezer. The rule is unchanged.
If Woodson hadn't hit Bradys arm it would have been a fumble. He did hit his arm so it was an incomplete forward pass. Get over it!
ok I'm sincerely sorry for my lack of research. I'll try getting over it. Actually, I'm over it now. Just remembered how much I hate the Raiders. :-)
There was a great deal of controversy and second guessing so the rule was written to, as far as possible, take a judgement call away from the official.
Whether you like the rule or not is of little importance. The hierarchy, in their wisdom and exercising their authority, has judged it an appropriate rule.
Also, despite the efforts of those who wish to rewrite history, the "tuck rule" has been consistently enforced since 1999. It was not "new" with the Patriots/Raiders playoff game.
In a similar play in the second game of the season, the Patriots recovered an apparent fumble by Vinny Testaverde of the New York Jets but it was ruled an incomplete pass after being reviewed. The Jets went on to win 10-3.
Don't believe me? Then look here.
Better yet, trust the old man when he tells you something.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.