dabull80 Posted January 29, 2012 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 4,501 Reputation: 93 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/25/2001 Share Posted January 29, 2012 And then the phantom call for Ofensive pass interference - that is not a call that is made by any ref 98 % of the time especially with the game on the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEnglandBull Posted January 29, 2012 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 42,125 Reputation: 8,834 Days Won: 344 Joined: 11/29/2009 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Well if you blow it up and look at from a few different angles you can see "the hand". Man, talk about a shooter on the grassy knoll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted January 29, 2012 Group: Admin Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 97,087 Reputation: 10,858 Days Won: 469 Joined: 05/19/2000 Share Posted January 29, 2012 LOL. No. It wasn't that hard to see. The zoom was provided by ESPN. No one had to do anything. It was on SportsCenter. Curious if you even know which player it was called on, was it the first or second fumble? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEnglandBull Posted January 29, 2012 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 42,125 Reputation: 8,834 Days Won: 344 Joined: 11/29/2009 Share Posted January 29, 2012 I thought the second fumble was advanced forward. That was a sad, sad night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted January 29, 2012 Group: Admin Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 97,087 Reputation: 10,858 Days Won: 469 Joined: 05/19/2000 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Thats the one in which ESPN video clearly showed possession lost by the ball carrier. Brad via BullPhone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitting_BULL Posted January 29, 2012 Group: Bull Backers Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 2,527 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/12/2002 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Yeah, it very easy to see. Although, apparently not for the replay official? The thing that really sucked, it's not up to the replay official to determine a player's intention. They are just supposed to see if there is indisputable evidence to over turn the call, which there was NOT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmhatter Posted January 30, 2012 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 8,174 Reputation: 268 Days Won: 6 Joined: 09/02/2007 Share Posted January 30, 2012 there are a lot of people still emotionally invested in leavitt... the reason they keep writing about him is because so many of you keep reading it. He doesn't care about Leavitt at all... He knows it fires you guys up and you read it, he wins... everytime. And there are some that defend him against the flagrant attacks that weasels like McMurphy and Fennelly launch because, well, they can launch them and hide behind "journalism" or "editorial" nature of the comments. If Fennelly wanted more than a dozen readers, he'd actually write about something that people care about, not something that extends his image as a idiotic and uncreative writer - and a basher of USF. No one reads him for any real information on Leavitt - there is plenty of that on the internet, you should check it out. Everyone knows that Fennelly, like McMurphy is jaded (and many more as you'd like to say) and wish to perpetuate their personal grudges and destroy what they can of the guy. If you really think he doesn't care about Leavitt still, you're only fooling yourself. Why would a mature man include Leavitt in a story about the Bucs new head coach? I know you're a good pal with the the party involved. It'd be like me writing stories about every murderer being a liar and pulling Joel Miller in as the preeminent liar. Or the horrors of purse thieving and bringing in his dad as the undisputed ace of purse thieving. You know as well as I do that people here wouldn't stand for that. Why do you and others stand for Fennelly's constant knocks on Leavitt and USF? Because it makes your pal look better? Good answer I guess. Greg has pretty much proven that if you report facts and information and not drummed up vitriol, you can get a pretty good following. Fennelly continuing on Leavitt is not the way a bright man would go. If Fennelly keeps it up, he loses his last few readers. I could actually lose a few dozen here. What are you talking about? I don't think I've ever even commented about Fennelly, positively or negatively... and how does this article make Joel look better? Frankly I don't really care anymore if someone attacks Joel. I'm not going to read into this garbage and let it fire me up. If you are REALLY upset with Fennelly for writing this then I really don't know what to tell you. Its not that big of a deal. Leavitt is clearly doing just fine. at the end of the day who really cares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beastiebull Posted January 30, 2012 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 3,809 Reputation: 82 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/26/2001 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Costliest loss in the history of this program and probably a big part of why we are in the very unenviable position we are in now. We did have several playmakers on that team though as opposed to the zero we have now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitting_BULL Posted January 30, 2012 Group: Bull Backers Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 2,527 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/12/2002 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Costliest loss in the history of this program and probably a big part of why we are in the very unenviable position we are in now. We did have several playmakers on that team though as opposed to the zero we have now. + 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmhatter Posted January 30, 2012 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 8,174 Reputation: 268 Days Won: 6 Joined: 09/02/2007 Share Posted January 30, 2012 loss to RU was crushing. We shoulda won that game. Refs were garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.