T&C
-
Posts
5,989 -
Joined
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by T&C
-
-
5 minutes ago, Buffalo619 said:
I have not been able to access buff news articles for a couple of years ever since they implemented the pay wall...
Maybe they just don't like you... no idea why you can't other than that.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Buffalo619 said:
Buff news is protected by a pay wall.
I don’t have access to the article. The title implies it’s a bills issue, obviously for clicks.
Shows up on my phone just fine and I'm not paying either. You can do it.
-
2
-
-
Not sure where to put this... same year I was born, and I'm here typing this. Bike helmets? Meh.
-
1
-
-
-
Went better than expected... happy mofo here..
-
2
-
-
46 minutes ago, LewPort71 said:
Bon Scott ?
I think he asked another question before the ongoing one was answered... I guess. Last one was Arthur Brown next to Jimi.
-
Wow... first I heard of it was this very thread. RIP man.
-
6 hours ago, PastaJoe said:
Alice Cooper?
You weren't that far off.... he was friends with him.
-
He was in Carl Palmer's ELP Legacy tour last year, played the priest in the Who's Tommy movie, is friends with Alice Cooper, inspired the Kiss makeup, etc... the guy has been around and I'm actually surprised that he still Is around. I'll post his Wiki, a pretty cool read. The guy next to Jimi is:
-
Clue: He is one of the pioneers of shock rock.
-
Alice is incorrect.
-
All incorrect... but yeah, he Does look a lot like Cat Stevens.
-
Who is next to Jimi?
-
The bottom line is that we should be playing at KC this upcoming weekend.
Over and out.
-
15 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
You mean the video you put up where the specialist on NFL rules coverage agreed with the ruling? Yeah I saw it, and I saw it live on TV too.
I agree the player gave himself up, and have no issue with the refs making that determination based on the series of events. I have seen the refs make other "he gave himself up" rulings before too in various situations.
The "specialist" was wrong as *****... I'm good with you and I see your angle, so keep on keeping on.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:
When you come into a thread with no knowledge of relevant rules, understanding of the events, declare it a non-issue, and tell us all that we're crazy idiots for even discussing the topic your odds of a swift rebuke increase dramatically.
Sometime down the road when a huge return gets called back because a ref circumvented the rule book in favor of "common sense" to determine a runner gave himself prior to the return I expect to see an equally fervent stand on your part in defense of a refs right to arbitrary bull####. There are rules for a reason. I don't see how anyone who follows the game wouldn't be alarmed by the precedent just set.
He strikes me as someone who wants to challenge you to a game of Battleship... but, you have to wear a mirror on your forehead.
-
17 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
Not a TD. Nothing anyone can say to me will change that stance. All good.
We lost, but not because of this play IMO. We lost because of other terrible gaffes by the refs, especially in OT. Im done discussing this non issue. Go Bills.
I know what the safe signal is. I also know its VERY CLEAR that the player was not returning the kick, and therefore was determined to give himself up. Case closed. Move on.
Refs did screw us later in the game multiple times. Complain about that and I am all on board. Complaining about this weak play is silly to me.
Did you watch the video I put up... starting at 5:10?
If not I'm pretty sure you are either hard headed or don't read your quotes. Let us know.
-
6 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
Except you are wrong. The returner signaled NO RETURN prior to giving the ball up. He established there would be NO RUN BACK via signal and gestured to the ref to give him the ball. There were no players within the immediate vicinity of him. The refs have the ability to make the determination if the player had chosen to give themself up, which they clearly did and was accurate. Refs have the ability to rule that a player has chosen to give themselves up versus being touched down by contact.
It was absolutely the correct call to remove the TD. Its not the first time this season a player was ruled to have "given himself up" either.
Except the fact refs have the ability to make that determination, and like many rules, its often a judgement call.
Here is what you and others are missing...refs are allowed to make a judgement call on whether a runner has given himself up. He signaled no return and tried to hand the ball to the ref. Pretty clear as day that he gave himself up, and refs concurred. Case closed.
You are completely wrong on this... look up rule 7 section 2 article 1 in the NFL rule book. Notice the word "and".
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
WOW lmao...16 pages on a topic thats a non-topic?
Come on, no one can really be arguing that we should have been given the TD there right? I mean its clear he gave himself up, whining about its just being poor sports about the loss.
ONE MILLION PERCENT no one would be claiming that was a TD had a Bills player been the one receiving and did that. Anyone who claims they would still see it as a TD for the kicking team had the Bills been receiving that kick and that happened is lying.
Disagree. Did you watch the video I put up? Might have slipped to the last page depending on settings I suppose. Go to 5:15 if you are interested.
-
13 minutes ago, KOKBILLS said:
Exactly...That's the rule...SCORING play...It was a scoring play...By rule there is only one way it can be reversed and that is by replay...
Folks can say what they want about the spirit of the blah, blah, blah...They truth is there are a million different ways for NFL players to make boneheaded mistakes that cost their team TD's...This was one of the million...The difference in this one is they quite literally threw away the rule book in MULTIPLE ways to make a feel good (for the Texans) call...
Did it cost the Bills the game? Nope...Was it the wrong call...Absolutely, by the rule book it was...And the time for "common sense" to prevail was not last Saturday...It was this coming year at the Owners meetings...Period..End of story...?
100% disagree. Had that been called correctly it would have shut up the crowd and given us major momentum in the 2nd half.
Also, the 2nd half as we all watched it, would not have happened as it did... not one play, none of it.
We should be playing the Chiefs this weekend, but instead a whole year worth of work went down the ***** drain because the NFL ***** this up royally.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Bermuda Triangle said:
"Some sort of technicality" = NFL Rule Book.
If it's going to be ignored, or set aside, for "common sense" ( "NFL officials" and "common sense" are an oxymoron), then why have a Rule Book at all?
Imagine a game of chess, which football basically is, where any piece can move like the queen.
-
1
-
-
Not sure if this has been posted... skip to 5:10:
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, GaryPinC said:
A couple points I feel worth considering:
During live play is the official considering a neutral part of the field of play?
If so, was the play really some kind of forward pass if there was no passing target anywhere near?
Also, is a forward fumble/pass entirely inside the end zone possible? The endzone has no yardage markers and is a special area of the playing field where the goalline and sidelines are the most important aspects. Is the ball and possession inside or outside of the EZ is how it's treated.
Or, how can there be a line of scrimmage when there isn't one... once the returner touches the ball.
-
Anyone know when the "league" will comment on this? We clearly were *****, no doubt about it.
They tried to sweep it under the carpet but when do they address things like this, Tuesday maybe?
-
2
-
Bills fan claims huge memory loss after stadium incident.
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Maybe they looked at your browsing history and decided they didn't want any Dolly Little video's showing up on their website.