|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1
|
Hall of Famer [24687]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42358
Joined: 7/31/10
|
Whether you agree with the holding on Kupp call or not, the
Feb 13, 2022, 10:56 PM
|
|
really bad call was the offsetting penalty call for "unnecessary roughness after the play" when Kupp got hit in the end zone...
Total BS... He was hit in the chest with forearms and his feet hadn't ever even landed in the end zone at the time. Totally legal play.
Of course, it cancelled out the hold against LA which would have moved them off the goal line.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [25888]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 20597
Joined: 7/31/07
|
Re: Whether you agree with the holding on Kupp call or not, the
Feb 14, 2022, 12:31 AM
|
|
It was definitely a hit to the head area and the holding on Kupp was legit. The holding on the linebacker was BS. I think some of those calls were pay back for the missed offensive face mask that was missed and wound up a TD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11478]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9412
Joined: 10/3/12
|
Re: Whether you agree with the holding on Kupp call or not, the
Feb 14, 2022, 11:25 AM
|
|
The call on the LB was for holding Kupp as well. I'm pretty sure that the one the OP was referencing.
I too thought the roughing penalty was weak when considering how the previous 58 minutes of the game had been called.
Claiming the calls at the end of the game were make-up calls for the facemask is ignoring the missed holding call in the end zone earlier in the game where Ramsey grabbed Higgins to keep Cincinatti from scoring a TD early. I saw several people claim after Higgins' TD that the no-call made up for what should have been a TD for him earlier in the game.
Also any "make-up call" is a sign of terrible officiating because getting two calls wrong instead of just missing one call is a horrible way to try to control the game as an official.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2989]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 7583
Joined: 7/19/01
|
Re:
Feb 14, 2022, 12:53 AM
|
|
I honestly thought Cinn got away with several PI no calls. They were all on top of LA's receivers some of the night, when they were having trouble stopping the Rams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7191]
TigerPulse: 70%
Posts: 20374
Joined: 8/18/06
|
Re: Whether you agree with the holding on Kupp call or not, the
Feb 14, 2022, 7:26 AM
|
|
the... thing is referee's "are human". Sometimes they make good calls ,some times they make bad calls, sometimes they make the right call, sometimes they make the wrong call, sometimes they miss calls all together, sometimes they will call something against the other team to make up for a missed call, which doesn't make it right ,but go back to my opening remarks. "they are human".
Long before instant replay ,and reviewing every play to see if somebody might have inadvertently farted during an excessive touch down celebration, football games, even big games are sometimes determinded by the actions of the referee's.
Sometimes those calls will help your team win a game, sometimes those calls will cost your team the game.
It's called FOOTBALL.
And I for one am sick and tired of people always using the referee's actions as the reason your team lost the game.
You lost the game because the other team scored more points. And the last time I checked, all scoring plays are reviewed ,which was not always the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Whether you agree with the holding on Kupp call or not, the
Feb 14, 2022, 7:45 AM
|
|
But blaming the refs is the Clemson way of life. Every other team has a holding penalty on every play but they never flag it. Clemson hasn't lost a game on its own since 1962. It's always the refs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4796]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 6029
Joined: 12/20/04
|
Re: Whether you agree with the holding on Kupp call or not, the
Feb 14, 2022, 10:03 AM
|
|
If anyone is deaf its U. You have Clemson fans mixed up with the
whining dirt peckers from cooterville.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11478]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9412
Joined: 10/3/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16428]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14909
Joined: 1/26/99
|
SPOT ON
Feb 14, 2022, 12:14 PM
[ in reply to Re: Whether you agree with the holding on Kupp call or not, the ] |
|
Most of the time I just dismiss your consistently negative posts and write them off to you being the resident curmudgeon. But this one, although still negative, is exactly right! Could not agree more. Instant replay is not progress. Ditch it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24687]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42358
Joined: 7/31/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6692]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 6139
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: Whether you agree with the holding on Kupp call or not, the
Feb 14, 2022, 10:05 AM
|
|
That was not holding by that LB. Bad call. Either way, the Bengals deserved to lose imo after those 3 consecutive horrible play calls on 2nd and 1 towards the end there. That deep pass way out of bounds was a killer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11478]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9412
Joined: 10/3/12
|
Re: Whether you agree with the holding on Kupp call or not, the
Feb 14, 2022, 11:29 AM
|
|
That's interesting reasoning because the Rams hardly called a smart offensive play for 1 and a half quarters beginning with the second half of the game.
They continued to do things that hadn't worked all night long until the 4th and 1 handoff to Kupp which led to them deciding to just give him the ball every play the rest of the game unless somebody else happened to pop up wide open on a play by surprise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [65031]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33173
Joined: 12/3/03
|
It did appear that the zebras took on the shape of Mountain
Feb 14, 2022, 11:30 AM
|
|
Goatas there at the end of the game. Whatever it took to get the Rams that go-ahead touchdown, it was going to be done.
That is just an observation from someone who had no dog in the fight, no money wagered, nothing, NADA.
The officials had pretty much stayed out of the game until that last part of that last Rams possession.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24687]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42358
Joined: 7/31/10
|
Yep.***
Feb 14, 2022, 7:09 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
