PDA

View Full Version : Circumstantial proof the NFL is fixed?


Hayeksheroes
09-27-2011, 11:59 AM
If you watched the Bears Packers game, you saw the holding call on the punt return. The problem is that the player called for the holding was not even on the field. The penalty was on number 29. The problem is that the bears don't have a number 29 on their roster. They do have a 92 if the referee was dyslexic. He's a DT and is not on special teams.

The Las Vegas spread was +4 Packers. The punt return would have left the Bears 3 points out 27-24, beating the spread.

You can decide. I think an investigation is on order. I know it won't happen.

Baltimore Ravens Fan
09-27-2011, 12:09 PM
Take off your tin-foil hat and realize referees make mistakes, the NFL is not fixed.

BIGNASTY91
09-27-2011, 12:31 PM
Even aside from the number mistake, when you watch the replay there was not even a bear player within hands reach of the packers??:noidea: Kinda makes you wonder:tap::tap:

truesteelerfan
09-27-2011, 12:37 PM
Really?

Fire Arians
09-27-2011, 12:47 PM
no its probably because the nfl is hiring referees that are all 70+ years old and their eyesight is probably failing them, and they are big candidates for alzheimers

MasterOfPuppets
09-27-2011, 12:57 PM
and why again is this in the STEELERS section ? :huh:

tanda10506
09-27-2011, 01:11 PM
I agree the refs age is ridiculous, their eye sight and overall awareness is definetly going down hill at that age. I think its possible for games to be "fixed" or attempted to be fixed, but the NFL as a whole, I dont think so. The refs also have their favorites and I am sure goodell puts his two cents in during ref meetings too.

Steelersfan87
09-27-2011, 01:32 PM
Are you insane? The referee clearly says "21", not 29. And just for good measure, #21 walks in front of the referee right after he says it.

Watch the replay: http://www.nfl.com/videos/chicago-bears/09000d5d8228f7c4/The-punt-return-that-never-was

It's hard to see, but #21 flashes on the screen at the 1-2 second mark, and you can see he's clearly gotten beat by the man he's responsible for, and he tugs at the guy's jersey. You can actually see the player's shoulder tip due to the hold.

MasterOfPuppets
09-27-2011, 01:43 PM
:buttkick: :toofunny:

http://cdn.slashgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/debunked-300x300.jpg

FanSince72
09-27-2011, 01:51 PM
Now wait a minute...Hayeksheroes might be onto something...

It could very well be that the refs have conspired to drug Mendy's Gatorade and THAT would explain his indecisiveness.

I'm going to go to the kitchen for some Reynold's Wrap and think about this!

davidtrout
09-27-2011, 02:07 PM
Holy hell! Is everyone here a teenager? Failing eyesight? Dementia? WTF are you talking about? Most officials are in their 40s or 50s, I can personally assure you that the eyes and mind still work at that age. LOL

I've long thought that the reason NFL officiating seems to be inferior to other professional sports is because it's a part time gig. If you want professionals, you have to make it a profession! These guys aren't depending on the job for their livelihood. It needs to be year round, they need to be paid a salary that befits the influence they have on the sport, and they need to be held to a much higher standard. I don't believe any cheating is going on, nor do I believe it would be possible to "fix" an NFL game with the way each game is scrutinized. I just think it could be a lot better.

FanSince72
09-27-2011, 03:17 PM
Holy hell! Is everyone here a teenager? Failing eyesight? Dementia? WTF are you talking about? Most officials are in their 40s or 50s, I can personally assure you that the eyes and mind still work at that age. LOL

I've long thought that the reason NFL officiating seems to be inferior to other professional sports is because it's a part time gig. If you want professionals, you have to make it a profession! These guys aren't depending on the job for their livelihood. It needs to be year round, they need to be paid a salary that befits the influence they have on the sport, and they need to be held to a much higher standard. I don't believe any cheating is going on, nor do I believe it would be possible to "fix" an NFL game with the way each game is scrutinized. I just think it could be a lot better.

You're Damned Right!

I'm 54 and I just had someone read me what you just wrote and I agree with you!

davidtrout
09-27-2011, 03:27 PM
You're Damned Right!

I'm 54 and I just had someone read me what you just wrote and I agree with you!

I was able to read your post once I found my binoculars, but my 46 year old brain is just too far gone to remember what my response was going to be.:old:

MACH1
09-27-2011, 03:42 PM
http://iowacaucus.com/files/2011/08/tinfoilhatarea.jpg

solardave
09-27-2011, 03:58 PM
You're Damned Right!

I'm 54 and I just had someone read me what you just wrote and I agree with you!

Hell I'm 56 and this year I applied for a job as an NFL ref. They turned me down, said I was to young.:flap:

Hayeksheroes
09-27-2011, 10:29 PM
Are you insane? The referee clearly says "21", not 29. And just for good measure, #21 walks in front of the referee right after he says it.

Watch the replay: http://www.nfl.com/videos/chicago-bears/09000d5d8228f7c4/The-punt-return-that-never-was

It's hard to see, but #21 flashes on the screen at the 1-2 second mark, and you can see he's clearly gotten beat by the man he's responsible for, and he tugs at the guy's jersey. You can actually see the player's shoulder tip due to the hold.

Yes, you are right. However, Joe Buck said 29. My friend said that he lost his bet because the punt was called back. The spread was 4. I started to get suspicious.
It was a bad call. Number 21 was 30 yards away. The ref threw the flag as Knox caught the ball. The "holding" would have had no impact on the play's outcome.

What I really don't understand is why the Packers were so tricked on the play. Usually the punter will tell the team where he's going to kick it. Unless the Packers don't know their right from their left. That may be the case in Greenbay. If so, how did the Steelers lose in the Super Bowl last year.

No, tin foil hats, but you know, we've got to keep them honest and that was a bad call.

tony hipchest
09-27-2011, 11:13 PM
it was definitely a horrible call. whats funny is how many replay shows stated as much but they are prohibited from even mentioning a las vegas point spread and how a call couldve affected bettors.

also suspicious is that if you watch the video link posted above (conviniently provided by NFL.COM) at 51-54 seconds the ref clearly mouths "twenty-nine" and you can clearly hear the over dubbing of his voice saying "twenty-one".

i mean i already knew the nfl destroyed tapes, i just never thought they would sink as low as editing them prior to their official release..

finesward
09-28-2011, 12:17 AM
Wasn't there some hooplah a while back about a steelers game when polamalu got.in the end zone and they waved it off for some shady reason? Can't remember vs who maybe chargers? It was the last play of the game and ended up affecting the spread

tony hipchest
09-28-2011, 12:38 AM
:chuckle: it was the chargers, and hayeksheros has already beaten that hooplah drum to death on this board.

please dont get him started again. hes just now moving on to proving that the apollo 18 mission was for real.

Steelersfan87
09-28-2011, 12:52 AM
Yes, you are right. However, Joe Buck said 29. My friend said that he lost his bet because the punt was called back. The spread was 4. I started to get suspicious.
It was a bad call. Number 21 was 30 yards away. The ref threw the flag as Knox caught the ball. The "holding" would have had no impact on the play's outcome.

What I really don't understand is why the Packers were so tricked on the play. Usually the punter will tell the team where he's going to kick it. Unless the Packers don't know their right from their left. That may be the case in Greenbay. If so, how did the Steelers lose in the Super Bowl last year.

No, tin foil hats, but you know, we've got to keep them honest and that was a bad call.

Does it matter what Joe Buck said? He was obviously merely incorrect. And even if there was a conspiracy involving bets, that is irrelevant, because the referee flagged a player on the play that actually committed a foul. Whether or not a hold would or would not have have an impact on a play doesn't mean anything. I remember in 2009 against the Vikings, James Harrison was blocked low, and even though he had no chance to make an impact on the play, a flag was called on a play that nullified a touchdown. Later on in that series, Keyaron Fox returned an interception for a touchdown.

As far as the Packers being confused, it is likely a number of things. Most likely they understood that they were directionally kicking away from Hester. But punters are human, and shank the ball sometimes. So when they see arguably the greatest return specialist hovering under a ball, it makes you stop and think for a second, and that's all that was necessary.

it was definitely a horrible call. whats funny is how many replay shows stated as much but they are prohibited from even mentioning a las vegas point spread and how a call couldve affected bettors.

also suspicious is that if you watch the video link posted above (conviniently provided by NFL.COM) at 51-54 seconds the ref clearly mouths "twenty-nine" and you can clearly hear the over dubbing of his voice saying "twenty-one".

i mean i already knew the nfl destroyed tapes, i just never thought they would sink as low as editing them prior to their official release..

This is a joke post, right?

tony hipchest
09-28-2011, 01:08 AM
This is a joke post, right?

:chuckle:

i guess that depends on if you believe me or not.

:wink02: