MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Saturday, October 25, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 50.0° F  Fair
Collapse Photo Bar

Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Badgers, Packers, Mallards. Paddling, running, golfing. And bikes!

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby supaunknown » Thu Jan 28, 2010 11:05 am

I didn't cry over the non-calls at the end of the Cards/Packers game, and I certainly ain't cryin' now.
supaunknown
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5577
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2002 3:22 pm

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby butters » Thu Jan 28, 2010 11:14 am

ShawnM wrote:The Saints are my team, but man those referee's made some bad calls in O.T.

If there's one thing i hate it's when referees impact the final outcome of the game. It's like they think we are all watching just to see them perform. Man, that pass interference call pissed me off, and i'm not even a Vikings fan. I want the players to dictate the final outcome of the game, not the refs.

In the NHL playoffs, the refs put their whistles in their pockets when it's game seven, third period, and tied.
butters
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:30 pm

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby O.J. » Thu Jan 28, 2010 11:32 am

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -overtime/

The pass interference call was BS, but you can't(shouldn't) overturn a call with replay unless there is absolute evidence to the contrary. For the record, I don't think it was a catch.

The VP of officiating admits to some blown calls, but seems to ignore the pass-interference call.

We probably wouldn't be having this conversation if the Vikings knew how many people belonged in a huddle, which is absolutely inexcusable following a timeout.
O.J.
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2992
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 10:13 am

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby gargantua » Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:25 pm

I understand people being upset about blown calls. Just keep in mind that as TV viewers, we have much better angles, slow motion, and time to evaluate plays. The refs have to make decisions from right down there on the field, in real time, from sometimes less than ideal angles with a bunch of big bodies in the way. So I give them the benefit of the doubt unless it's obvious that something happened right in front of a ref, it's egregious, and it still wasn't called. There aren't a whole lot of those.
gargantua
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4183
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:30 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby Peacetrain » Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:59 pm

butters wrote:In the NHL playoffs, the refs put their whistles in their pockets when it's game seven, third period, and tied.


Hate that argument. No-calls can effect the outcome as much as calls can. If its a foul,penalty, or violation in the first 36 minutes than its still a foul,penalty, or violation in last 4 minutes.

Example: Last nights UW hoops game. The no-call on Hughes 3 certainly effected the outcome, didn't it?

Although i do think the refs just missed it and not a conscience decision to put their whistles in their pockets like you advocate.
Peacetrain
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 712
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 4:49 pm

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby O.J. » Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:29 pm

Peacetrain wrote:Example: Last nights UW hoops game. The no-call on Hughes 3 certainly effected the outcome, didn't it?


That non-call was almost as bad as the shot selection.
O.J.
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2992
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 10:13 am

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby Peacetrain » Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:49 pm

O.J. wrote:
Peacetrain wrote:Example: Last nights UW hoops game. The no-call on Hughes 3 certainly effected the outcome, didn't it?


That non-call was almost as bad as the shot selection.


Shot was worse cause it was deliberate.
Peacetrain
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 712
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 4:49 pm

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby butters » Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:18 pm

Peacetrain wrote:Hate that argument. No-calls can effect the outcome as much as calls can. If its a foul, penalty, or violation in the first 36 minutes than its still a foul, penalty, or violation in last 4 minutes. Example: Last nights UW hoops game. The no-call on Hughes 3 certainly effected the outcome, didn't it?

You really can't compare the two sports. In basketball, referees play a huge part in the game. A whistle is blown every time they walk down the court. On the final stretch of a highly significant game, you need to differentiate between nitpick calls and real fouls. NHL refs have learned this. NFL refs still think everyone is watching just to see them throw their yellow nylon flags around.

[Speaking of nitpicking (which is what i'm doing here)..."affect" is a verb and "effect" is a noun. Sorry for being one of those nitpicky grammar dicks.]
Last edited by butters on Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
butters
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:30 pm

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby HeyZeus » Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:38 pm

Saints vs Vikings = Bad call from a bitter old veteran
HeyZeus
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 1:52 pm

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby butters » Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:40 pm

HeyZeus wrote:Saints vs Vikings = Bad call from a bitter old veteran

Isn't it amazing how fortunes can hinge on just a single play?
butters
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:30 pm

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby jman111 » Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:45 pm

Hey Butters-
Since we're picking nits, "effect" can be a verb (to cause or bring about); therefore, its use may be appropriate here.
jman111
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3041
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:43 pm
Location: Dane County

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby butters » Fri Jan 29, 2010 6:12 pm

jman111 wrote:Hey Butters-
Since we're picking nits, "effect" can be a verb (to cause or bring about); therefore, its use may be appropriate here.

Thanks. Really! I've pulled out a few hairs trying to discern the difference. But in this case, i think "affect" is correct. In any case, I sincerely apologize to Peacetrain. I had no idea how confusing this grammatical issue was. I thought it was more cut and dried.

Nothing i could find was helpful but this seemed to add some clarity:
http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/glos ... ectEff.htm

Which Is It - Affect or Effect?
3. If a verb, is 'accomplish' closer in meaning or is 'influence'?
A. If a verb meaning accomplish, it's effect, with an E, unless it's an affectation.
B. If a verb meaning influence, it's affect, with an A.
------
btw--I'm still confused and picked so many nits i don't know what to do with them.
butters
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:30 pm

Re: Saints vs Vikings = Bad calls from the referee's.

Postby jman111 » Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:07 pm

I think you have it exactly. Two different words, two different meanings. I have no doubt "affect" was intended, but "effect" wouldn't necessarily be wrong. 'nuff nits...
jman111
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3041
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:43 pm
Location: Dane County


Return to Sports, Recreation & Biking

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR
Created with flickr badge.

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar