No one is ever going to get over the 1972 gold medal game... and losing a perfect game means very little - while it sucked for the pitcher, and the umpire felt terrible afterwards, it had no impact on the outcome (other than the record books) of what was essentially an insignificant game.
On the other hand, this game was almost assuredly stripped from one team (maybe 95% likely if the easy, correct call was made). Yes, the Saints could have overcome their bad luck, if you want to call it that - but that’s not the point. For what it’s worth, I was rooting for the Rams, though not passionately.
sushirittoRegistered UserPosts: 3,051Senior Member
I'm over it. No one gives a "you know what" about the 1972 Gold Medal game anymore.
I'm not a Raider fan, but no Raider fan will ever get over the "Tuck Rule" game. That is still mentioned occasionally on local sports talk radio.
BTW, the 49ers were robbed on a PI call in the 1984 NFC Championship game against the Redskins that I still remember. Ronnie Lott was called for a completely ridiculous PI. It happens.
Maybe you’re over it, but I was a 10 year old boy in ‘72 and still care about that stolen game as a 56 year old (no, it doesn’t play a significant role in my life). It’s kind of funny that you could suggest no Raider fan could ever get over that game, but think that no one cares about the medal game. It’s also silly to suggest that Saints fans should just get over it - people who are passionate about their teams are invested in their outcomes. Surely everyone who is passionate about their own favorite teams or players can understand that.
greenwitchRegistered UserPosts: 8,528Senior Member
If you're going to the Super Bowl, you will see billboards put up by a New Orleans car dealership. They were up less than 24 hours after the game, lol.
I know there are always questionable calls, but it makes no sense to complain about what was done in OT. OT shouldn't have happened. I don't think past or future sloppiness by officials is any excuse.
Two Saints season ticket holders sue over blown call.
Wow! Sorry, even though I think that call was horrible, and probably cost them the game, and I think "they need to get over it" is easy to say when it's not YOUR team, I'm totally laughing at this one.
I must say it would be fun to watch the fallout if it did indeed turn out that the call was due to some kind of foul play. We'd have something to focus on other than Russia.
notrichenoughRegistered UserPosts: 9,014Senior Member
Reminds me of when a Jets fan sued the Patriots for $180 over SpyGate, claiming fraud. They didn't get anywhere with that, either, with the judge saying they had no legal right to damages and the only thing they were promised was a seat at the game, which they received.
This lawsuit will meet a similar fate.
The Cowboys got robbed a few years ago on the Dez Bryant non-catch catch. It happens.
Jugulator20Registered UserPosts: 1,509Senior Member
Although I love sports as much as next guy, coaches coach, players play, fans cheer, refs make bad calls… it’s just a game, the sun will still come up.
@bluebayou ,
The Tuck Rule was applied before that Pats-Raiders game. In fact, it was applied in that regular season in the Jets-Pats game on 9/23/01. In the game, the Jets benefited from the Tuck Rule.
Like @MADad stated, the rule may have been dumb but the ref interpreted it correctly in the Pats-Raiders game, just like the Jets-Psts game earlier that season.
There were other applications of the Tuck Rule in other games but most fans do not pay attention to that fact. All they know is the infamous Tuck Rule.
twoinanddoneRegistered UserPosts: 21,026Senior Member
There aren't many penalty calls that are reviewable - can't question a late hit, roughing the quarterback/kicker, holding. The booth can review a hit for spearing, but I think the flag has to be thrown on the field first. They can assess fines and penalties AFTER the game if the league feels a hit was too much, but they don't replay the game. The things that are reviewable are spots, catches, whether the ball passed the goal line, stepping out of bounds.
In baseball, tags are reviewable, balls and strikes aren't.
sushirittoRegistered UserPosts: 3,051Senior Member
edited January 23
Now to be fair, let’s present the Raiders, not Patriots’ fan’s, POV.
A. There’s was not enough visual evidence to overturn the initial call of a fumble.
B. There’s a mass NFL conspiracy to screw Al Davis and the Raiders. So the referees pulled some obscure BS rule out of their bottoms and used it to overturn a call that shouldn’t have been overturned due to lack of visual evidence.
Again, I don’t care. I’m not a Raiders fan. But both sides of the “Tuck Rule” game should be presented.
Win or lose next week, Tom Brady's legacy is sealed...he will forever be the Greatest of All Time who couldn't manage a winning record against Peyton Manning when the SB was on the line.
I would like for the coin toss, for OT, to revert back to the first coin toss to open the game. Wouldn't it add more suspense as teams end regulation game knowing they won't even have a chance to be first up? Would you kick with 11 seconds left knowing you get don't get the ball back first? If the team lost the coin toss wouldn't they take the risk to score and win. Wouldn't it lead to end of games be more exciting because a coach might take more risks;more going for 2 points, not just take a kick to tie?
Replies to: A NFL running playoff thread
On the other hand, this game was almost assuredly stripped from one team (maybe 95% likely if the easy, correct call was made). Yes, the Saints could have overcome their bad luck, if you want to call it that - but that’s not the point. For what it’s worth, I was rooting for the Rams, though not passionately.
I'm not a Raider fan, but no Raider fan will ever get over the "Tuck Rule" game. That is still mentioned occasionally on local sports talk radio.
BTW, the 49ers were robbed on a PI call in the 1984 NFC Championship game against the Redskins that I still remember. Ronnie Lott was called for a completely ridiculous PI. It happens.
https://www.si.com/vault/1984/01/16/540968/the-49ers-got-skinned
I know there are always questionable calls, but it makes no sense to complain about what was done in OT. OT shouldn't have happened. I don't think past or future sloppiness by officials is any excuse.
Wow! Sorry, even though I think that call was horrible, and probably cost them the game, and I think "they need to get over it" is easy to say when it's not YOUR team, I'm totally laughing at this one.
I must say it would be fun to watch the fallout if it did indeed turn out that the call was due to some kind of foul play. We'd have something to focus on other than Russia.
This lawsuit will meet a similar fate.
The Cowboys got robbed a few years ago on the Dez Bryant non-catch catch. It happens.
Two separate issues:
1--rule may have been a dumb rule
2--dumb rule notwithstanding, it was applied correctly in Patriots-Raiders game.
Dumb rule was changed before next season.
The Tuck Rule had never been applied in any game before.....(strange time to find it in the Rule book, no?)
The Tuck Rule was applied before that Pats-Raiders game. In fact, it was applied in that regular season in the Jets-Pats game on 9/23/01. In the game, the Jets benefited from the Tuck Rule.
Like @MADad stated, the rule may have been dumb but the ref interpreted it correctly in the Pats-Raiders game, just like the Jets-Psts game earlier that season.
There were other applications of the Tuck Rule in other games but most fans do not pay attention to that fact. All they know is the infamous Tuck Rule.
In baseball, tags are reviewable, balls and strikes aren't.
A. There’s was not enough visual evidence to overturn the initial call of a fumble.
B. There’s a mass NFL conspiracy to screw Al Davis and the Raiders. So the referees pulled some obscure BS rule out of their bottoms and used it to overturn a call that shouldn’t have been overturned due to lack of visual evidence.
Again, I don’t care. I’m not a Raiders fan. But both sides of the “Tuck Rule” game should be presented.
I would like for the coin toss, for OT, to revert back to the first coin toss to open the game. Wouldn't it add more suspense as teams end regulation game knowing they won't even have a chance to be first up? Would you kick with 11 seconds left knowing you get don't get the ball back first? If the team lost the coin toss wouldn't they take the risk to score and win. Wouldn't it lead to end of games be more exciting because a coach might take more risks;more going for 2 points, not just take a kick to tie?