Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Rudyy View Post
    Can someone explain to me why certain plays are comsidered "non reviewable"? Random, I know..but I've always wondered what makes a play reviewable and what makes a play non reviewable.
    The rules.
    For instance, recovering of a fumble is NOT reviewable. The reason being that a fumble is often followed by a scrum, with the ball possibly changing hands. It would be impossible to determine so they just give it to the team that has the ball when they unpile.
    Penalties are not reviewable because they are judgement calls. I guess most reviewable plays have to be black and white, and not subject to interpretation, or conditional on the way the refs are calling it.
    Admit nothing. Deny everything. Make counter accusations.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Morehead State View Post
      The rules. For instance, recovering of a fumble is NOT reviewable. The reason being that a fumble is often followed by a scrum, with the ball possibly changing hands. It would be impossible to determine so they just give it to the team that has the ball when they unpile.Penalties are not reviewable because they are judgement calls. I guess most reviewable plays have to be black and white, and not subject to interpretation, or conditional on the way the refs are calling it.
      But what about the Greg Jennings "fumble" in the playoffs when we faced them? They reviewed that one.
      Mood: WOOF!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Rudyy View Post
        But what about the Greg Jennings "fumble" in the playoffs when we faced them? They reviewed that one.
        That was to determine if he actually fumbled. The rule is if the ball is loose, and there is a clear recovery by the defense, the fumble is reviewable. that rule changed a few years ago.
        Of course, the ref blew that review because it was crystal clear that he fumbled.
        Admit nothing. Deny everything. Make counter accusations.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Morehead State View Post
          That was to determine if he actually fumbled. The rule is if the ball is loose, and there is a clear recovery by the defense, the fumble is reviewable. that rule changed a few years ago.Of course, the ref blew that review because it was crystal clear that he fumbled.
          I see, that's for the clarification.
          Mood: WOOF!

          Comment


          • HOLLER HOLLER HOLLER BACK.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by dezzzR View Post
              Ever have a turkish or greek gyro or how ever you spell it? Reeeally good.
              Gyros are best when they're lamb. There's some good beef gyros out there, but lamb is where it's at. And the tzaztiki sauce needs to be made from a yogurt base, with fresh dill and cucumbers, not sour cream and pickle relish.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Drez View Post
                Gyros are best when they're lamb. There's some good beef gyros out there, but lamb is where it's at. And the tzaztiki sauce needs to be made from a yogurt base, with fresh dill and cucumbers, not sour cream and pickle relish.
                This is a perfect example of why we are all different. What you describe here literally makes me want to puke.
                Admit nothing. Deny everything. Make counter accusations.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Rudyy View Post
                  Can someone explain to me why certain plays are comsidered "non reviewable"? Random, I know..but I've always wondered what makes a play reviewable and what makes a play non reviewable.
                  MS has the right of it when he says, "the rules." The Competition Committee arbitrarily decides what types of plays can and cannot be reviewed. For instance, just a few years ago plays that were called dead on the field were not reviewable for fumbles, then they decided to change it so that they could be reviewed, though the defense would be awarded the ball where it was recovered negating any return that may have happened. Point in case, your Jennings example I believe was called as an incomplete pass (dead ball), but was reviewable, and in the NFCCG after Williams' first fumble we were awarded the ball at the spot of the recovery as opposed to being awarded the TD that resulted.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Morehead State View Post
                    This is a perfect example of why we are all different. What you describe here literally makes me want to puke.
                    Not a fan of lamb? I mean, authentic Greek gyros are lamb. 99.99999% of the time the authentic recipes are best.

                    Comment


                    • Damn. I want a gyro now, but there's no way I'm walking a mile to get one, lol.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Drez View Post
                        MS has the right of it when he says, "the rules." The Competition Committee arbitrarily decides what types of plays can and cannot be reviewed. For instance, just a few years ago plays that were called dead on the field were not reviewable for fumbles, then they decided to change it so that they could be reviewed, though the defense would be awarded the ball where it was recovered negating any return that may have happened. Point in case, your Jennings example I believe was called as an incomplete pass (dead ball), but was reviewable, and in the NFCCG after Williams' first fumble we were awarded the ball at the spot of the recovery as opposed to being awarded the TD that resulted.
                        Yeah but that lamb thing you described is still disgusting!
                        Admit nothing. Deny everything. Make counter accusations.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Drez View Post
                          Not a fan of lamb? I mean, authentic Greek gyros are lamb. 99.99999% of the time the authentic recipes are best.
                          I basically hate every ingredient you listed.
                          Especially lamb which is horrific. Poor little babies.
                          Admit nothing. Deny everything. Make counter accusations.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Morehead State View Post
                            I basically hate every ingredient you listed.
                            Especially lamb which is horrific. Poor little babies.
                            You're missing out, then.

                            I have to say that even though I don't like working in restaurants, I do love the fact that it has expanded my palate. There are things that I absolutely love now that I hated years ago (for example one of the ingredients for a gyro, feta cheese. I used to hate feta, but have grown to love it by repeated tasting). I think the ability to repeatedly try things without risk (i.e. spending money on it) helps out a lot. I mean, it's a lot easier for someone who works with food to try things many times, as opposed to someone who doesn't that might have to pay $18+ a plate for something that s/he may not like (or risk buying it on their own and not preparing it properly).

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Drez View Post
                              You're missing out, then.

                              I have to say that even though I don't like working in restaurants, I do love the fact that it has expanded my palate. There are things that I absolutely love now that I hated years ago (for example one of the ingredients for a gyro, feta cheese. I used to hate feta, but have grown to love it by repeated tasting). I think the ability to repeatedly try things without risk (i.e. spending money on it) helps out a lot. I mean, it's a lot easier for someone who works with food to try things many times, as opposed to someone who doesn't that might have to pay $18+ a plate for something that s/he may not like (or risk buying it on their own and not preparing it properly).
                              My "palate" is plenty expanded. I just don't like the crap you listed.

                              So if I can't stand the taste of what you describe, how is it that I'm missing out?
                              Admit nothing. Deny everything. Make counter accusations.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Morehead State View Post
                                My "palate" is plenty expanded. I just don't like the crap you listed.

                                So if I can't stand the taste of what you describe, how is it that I'm missing out?
                                Because it's tasty. If one doesn't like something, by definition one is missing out. Is it not more fun to like something than it is to not like something? And let's not cite some extreme thing like eating human flesh or excrement as a counter example. For every thing that one does not like, it takes away from a pleasure that one could otherwise enjoy. For example, I hate sundried tomatoes (save for this one brand of sundried tomato pesto). I see why people like them, I just don't, and I lament the fact that I cannot enjoy them.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X