>
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /sp/ - Sports
You are currently reading a thread in /sp/ - Sports
Patriots player of the game right there
How much does kraft pay them off?
>>63768211
Is that the asshole who doesn't know how to ref?
>>63768233
lol..no
To be fair, it wasn't so much Geno's fault as it was the line judge/head linesman who fucked everything up repeatedly.
>>63768233
>>63768246
Are you kidding? The refs tonight are the only reason the score wasn't like 27-6. The Pats got hosed so many times tonight. You don't even know what you're watching. Inadvertant whistles? Come the fuck on. But everythings ok to beat NE right? Can't do it on your own I see.
>>63768233
yeah, that "inadvertent whistle" sure helped them...
are you really this retarded
>>63768305
>get 27 yards and a first down
>hosed
Meanwhile....
>bs overturned interception
>waste 15 seconds, then to change the spot of the ball
>he's in bounds, lol game over
>>63768233
Typical blind retard...
As the refs continuously fuck the Pats over...
>duhhhh patreeots win da refs helped dem
Blindingly stupid
>>63768519
That was a 50 yard play, possibly a touchdown cause that fucking ref couldn't keep his lips off the whistle.
>>63768305
Pats were holding every play and never got called. It's also about what doesn't get called rather than what does
>>63768615
>50 yards or touchdown
>Darby is literally right next to him
>>63768705
What....? Christ your delusion is strong.
>>63768519
>overturned interception
>hanging off of gronk, which wasn't called
>Can't keep your faggot secondary from feeling up Amendola
>called for grabbing his nuts
>mad that the result of your own faggotry is an overturned interception
Karma, motherfucker.
>>63768755
Feel free to post pictures of any of this.
>>63768710
>Darby is literally right next to him
>literally
Here's what I think about that whistle gate play as nfl network was calling it. Let's look at the facts. The spread for this game was 7.5. That play goes on, Pats get the TD and the lead grows to double digits with the bills likely not to cover. However by stopping that play they keep the close score. The game ends 20-13 and bills cover the 7.5 spread. Majority of the public was on the Pats. Make use of that as you will
>>63768810
u first :^)
>>63768519
>waste 15 seconds, then to change the spot of the ball
That's how you're supposed to do it. You think they should have given Buffalo a free timeout?
>>63768814
Yes literally.
>>63768519
Why didn't you have any timeouts? That's your shit ball coach bud. That's what timeouts are for. you don't fucking waste them having 10 guys on the field.
>>63768831
i've seen it happen in other games. shit isn't fixed you dumb fuck
>>63768907
first time watching football? there is zero chance he makes that tackle
>>63768935
The whistle blew while the ball was still in the air and Darby already stopped play. Watch the video faggot.
>>63768907
Would've been the tackle of the week if he got it. Too bad Amendola was getting insane yards after the catch all game, so it just makes the case even better if that ref had just kept is mouth off the fucking whistle.
>>63768963
The whistle was blown when the ball was about 5 fucking yards from Amendolas hands, you telling me a defender can react that quickly? You see players still bumping into or grabbing each other well after a whistle is blown.
The nigga got beat and he knew it.
>>63768963
so it definitely is your first time watching football? still absolutely no chance he makes that tackle. amendola would have burned him hard
>>63769012
Watch the video.
>ball is in the air
>whistle blows
>Darby stops
>Amendola catches the ball and runs
>>63769042
You're making a massive assumption that he could've had made the tackle. Over 50 yards of Amendolas yards were from after the catcher that game. The refs fucked up and took away a massive play, possibly a touchdown. If you don't believe this you are either a person that watches football only on Super Bowl Sunday or a mentally handicapped with a status of legally blind.
Much like the ref that blew his whistle for no reason.
>>63769107
You're not getting hios point. Darby gave up on the play while he was still involved in it because he heard the whistle. The only reason Amendola had ANY seperation was because Darby stopped
>>63769128
Derby always gives that much space to a receiver with the thought in mind "Oh the whistle might be blown"
I've never seen a defender just give up a play so quickly after hearing the whistle. If he had be within arm or even tackle distance he would have tackled Amendola regardless of the whistle.
Does no one watch football or watch what the players do during the game?
>inadvertent whistle
wtf refs
>>63769107
Watch the play. The whistle blows when the ball is still 5 yards from Amendola. At that point the play is dead. Darby stops defending at that point. By the time it hits Amendola's hands, you see Darby right next to him casually slowing down. Amendola then turns and takes off.
>>63769159
>Players stop when the whistle is blown
Are you so blind. Look at this video
https://twitter.com/DocInRealLife/status/668993142448889857
>Ball thrown at 0:08
>Whistle at 0:10
>Darby noticeably slows down
>Amendola catches the ball
>Darby starts walking
Not to mention that Amendola had to stop, turn around, and right himself to start towards the end zone. There's no way he avoids Darby if the play is live. He could break a tackle, but I'm not gonna speculate on that
>>63769128
Wrong. He gave up on the play because he got beat and he knew it
did the refs think brady was out of bounds?
>>63769220
see
>>63769207
He didn't hit him even though he could've. Possibly because he didn't want to incur an unnecessary roughness penalty.
Also, defenders don't stop chasing players down the field. If they do that they get benched for their lack of effort
>>63769207
>I'm not gonna speculate
good idea
>There's no way he avoids Darby if the play is live
broooooooo
>>63769207
Yet you speculate on a tackle that would involve a risky several yard dive. He was still playing when Amendola caught the ball. That was an easy touchdown, deny all you want, but your double standards of "speculation" hinders your point more than it helps.
>>63768211
those blind retards shit on everybody
There's a thread still up where pats fans and nfl fans unite in a polite conversation discussing cheating in the NFL, it's a pat thread but you should be able to find it if you don't want to deal with any more tards claiming that cheating is 100% not involved.
It's very noticeable that many people who posted in here are blind and or not socialists of any kind.
Not sure how to link to that thread though, it's up still though.
>>63769247
>literally no response
For arguments sake, there's quite a difference in odds of the defender hitting a defender who has to physically turn his whole body around, than an undersized defender shedding a tackle from Darby.
>>63769254
>several yards
See pic. He's at most a yard from him. Again, AFTER slowing down
>>63769256
This.
They screw over the pats, think "oh shit we fucked up" and screw over the bills to make it evenish. Its like in soccer when a ref fucks up with a red card or a penulty and tries to make it even.
>>63769207
You're whole argument is based on the thought that Darby could make the tackle. Amendola was breaking tackles, shaking defenders, and getting space the whole night.
It's also quite ridiculous how the main subject of this thread in particular switched from the very alive possibility of cheating ACROSS THE LEAGUE, to "hurr durr he wouldn't have ran that for a touchdown anyways".
>>63769282
You are aware that camera angles alter perception right? I'm assuming you've seen at least one football game, so you know that what looks like a foot can actually be a huge amount of distance from this angle of view. That small distance is most likely two-three yards. You're telling me that nigga is gonna dive three fucking yards to tackle a full speed Amendola? You are literal retard if you think that.
>>63769289
My whole argument is Darby would have hit him from behind had the whistle not blown. Amendola might have broken the tackle, sure. He also might have fumbled, but the more likely outcome was a catch and tackle for a first down.
>>63768899
Reviews always stop the clock. You don't make a ruling, wait for the clock to count down precious seconds, and then decide to review your previous decision. If that does happen, you put the time wasted back on the clock.
>>63769312
You do realize that Amendola is 5 yards down the field from the first down marker, right? Does Darby look 5 yards away to to you? No, he does not.
>>63769322
*4 yards
>>63769322
Holy shit, did you get a fucking 12 as your reading subscore on the ACT or something? I just said that camera angle alters perception immensely. Your reading comprehension is even worse than that of a second grader.
>>63769340
No matter how you look at it (or what you choose to believe), Amendola is standing on the 45 yard line. This is an objective FACT. The first down marker is also place at the 41 yard line. This also is an objective FACT. You only need to look at both frames to conclude that Darby was indeed closer to Amendola that Amendola was to the 41 yard line.
>>63769312
In that screenshot, the play had already been whistled dead. Darby is no longer trying to make a play.
>>63769312
How is Amendola full speed?
>>63769313
Don't forget there was at least one other defender down the field who could have stopped him
Calling that a guaranteed td when the whistle blows, the defender clearly stops, and their is another player between him and the goal is ridiculous.
>>63769313
>the more likely outcome was a catch and tackle for a first down
How do you reach this conclusion? Seriously, what kind of apparatus allows you to reach deep enough into your asshole that you're able to get to that conclusion?
I can just as easily say that Amendola would have caught it, broken the tackle and scored. Except with this I actually have some justification as he'd been breaking tackles all night. Not to mention that the camera gives a completely altered perception and in reality Amendola wouldn't have even been touched.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZorFWMalTY
>>63769549
I reach that conclusion based on the circumstances that
1) Darby was close enough to tackle Amendola, even after pulling up after the whistle blew. It is a reasonable conclusion that Darby would have at least hit Amendola. What little seperation Amendola had would have been closed by Darby's 4.38 40 time.
2) Darby had 3 tackles on the night, 2 of them solo, so he showed the ability to wrap up cleanly.
3) Amendola had 9 receptions, and no touchdowns. Which means he was tackled 9 times in the game. He is not untackleable.
4) Darby is faster, heavier, as tall, stronger, and had momentum while Amendola needed to rotate his body to advance upfield. He would have been hit just behind his right side, so it is easy enough to wrap up a moving target.
In conclusion, Amendola WOULD have been hit by a stronger, faster and younger defender, who had momentum on his side. Amendola was tackled several times in the game, and while it is possible to suggest that there at least is a chance of Amendola shrugging off Darby, the most likely probability would have been Amendola being tackled (again).
Also
>posting irrelevant videos in a desperate attempt to support your flimsy case
>>63769398
The defender down the field wasn't a factor, he was covering another receiver and would have been easily blocked when Amendola was running
>>63769644
>Darby was close enough to tackle Amendola
>Suggs was close enough to tackle Edelman
>I didn't play football and have never watched film of myself
>I don't understand that the camera alters reality because I never experienced what actually happens on a football field
>>63769701
See pic related. Your unrealistic analogy aside, Suggs was approximately 21/2 yards away from Amendola, not 1 yard. He also slows as Amendola is beginning his motion, and I don't know how to properly account for the distance he lost because of this.
>Using ad hominems that you have no idea are true
>Greentexting instead of formulating a proper argument
>using a made up image with no way to properly account for your measurements.
>>63769701
Also, this pic is an obvious difference from >>63769254, which is the play in question. I've also diagrammed that image for you, so you can see the obvious differences in them.
You also fail to account for the differences in speed between Suggs and Darby. It doesn't take a genius to understand that Darby can close faster than Suggs
>>63769835
I just realized the line to the 1st down marker wasn't parallel to the sideline. Here is an updated image showing that the distance between Darby and Amendola was actually closer to 1.25 yards, instead of 1.33 yards
patsfags psyops itt
>>63768211
today will go down in history as being one of the worst blowjobs the pats had this season.
You guys are really good at measuring
>>63769947
>implying it doesn't check out
So how big will the shitstorm be when it's revealed that the Patriots are bribing the Refs and the smoking gun is presented to the pubic?
>>63769287
yeah that made hockey unwatchable for me
>guys getting their head bashed in no calls everywhere
>some one dares to call a penalty
>no way bro here's a baby soft make up call :^)
either that or the inevitable joke penalties any time a 2 goal lead happens in the same situation. people want objective judges not game managers sticking their nose in everything.
>>63769821
Jesus Christ my man, what don't you understand about the camera giving an altered perception of what actually happened. The picture was a joke because any attempt to diagram a screencap of footage is futile as the footage is a complete distortion of what happened in reality. Also, I figured that you never played football or watched film of yourself because anyone who has knows that making a play looks a lot easier on the screen than out on the field.
As for, ">Greentexting instead of formulating a proper argument." You want a proper argument, here:
Premise 1*: Filmed footage is a distortion of what happens in reality.
Premise 2*: Part of this distortion includes players appearing to be separated by distances different from the distances experienced in reality.
Premise 3*: This variance is favorable towards players appearing closer than they are in reality and by extension, plays appearing to be easier to make than they are in reality.
Premise 4: In >>63768907, Darby appears to be of a distance that would require a difficult to shoestring tackle in order to bring down Amendola.
Premise 5: According to premises 1-3, in actuality Darby was of greater distance than the range of a difficult to shoestring tackle.
Premise 6: A distance greater than the range of a difficult to shoestring tackle constitutes a shoestring tackle to un-tackle-able.
Premise 7: Amendola was breaking tackles all night.
Premise 8: A shoestring tackle does not bring down someone who has been breaking tackles all night.
Conclusion: Amendola would not have been tackled by Darby.
*evidence for premises 1-3: Expert opinion of someone who played 8 years of football consisting of playing in games and watching film of games played in.
>>63770223
Please actually watch replays of the play in question. You can find it here >>63769207
1. The barrel distortion you are referring to isn't applicable. For starters, distortion is only actually felt in the edges of zoom lenses. As the camera was both trained on the subject of the shot (Amendola), this isn't applicable. Even if it was, you're talking about a matter of inches at most, and more likely none at all.
2. The globe effect you're referring to may account for a little distortion, but again, it's minimal.
3. Players "appearing closer in reality" applies to both players, not just Darby. You are arguing Amendola is the constant in the shots, while simultaneously arguing that Darby is the only one distorted. Either their distances relative to the viewer are equally affected, or neither of them are.
4. This shot your referring to, is a full second after the whistle blew, when Darby had already slowed down, and Amendola had received the ball, pivoted, regained his feet, and started towards the end zone. Of course the distance will be widened when Darby slows down. Again, refer to >>63769207 to see the play. If you did in fact play football, you know how critical a second is. (Hint: Darby can run 10.95 yards in one second according to his listed time)
5. Again, refer to 3. Darby's location is no more distorted than Amendola's.
6. Darby has a 4.38 time, was chasing a receiver who had to contort his body to receive a pass that was behind him, and had to right himself to move downfield. Refer to point 4 again. Darby can close a 2 yard distance in .219 seconds, a fifth of the time between the blown whistle and the point at which Amendola actually caught the ball.
7. Again, he was tackled on all 9 of his completed passes. He was BEING tackled all game.
8. It would not have been a shoestring tackle, and he was not, and is not, untackleable. Regardless, it can and does happen, and isn't predictive of future occurances based on such a small sample as 3 quarters.
>>63770223
>>63770372
In conclusion, there is no evidence that camera distortion plays a significant role in altering our perception of the play. It also does not significantly distort on Darby, and not Amendola. Darby would have hit Amendola had the whistle not blown. There are only one reasonable conclusions to why he did not hit Amendola; he heard the whistle and did not want to occur a unnecessary roughness penalty. Your experience with football does not trump the science employed frequently by such tracking technologies such as MLB Statcast, which do exactly as I just did.
>>63770372
>This shot your referring to, is a full second after the whistle blew
Oh yeah, because Darby can instantaneously react to the whistle being blown as the refs lips are connected directly to his CNS.
>Darby can close a 2 yard distance in .219 seconds
Are you fucking kidding me? This is incredibly disingenuous and wrong on so many levels. He's not at the combine, he's wearing full gear, he's already played a full half of football, he isn't running in a straight line, he can't run at full speed when in coverage or the slightest cut would knock him down and are you really trying to say he can reach his top speed in the 5 yards from when Amendola breaks free from him as he's standing still. Get the fuck out of here, you're so full of shit.
>>63770550
>Oh yeah, because Darby can instantaneously react to the whistle being blown as the refs lips are connected directly to his CNS.
You do realize that all professional athletes react to things nearly instantaneously all the time. The snap of a football, a starter's pistol being fired, a referee blowing a whistle, etc.
What a shit thread. Patcvcks are retarded
Here's what I think happened.
1) I highly doubt this was some kind of intentional fix, that red would have to have godlike intuition to think that was going to be a touchdown so he'd better blow the play dead.
2) Brady had been throwing the ball into the dirt all game long and it looked like he was about to do the same.
I think the ref blew the whistle early to protect Brady from a hit. I'm not denying the whistle was a massive fuck up, and it isn't the pats fault that the refs are protecting Brady, but if Brady gets the same treatment as Newton the whistle never gets blown.
Just my 2ยข family
>>63769701
>>63769821
>>63769835
>>63769924
>>63770223
>>63770372
we /science/ now
