[Pats and Sox]

Originally Posted by RamTime

It absolutely kills me that these patriot fans go running home to the CHFF web site to look for answers. Every Patriot fans apologie err excuse you read anywhere on any board is taken right out of the CHFF handbook. Many Patriot fans have asked the CHFF web site to do a video analysis and show how the Rams got away with the same type of play in an effort to debunk our videos at stlouisrams.net. They have asked CHFF to do an article debunking the videos at stlouisrams.net.

Big surprise, instead of setting these misguided dot fans straight and telling them that there is no video to support what they are asking CHFF to do they say; "Were not interested in breaking down a game that is 4 years old." However when he decides to rip Skip Bayless (who left himself wide open to be bombarded) he breaks down games from the early 1980's.

I actually found out about this site through PatriotsPlanet, but since you mentioned CHFF, they put it best themselves:

"Like we said above, not sure something so obviously hysterical needs us to comment on it. There are not even a lot of facts in it to refute. We can refute facts. We can’t refute hysteria."

Face it, your site is hysteria, sour grapes, and a general indicator of a larger instability.

Anyway CHFF has been self anointed as the web site that discovered the "Vicious head slap" to Brady during the tuck play. On the surface this may look like a heroic discovery and while Patriot fans dance to inclination that the Raiders would have gotten away with a vicious head slap, isn't it true that if it had to be discovered days or weeks later that it wasn't much of a slap to the head? While they call it a vicious slap to the head they ignore the fact that Woodson came within inches of the football. Yet ask one of them about the slap to Warner's face mask and they say Oh that little tap. Its sickening how spoiled these post season NFL welfare recipients will go.

This is absolutely priceless and a perfect indicator of what a blind homer you are and how you have clearly started at a conclusion you hoped to reach and worked backwards.

You say, "isn't it true that if it had to be discovered days or weeks later that it wasn't much of a slap to the head?"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you, years after the game, "discover[ing]" all these missed calls that supposedly cost the Rams their rightly-earned Super Bowl victory? If these horrible missed calls are only being discovered now, "isn't it true that if it had to be discovered days or weeks later that it wasn't much of a [missed call]?"

Referees miss calls. That none of us complained about Woodson's head slap that was clearly hard enough to cause Brady's head to jerk left does not mean it didn't happen. Winning teams don't usually harp on the bad officiating that happens in every game because, well, they won. Nothing to harp on. On to next week.

The last I checked the hand was part of the body. If the hand is part of the body then Brady has finished tucking the football away and it is a fumble.

Oh, dear God, it is simply impossible for you to be skilled enough to code a website and be this ignorant. If the hand was enough to complete a tuck, the rule itself wouldn't exist, since the moment the QB took posession of the ball and went to pass, he would have tucked it away in his hand. If the rule was not correctly called, it would have been acknowledged by the league...since it wasn't and there is no evidence that the Super Bowl had variance from the normal number of missed calls in a game, you're forced to concoct your wild conspiracy theory. Entertaining, to be sure, but probably for reasons you hadn't intended.