you havn't even brought up a point kid. Just keep homering a play that went against your beloved super bowl winners... Seriously all I have to say after everytime you try to look smart is



wtf

And you think I need to counter l0l

My point was that the rule you pointed to doesn't apply because he is not carrier, since he never had possession:



Then you countered with your arguing about the rule and not the play...don't know why you said this since the whole argument was how the rule applied to the play....since he never had possession and thus could not be downed, making the rule you pointed to completely irrelevant to the topic. No credible source has agreed with your point, you are the only person who has argued this I have seen. NFL vice president of officiating himself said that the ball was loose going into the pile:



counter?

We started "arguing" when you said that's not the rule 3 times in a row. I've already said, 4 times now, that the play might have gone against you.

I'm not arguing about a fking 3 day old call with you holy shit retard, facts are, you lost to the rams kid shouldn't you be a cowboys fan by now?

This has absolutely nothing to do with the play, and once I said :



We were done talking about the play. But you're wayyyyyyy too stupid to know that.

You said:



Which it clearly is not...or else he would have been ruled down right there and the whole pile wouldn't have mattered. The NFL disagrees with your assessment and that is not the correct interpretation of the rule.

Didn't think I needed to spell out it to this extent.

Rules are best explained with examples, this is an example that shows your interpretation to be incorrect.

This post was edited by Meeker on Oct 22 2014 01:07am

The "NFL" disagrees with the fact that he had possession or not you braindead fucking amoeba. The rule is nonnegotiable

And that would have to do with what your said here:



even if its only for .0000000005 seconds...does matter. You're interpretation of the rules are incorrect.

This post was edited by Meeker on Oct 22 2014 01:10am

And yet the refs called it a fumble recovery for hankins, awkward.


Glad you found a semantic bone to pick, cus wow I was getting worried about your mental health.

(1:14) 27-T.Mason left tackle to SEA 46 for 9 yards (53-M.Smith). FUMBLES (53-M.Smith), touched at SEA 41, recovered by STL-46-C.Harkey at SEA 32. Ball recovered by STL at the SEA 32, by rule it returned to the spot where the ball is batted forward.

The SEA 32...where the pile is, not where you claim he downed it. They claim Harkey got into the pile and recovered it, which is complete BS. Seattle came out of the pile with it, as Blandino hinted to. You've done nothing to help your argument.

This post was edited by Meeker on Oct 22 2014 01:15am