The receiver should have laid there like he was dead. Then there would have been a call.

(07-31-2019 01:25 PM)Def Berkkat Wrote:  The receiver should have laid there like he was dead. Then there would have been a call.

Yeah, so they could add to the fiasco by taking him out of the game by accusing him of having a concussion...

clt says saints fans should be suing payton. horrible clock management cost them the game

(07-31-2019 02:38 PM)nastybunch Wrote:  

(07-31-2019 01:25 PM)Def Berkkat Wrote:  The receiver should have laid there like he was dead. Then there would have been a call.

Yeah, so they could add to the fiasco by taking him out of the game by accusing him of having a concussion...

Uhhh... Would it have been worth it to have gotten the call?

(07-31-2019 01:08 PM)nastybunch Wrote:  

(07-31-2019 09:26 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  Layman's opinion: My guess is that the NFL will petition up to the state Supreme Court and at some point, some judge is going to rule that there's no legal basis to challenge calls on the field in the legal system and the next court up will refuse to hear that appeal, effectively shutting the door on cases like this. Because the last thing the Louisiana (or any other) courts want is to have their docket filled with fraud charges based on what the plaintiffs consider bad refereeing decisions.

Even if that doesn't happen, I can't see how a fraud charge holds up unless they can prove forethought and malice. Referees and umpires miss calls all the time. Maybe none quite as seemingly egregious but it's certainly happened and will happen again. Given that calls are always at the discretion of the on-field officials, I don't see the legal case for it. They broke no laws by no-calling it.

Bingo

I admit I'm no lawyer. But I'm not seeing that article the same way you guys are. It's simply saying that "Louisiana judge orders Roger Goodell, referees to be questioned under oath about NFC title game no-call". Questioned under oath does not necessarily mean it's going to trial. But if they lie under oath, then they've committed perjury and are in deep **** if it ever comes out that there was some fraud going on. They probably want to have the officials state they had no instructions or pressure to favor one team over the other. They want Goodell to state under oath there was no pressure. If it was truly just a horrible call, then so be it. But if it was anything other than that and their lawyer tells them they best not commit perjury then you'll have the evidence you need to take it to trial. The lawyer requesting the depositions is looking for smoke. To me it's that simple. If he can't find the smoke, then so be it - move on. But if something else was going on and one of these guys doesn't want to commit perjury, then so be it - get to the bottom of it.

Maybe there is a lawyer on the board that can tell me where I'm missing something.