Gotta love the prevalence of on field microphones

[oochymp 2,393]

Bill Belichick dared the New York Giants to throw to Mario Manningham and paid the price.

 

Before the Giants final game-winning drive in Super Bowl XLVI, the New England Patriots coach told his team not to get beat by receivers Victor Cruz andHakeem Nicks.

 

"This is still a Cruz and Nicks game," Belichick was heard saying in audio recorded for NFL Films. "I know we're right on them. It's tight but those are still the guys. Make them go to Manningham, make them go to (Bear) Pascoe. Let's make sure we get Cruz and Nicks.

 

Full Article

The article also says on field mics caught Brady saying Manningham caught it after his big catch on the last drive and Mayo and Wilfork telling teammates to let the Giants score at the end, but the best line from the article is this gem toward the end:

 

"Referee John Parry, talking to another official, was caught on tape saying of the Welker play: 'That was the game.'"

 

you know it's bad when the refs acknowledge the game is over

Edited February 9, 2012 by oochymp

[NYGIANTSFLYHIGH 1]

The article also says on field mics caught Brady saying Manningham caught it after his big catch on the last drive and Mayo and Wilfork telling teammates to let the Giants score at the end, but the best line from the article is this gem toward the end:

 

"Referee John Parry, talking to another official, was caught on tape saying of the Welker play: 'That was the game.'"

 

you know it's bad when the refs acknowledge the game is over

 

My favorite part was after the HUGE holding call before the half (that ultimately took a 1st and 10 at the Pats 40 away from the Giants, which led to a punt and a long Brady TD drive to take the lead before half) was the head referee and the line judge asking Wilfork about the call during a TV time out and Wilfork says "That was a bad man, his hands werent even on me how could he hold? I tried to spin and it didnt work....really bad call, but thanks!"

 

That would have been HUGE news if we lost I think

 

here are the links

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-films-sound-efx/09000d5d826c94b4/SB-XLVI-Sound-FX-Giants-strike-first

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-films-sound-efx/09000d5d826c94b6/SB-XLVI-Sound-FX-Patriots-fire-back

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-films-sound-efx/09000d5d826ca6b7/SB-XLVI-Sound-FX-A-physical-battle

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-films-sound-efx/09000d5d826ca6b7/SB-XLVI-Sound-FX-A-physical-battle

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

That would have been HUGE news if we lost I think

lol no.

 

There's plenty of bad/missed holding calls during the course of the game. Be rational here.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Err, it sure looked like a hold to me. Maybe it wasn't, but it looked like one, I can completely understand why a ref called it a holding penalty.

 

@oochymp: The ref saying that was the game may not have meant the game was over now that Welker didn't catch it, he may have been saying that had Welker caught it, that would have been the game. Which I agree, if Welker makes that catch, the Pats are SB 46 Champs.

 

As well, I don't really see the issue in BB saying make them go to Manningham. They should. Mario is the Giants #3, he didn't want Cruz or Nicks to beat them. That's just good coaching. It would be dumb for him to say, "Make them go to Cruz or Nicks, just keep it away from Manningham."

[NYGIANTSFLYHIGH 1]

lol no.

 

There's plenty of bad/missed holding calls during the course of the game. Be rational here.

 

LOL yes. First down there from your 40 we likely score at least a field goal. Or worst case kill another 2 minutes of clock and punt you inside the 10 like weatherford did all game. Leaving you no time to take the lead before half

 

Hands down the closest the refs game to deciding the game....not debatable

[NYGIANTSFLYHIGH 1]

Err, it sure looked like a hold to me. Maybe it wasn't, but it looked like one, I can completely understand why a ref called it a holding penalty.

 

@oochymp: The ref saying that was the game may not have meant the game was over now that Welker didn't catch it, he may have been saying that had Welker caught it, that would have been the game. Which I agree, if Welker makes that catch, the Pats are SB 46 Champs.

 

As well, I don't really see the issue in BB saying make them go to Manningham. They should. Mario is the Giants #3, he didn't want Cruz or Nicks to beat them. That's just good coaching. It would be dumb for him to say, "Make them go to Cruz or Nicks, just keep it away from Manningham."

 

Watch the 2nd video link I posted, starts at the 1:20 mark. It shows the whole play close up. One ref saying I dont think it was a hold, the other over ruling him, than Wilfork having a "private" conversation with him telling him it was a bad call and wasnt a hold lol. When the guy ellegedly being held denies it, you know its a bad call

Edited February 9, 2012 by NYGIANTSFLYHIGH

[SteVo+ 3,702]

That would have been HUGE news if we lost I think

 

No, if you lost the huge news would have been Bradshaw's go-ahead TD, and the Giants burning 2 timeouts early in the 2nd half.

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

LOL yes. First down there from your 40 we likely score at least a field goal. Or worst case kill another 2 minutes of clock and punt you inside the 10 like weatherford did all game. Leaving you no time to take the lead before half

 

Hands down the closest the refs game to deciding the game....not debatable

Giants could have gone down the field for another TD/FG or they could have turned it over. There's no guarantee what would have happened. Thus, it wouldn't have been ''HUGE'' news if the Giants lost the game.

 

No, if you lost the huge news would have been Bradshaw's go-ahead TD, and the Giants burning 2 timeouts early in the 2nd half.

Exactly.

[BucD+ 648]

Ahhh...the good ole pointless "what if.." game. You do it to one play and you gotta do it to them all.

 

What about that PI no call on Cruz (I think it was Cruz) on 3rd down on a crucial drive?

 

Pointless.

 

There were quite a few plays that if they did or didn't happen...the game changes. Or questionable calls/no calls.

 

Back to the OP...

 

Funny stuff.

 

[oochymp 2,393]

@oochymp: The ref saying that was the game may not have meant the game was over now that Welker didn't catch it, he may have been saying that had Welker caught it, that would have been the game. Which I agree, if Welker makes that catch, the Pats are SB 46 Champs.

yeah, that makes a little more sense since the Giants still had to score, but it's still amusing to get that sort of commentary from the ref

 

As well, I don't really see the issue in BB saying make them go to Manningham. They should. Mario is the Giants #3, he didn't want Cruz or Nicks to beat them. That's just good coaching. It would be dumb for him to say, "Make them go to Cruz or Nicks, just keep it away from Manningham."

yeah, definitely the right call if you can take out the top two options, but it shows that the Giants WR corps is deeper than at least I have given them credit for and it's always nice when a teams says 'if they're going to beat us they're going to have to do it through X' and then they win by going through X

[Thanatos 2,847]

Watch the 2nd video link I posted, starts at the 1:20 mark. It shows the whole play close up. One ref saying I dont think it was a hold, the other over ruling him, than Wilfork having a "private" conversation with him telling him it was a bad call and wasnt a hold lol. When the guy ellegedly being held denies it, you know its a bad call

 

I think you're slightly biased here, bud.

 

Besides, you read me incorrectly. I did not say it wasn't the wrong call- obviously it was, if Wilfork said it was. I said it looked like a hold. It looks like he grabs Wilfork and turns him. You can slow it down to microscopic levels if you want to, but the ref doesn't get to see that, and on the play, and even on the initial replay, it looked like an obvious hold to me.

 

And no, it would not have been "the refs giving the game away," lol. They missed a few calls on both sides, as they always will.

 

One of the calls that no one even looked twice at was Ninkovich's critical offsides on 3rd and 7- I don't think he ever crosses the line.

 

Regardless, the story would have been the Giants wasting two timeouts, not a penalty that occurred back at the end of the first half. You're acting like that was the only bad call in the entire game.

[NYGIANTSFLYHIGH 1]

I think you're slightly biased here, bud.

 

Besides, you read me incorrectly. I did not say it wasn't the wrong call- obviously it was, if Wilfork said it was. I said it looked like a hold. It looks like he grabs Wilfork and turns him. You can slow it down to microscopic levels if you want to, but the ref doesn't get to see that, and on the play, and even on the initial replay, it looked like an obvious hold to me.

 

And no, it would not have been "the refs giving the game away," lol. They missed a few calls on both sides, as they always will.

 

One of the calls that no one even looked twice at was Ninkovich's critical offsides on 3rd and 7- I don't think he ever crosses the line.

 

Regardless, the story would have been the Giants wasting two timeouts, not a penalty that occurred back at the end of the first half. You're acting like that was the only bad call in the entire game.

 

Its not bias when one ref says he didnt think it was a hold, one ref over rules him. Than after the play the player admits to it being a bad call......bud

 

Also please find where I said "the refs giving away the game"....this is what I said

 

 

My favorite part was after the HUGE holding call before the half (that ultimately took a 1st and 10 at the Pats 40 away from the Giants, which led to a punt and a long Brady TD drive to take the lead before half) was the head referee and the line judge asking Wilfork about the call during a TV time out and Wilfork says "That was a bad man, his hands werent even on me how could he hold? I tried to spin and it didnt work....really bad call, but thanks!"

 

That would have been HUGE news if we lost I think

 

Solely because it was the end of the half....if there is no call there and we have 1st and 10 from New Englands 40, at worst we take 2 minutes off the clock, if we dont get at least a FG. Instead we punted and NE took the lead as time expired.

 

Of course anything COULD happen, Eli could have thrown a pick on the next play, but most likely we take time off the clock or get another type of score.

 

If it happened in the middle of the quarter or in the 1st or 3rd and we lost, I agree not a big deal. But because it happened with 3-4 minutes left, it most likely would have preserved a lead for us going in to half time, and its a totally different game. Anything can happen. So again I say IF we lost, it would have been a HUGE deal, and theres really no way of denying simply because it happened at a point in the game that it did

Edited February 10, 2012 by NYGIANTSFLYHIGH

[Thanatos 2,847]

Also please find where I said "the refs giving away the game"....this is what I said

 

Here ya go:

Hands down the closest the refs [c]ame to deciding the game....not debatable

 

And you're still not getting it. I've explained it twice already, and you obviously can't understand the difference between a wrong call, a call that looks right on the field but was actually wrong, and a bad call, a call that on the field looked like the wrong call.

 

And no it would not have been a huge deal, you are again acting as if that was the only bad call made the entire day, lol, and the Giants didn't make a large amount of mistakes in the game that would have been blamed.

 

The non-call on the fumble for the GB game- that's a big deal if the Giants lose. This is not. It's a bad holding call it happens *all the time.* And I don't think the Giants would have blamed the officials for one missed call when they had several mistakes in the game that would have been to blame much more than one bad holding call. Several times later in the game the refs let borderline holding go on both sides. It happens. You're making a HUGE deal, as you put it, out of nothing.

Edited February 10, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

I find nothing wrong with what Bill said... You absolutely MUST cover Nicks and Cruz. Manningham is a talented guy, but has been pretty inconsistent in his career so far. Plus... They didn't even have terrible coverage on him. It was just a perfect throw and an amazing sideline catch.

[NYGIANTSFLYHIGH 1]

Here ya go:

 

 

And you're still not getting it. I've explained it twice already, and you obviously can't understand the difference between a wrong call, a call that looks right on the field but was actually wrong, and a bad call, a call that on the field looked like the wrong call.

 

And no it would not have been a huge deal, you are again acting as if that was the only bad call made the entire day, lol, and the Giants didn't make a large amount of mistakes in the game that would have been blamed.

 

The non-call on the fumble for the GB game- that's a big deal if the Giants lose. This is not. It's a bad holding call it happens *all the time.* And I don't think the Giants would have blamed the officials for one missed call when they had several mistakes in the game that would have been to blame much more than one bad holding call. Several times later in the game the refs let borderline holding go on both sides. It happens. You're making a HUGE deal, as you put it, out of nothing.

 

Thanks for assisting me, I said it was the closest they came to affecting the game...Not sure whats unclear there

 

Forget about the call being right, wrong, or unknown by the refs....Im not debating that.

 

The fact that your saying that it wouldnt have been a huge deal that this one call could easily have effected the score going in to the half from a 2 score Giant lead (12-3), the same score because we ran off most of the clock (9-3), or the score that it wound up being (9-10) with the Pats getting the ball to start the 3rd quarter....effectively ends this arguement because theres no getting through to you...One call being the potential between a 2 score lead, and losing at half, is huge.

[Thanatos 2,847]

I find nothing wrong with what Bill said... You absolutely MUST cover Nicks and Cruz. Manningham is a talented guy, but has been pretty inconsistent in his career so far. Plus... They didn't even have terrible coverage on him. It was just a perfect throw and an amazing sideline catch.

 

It's just so ironic because it's the exact same situation with Tyree.

 

Thanks for assisting me, I said it was the closest they came to affecting the game...Not sure whats unclear there

 

Forget about the call being right, wrong, or unknown by the refs....Im not debating that.

 

The fact that your saying that it wouldnt have been a huge deal that this one call could easily have effected the score going in to the half from a 2 score Giant lead (12-3), the same score because we ran off most of the clock (9-3), or the score that it wound up being (9-10) with the Pats getting the ball to start the 3rd quarter....effectively ends this arguement because theres no getting through to you...One call being the potential between a 2 score lead, and losing at half, is huge.

 

Wow. You can't even read what you wrote yourself, much less what others write, can you? You said deciding the game, not affecting the game, as if that one call would have decided the game had it gone the other way.

 

It wouldn't have been a huge deal because there was arguably holding on quite a few Giants 3rd down plays, (and Pats plays as well), so to pull out one bad call just because we happened to get a recording of it, is something I would expect from the media, who love to blow things out of proportion, but not from anyone on this site.

Edited February 10, 2012 by Thanatos19

[NYGIANTSFLYHIGH 1]

It's just so ironic because it's the exact same situation with Tyree.

 

 

 

Wow. You can't even read what you wrote yourself, much less what others write, can you? You said deciding the game, not affecting the game, as if that one call would have decided the game had it gone the other way.

 

It wouldn't have been a huge deal because there was arguably holding on quite a few Giants 3rd down plays, (and Pats plays as well), so to pull out one bad call just because we happened to get a recording of it, is something I would expect from the media, who love to blow things out of proportion, but not from anyone on this site.

 

In this particular arguement, affecting and deciding are interchangable for me. If you affect the game, it affects the decision...

 

And I cant believe this is still going on, FORGET all other plays and penalties and calls and non calls. Of course other plays could have changed the outcome, we could do this all day. My point is as simple as this:

 

This holding call, in which one ref said yes hold and one said no hold, as well as the player being held said no hold, because of the POINT of the game in which it occured COULD have AFFECTED the score at halftime, changing the entire second half and no one knows what could have happened. Effectively aiding in the DECIDING of the outcome. IF that ended up happening it WOULD have been a major discussion on here, ESPN, radio etc etc because it was the turning point/momentum swing whatever you want to call it which totally changed the game before going in to half time...I can not wrap my head around how you are attempting to debate that