Page 1 of 1
NFL rules that two of Breeland's penalties weren't penalties
Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2014 9:23 am
by Irn-Bru
Re: NFL rules that two of Breeland's penalties weren't penal
Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2014 12:38 pm
by oj
The results of those bad calls changed the game. Its a credit to Breeland that he sucked up the bad calls and played as well as they would let him play. It was almost as if the refs wanted to see beckham make another catch to get good press for the NFL.
Re: NFL rules that two of Breeland's penalties weren't penal
Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2014 12:58 pm
by mastdark81
I thought Breeland played well. Those big plays that Odel Beckham made wasn't against him.
Re: NFL rules that two of Breeland's penalties weren't penal
Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2014 2:05 pm
by PAPDOG67
I said this while watching the game. We always get shafted by the refs when playing the Giants.....its because Mara, Rooney, and to a lesser extent, Kraft run the NFL. Its no secret. The main problem I had was with Haslett. Eli was only looking OBJs way in the 2nd half, yet no double team or adjustment to speak of. The man is clueless.
Re: NFL rules that two of Breeland's penalties weren't penal
Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2014 4:22 pm
by oj
mastdark81 wrote:I thought Breeland played well. Those big plays that Odel Beckham made wasn't against him.
By then Haz had pulled Breeland off beckham and he was playing him soft - a direct result of those bad calls. Elsewise Breeland would have been in beckhams shirt pocket.
I'd also like to point out that none of the coaches were present raisng h*ll with the umpire during those bad calls. If it were the other way around Caughlin would have been up side of the umpire going ballistic. Our coaches were missing in action.
Re: NFL rules that two of Breeland's penalties weren't penal
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2014 9:53 am
by Irn-Bru
oj wrote:mastdark81 wrote:I thought Breeland played well. Those big plays that Odel Beckham made wasn't against him.
By then Haz had pulled Breeland off beckham and he was playing him soft - a direct result of those bad calls. Elsewise Breeland would have been in beckhams shirt pocket.
It looks to me like Breeland and Amerson are playing sides of the field rather than covering particular receivers, so that's why Breeland wasn't always on OBJ.
I'd also like to point out that none of the coaches were present raisng h*ll with the umpire during those bad calls. If it were the other way around Caughlin would have been up side of the umpire going ballistic. Our coaches were missing in action.
Hmm, I'm not sure about that. I recall seeing Haslett screaming at the refs during the game.
Re: NFL rules that two of Breeland's penalties weren't penal
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2014 10:34 am
by oj
Irn-Bru wrote:oj wrote:mastdark81 wrote:I thought Breeland played well. Those big plays that Odel Beckham made wasn't against him.
By then Haz had pulled Breeland off beckham and he was playing him soft - a direct result of those bad calls. Elsewise Breeland would have been in beckhams shirt pocket.
It looks to me like Breeland and Amerson are playing sides of the field rather than covering particular receivers, so that's why Breeland wasn't always on OBJ.
I'd also like to point out that none of the coaches were present raisng h*ll with the umpire during those bad calls. If it were the other way around Caughlin would have been up side of the umpire going ballistic. Our coaches were missing in action.
Hmm, I'm not sure about that. I recall seeing Haslett screaming at the refs during the game.
You could be right, I was following that matchup as best I could. The last two beckham touchdowns (or did he get only two?) Breeland was at the fringes of the play, I was unsure if he was defender playing soft or had followed the ball. I assumed that breeland was defender because if the giants could get breeland on another receiver they would definately have him well away from the intended receiver.