Who called the 2nd timeout?

if you cant handle the truth and want to get personal maybe we can figure this out

I just don't understand what your argument is.

if you cant handle the truth and want to get personal maybe we can figure this out

32 year old internet thugs are hilarious. Punctuation and spelling owns you. Obviously you don't know all that much about football because though you claim your knowledge out shines all you have yet to make one valid point nor have you used one term that could be considered any type of football vocabulary.:spank:


To the real skins fans: i was watching the game yesterday and felt so bad that you could not pull out the win. Then, to see my beloved Broncos lose to the raiders and basically put us out of the wildcard picture really crushed me. Well, i guess its mock draft time.


P.S: i am watching the ST funeral service now, very very nice/classy ceremony.:goodjob:

chocho = gone

bye d-bag

if you cant handle the truth and want to get personal maybe we can figure this out

Go away.

chocho = gone

bye d-bag

Thanks, now back to our regularly scheduled argument..

chocho = gone

bye d-bag

http://web1.denverbroncos.com/resources/custom/Smilies/salutebst.gif

Under NFL rules, the same team cannot call consecutive timeouts. If the officials incorrectly acknowledge the consecutive timeout, the clock is immediately started and the timeout negated. There is no penalty for this act, unless the purpose of the second timeout is to startle and cause a false start by the offensive team. In this situation, an unsportsmanlike conduct foul could be called on the defensive team. Under college rules, consecutive team timeouts are legal, and a team could call all of the team timeouts in succession.

When the penalty was called I googled this immediately. This is in reference to a Colts-Bears game in 2005 when the Bears tried to call 2 timeouts in a row. Seems the unsportsmanlike conduct call is a judgment call. Its not an unsportsmanlike penalty for trying to call a timeout you don't have, so this ruling is baffling to me.

Here's the link. Jerry Markbreit's answers on ChicagoSports.com (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/askthereferee/cs-050105jerrymarkbreitsanswers,1,5838515.story?coll= cs-bears-asktheref-headlines)

Under NFL rules, the same team cannot call consecutive timeouts. If the officials incorrectly acknowledge the consecutive timeout, the clock is immediately started and the timeout negated. There is no penalty for this act, unless the purpose of the second timeout is to startle and cause a false start by the offensive team. In this situation, an unsportsmanlike conduct foul could be called on the defensive team. Under college rules, consecutive team timeouts are legal, and a team could call all of the team timeouts in succession.

When the penalty was called I googled this immediately. This is in reference to a Colts-Bears game in 2005 when the Bears tried to call 2 timeouts in a row. Seems the unsportsmanlike conduct call is a judgment call. Its not an unsportsmanlike penalty for trying to call a timeout you don't have, so this ruling is baffling to me.

Here's the link. Jerry Markbreit's answers on ChicagoSports.com (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/askthereferee/cs-050105jerrymarkbreitsanswers,1,5838515.story?coll= cs-bears-asktheref-headlines)

The rule was amended following the 2005 season to include an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty for calling consecutive timeouts to try to "ice" the kicker.

So you spend some 20+ years as a coach in the NFL and all you get is a slap on the wrist, in the past year and a half the rule changes but you have a mental lapse and blow it. It is what it is.

I don't understand why everybody is always looking for someone to blame. Lindell may have hit that field goal anyway from 51 yards. If the offensive line didn't have that false start on 4th and less than a yard...if they didn't give up a safety...if Campbell (who takes the weight of the world on his shoulders every game) didn't throw that interception...if, if, if. Today is a day of mourning, not of blame.

I don't understand why everybody is always looking for someone to blame. Lindell may have hit that field goal anyway from 51 yards. If the offensive line didn't have that false start on 4th and less than a yard...if they didn't give up a safety...if Campbell (who takes the weight of the world on his shoulders every game) didn't throw that interception...if, if, if. Today is a day of mourning, not of blame.

I agree. Although you'll find that most people don't look for someone to blame here. They already know who to blame, they just look for new ways to blame him.