This is some BS

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

junkman

Farewell to all!
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Messages
822
Name
junkman
I know this is partially facetious but I kept waiting for the refs to signal Rams ball on the muffed punt. It looked like they just didn't want to and from what I saw, they never did until they announced the result of their meeting. How's that for conspiracy thinking? o_O

I know, right?? That was really weird!! No flag. No call. Just a conference. I don't remember ever seeing something like that where at least someone points in the directing indicating who recovered the fumble. You can almost hear the conversation.

"Well we can't call forward momentum stopped"

"Do we have any neutral zone infractions?"

"Unsportsmanlike conduct?"

"We can't give the ball to the Rams, that could actually give them a chance to win. "
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
Hello, Bolts fan here. As a Charger backer, I have to agree that the calls yesterday were downright embarrassing. Rams fans definitely have a legitimate gripe.

The interesting pattern I've noticed over many years is that there is at least one game (sometimes two) per year where a NON 'media darling' team gets an egregious, jaw dropping hose job from the refs - I.e. like unbelievably bad, WTF type calls that seem to occur at critical junctures, particularly when your team is mounting a strong charge or clutch comeback. You'll sometimes notice a series of calls that almost make it obvious that the refs are determined to preserve a pre-arranged outcome. The Chargers had their ref-job game earlier this year in Denver vs the league's anointed ambassador, Peyton Manning. Last year, it was in DC (prior to RG3 & co self destructing). Year before, Drew Brees record setting night in New Orleans.

I'm also not blinded enough by homerism to ignore the one or two instances per year that inexplicably tilt a game in our favor (just like yesterday). I guess you could forget it all & just chalk it up to the idea that 'it all balances out in the end'. But being a supporter of fair play, none of this sits very well with me. Now I don't pay close attention to Rams games, other than cursory glances given by ESPN updates, but I imagine that if y'all jog your memory, you might notice a similar pattern. Heck, I can't imagine Tom Brady's bogus 1st ring vs the Greatest Show on Turf brings out warm & fuzzy feelings among your faithful. And btw, I previously theorized one or two 'ref job' games per year because it seems that any more than that would elicit a much stronger response from a increasingly suspicious audience, inviting unwanted extra scrutiny. Keep it to just one game per year & you've got some manageable expectations for plausible deniability - especially since you have a built-in group of 'debunkers' in the form of opposing fans.

Anyways, just thought I'd seek the opinion of other fans. Yes, I'm well aware that what I'm suggesting will draw some charges of being a tinfoil wearing hat conspiracy kook. Fair enough. But I do know that I'm a rational, educated person who's capable of deducing from some fairly overwhelming visual evidence I've been witness to over the years.

I apologize in advance for muddying the waters or ruffling any feathers.

'DJ'

Trust me, you'll find a lot of supporters here. This has happened to the Rams a few others times this year and this fan-base just gets more suspicious as the year goes on.
 

Stranger

How big is infinity?
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
7,182
Name
Hugh
You need to reduce the hyperbole (the corrupt reference) until you get some evidence. I don't follow/agree with your contention that the detection rates can be affected by the amount or complexity of the rules. I'm not following your logic there. Increased complexity will just lead to more inconsistency in the interpretation and thus the enforcement will be even more uneven. The increased quantity will mean that while they may see multiple infractions they will only call the one they think is the most important and let the others slide. At least that's how I see it.
The evidence is in the bias of calls. It exists in most games, and it's obvious to most fans who are watching. If it were just poor training or performance, than bad calls would be random (ie. no bias). But they are clearly not. So, some unknown force is causing the bias. That "force" is either internal or external to the referee teams. But I'd conclude that if it were internal, then the referees would be removed and replaced. Hence, it's only logical that the bias is the result of some "force" external to the ref teams. Now, we can only speculate as to the source and motives of this "force".


Paranoia aside, you might indeed find a pattern were you to collate all the data you're talking about but what are you most likely to find? I would conjecture that you'd discover that certain refs suck much more than others. After all, not all the refs are incompetent and the data should show that some refs (the incompetent ones) are wildly inconsistent and others (the better refs) are much more consistent.
First, I'm not paranoid. I'm speaking from direct experience, having found this type of system in something that impacts every American 18yrs and older. This is just not some fan with no knowledge of systems, and mechanisms of bias, shooting his mouth off.

Second, what you'd get is clear transparency. One adds noise to a system to obfuscate patterns to the untrained eye... that's typically the purpose of noise. In this case, noise is in the form of complicated rules that are difficult to interpret, high quantity of rules that are a challenge to know, lack of transparency into referee calls (yes, there is video review but there is no systemic collection, databasing & ongoing analysis of calls) which makes patterns almost impossible to discern. So, transparency = pattern recognition. And with pattern recognition one cannot hide the noise & can clearly reveal any bias that's occuring.

So, we have the NFL taking steps to add noise while simultaneously NOT taking steps to filter the noise. This is a clear sign of an intent to obfuscate. Video review, or more video review is not the solution to the problem, it's merely a panacea for public consumption, because only some calls can be reviewed, leaving plenty of room for calls that are either outside the camera's eye, or simply not reviewable..
 

Alan

Legend
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
9,765
Stranger elaborating:
The evidence is in the bias of calls. It exists in most games, and it's obvious to most fans who are watching.

As I read this I ask myself a few questions. Bias towards or against who? If it's obvious to most fans who're watching then I assume you mean that it's endemic everywhere and if that's true then what's the point of it? What does the NFL Referees Association gain from showing a bias towards one team versus another? Is it the same teams every week that they bias their calls for or against? They must show bias against a large percentage of the teams for "most fans" to be aware of it. When you posit a conspiracy there has to be some kind of gain for at least one party and I can't see where it is.

Not only that, how do they keep such a vast conspiracy (and it has to be vast if most fans see it) secret? And by secret I mean secret from the law and Congress and not from the public because you say most of us fans are aware of it already. A conspiracy on that scale involving so many, many people would leak in about an hour IMO. That's if I could even figure out what the refs get from it. Are they in cahoots with the NFL? Because that would widen it even further and thus make it even more susceptible to leaks. What's the gain for the NFL?

The consequences of getting caught would be catastrophic for the NFL. Especially considering the consequences if caught at it. Which of course they would be eventually and who would lose? Their exemption from all the rules and regulations that other businesses have would be the first thing the Congress would take away. Baseball barely survived a much, much smaller scandal with the Black Sox


First, I'm not paranoid. I'm speaking from direct experience, having found this type of system in something that impacts every American 18yrs and older. This is just not some fan with no knowledge of systems, and mechanisms of bias, shooting his mouth off.

What experience? Where is your evidence of this collusion by the refs and why are you only speaking in generalities instead of getting concrete? Afraid they'll rub you out (always wanted to use that phrase in a sentence :LOL:)? Let's hear your evidence. One or two examples will be fine.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
33,812
Name
Stu
Oh yeah @Alan ? How do you explain this recent shot of the refs after one of Tavon's run backs? F U R indeed. That is just blatant. Fuck U Rams? I say fuck them.
upload_2014-11-25_12-33-41.jpeg
 

Alan

Legend
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
9,765
In today's world of same sex marriage and everything goes, I think you should be ashamed of your bias against the refs for liking a little Ram @RamFan503. Especially in those sexy uniforms. I think most of them have full time jobs as shepherds in the Rockies in the off season so it's a natural extension. They need to work on their pickup lines though. :eek: :LOL:
 

Alan

Legend
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
9,765
RamFan503 forgetting what high altitude does:
What? You don't think that wink and knowing nod while calling our guys for holding is a good pick-up line?
I think it gets awfully cold high in the Rockies when it's just you and a few Rams and ewes. Don't be judgmental my friend.
 

Stranger

How big is infinity?
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
7,182
Name
Hugh
Bias towards or against who?
Who cares "who"? What's important is that the calls are not randomly distributed.

If it's obvious to most fans who're watching then I assume you mean that it's endemic everywhere and if that's true then what's the point of it?
It's not necessarily about money, but that is a benefit. The NFL is able to craft a marketing story that realizes greater PR & public interest, and therefore creates more market penetration for the NFL product.

I can't see where it is.
Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it is not there. It's just not there for you.

Not only that, how do they keep such a vast conspiracy (and it has to be vast if most fans see it) secret? And by secret I mean secret from the law and Congress and not from the public because you say most of us fans are aware of it already. A conspiracy on that scale involving so many, many people would leak in about an hour IMO.
Why do you assume Congress would have a different agenda from the NFL, and therefore would want to expose the activity? All of the above are assumptions that aren't necessarily accurate.

The consequences of getting caught would be catastrophic for the NFL

It will never happen. They have no reason to fear this. The Noble Lie is been around since humanity socialized.
What experience? Where is your evidence of this collusion by the refs and why are you only speaking in generalities instead of getting concrete? Afraid they'll rub you out (always wanted to use that phrase in a sentence :LOL:)? Let's hear your evidence. One or two examples will be fine.
I said I was aware of this type of behavior in another system, not the NFL. But the same rules of science applies. My knowledge is not for public consumption.
 

Alan

Legend
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
9,765
Stranger opening my eyes:
Why do you assume Congress would have a different agenda from the NFL
, and therefore would want to expose the activity?

Next thing you're gonna tell me is that the rot goes all the way to the top. :eek: My ex-wife isn't gonna like you ratting her out. Just sayin'.

My knowledge is not for public consumption.

Would you tell me if I swore I didn't even like the public?

If what you say is true then there doesn't seem to be much we can do about it. Do you think they will ever relent?
 
Last edited:

Stranger

How big is infinity?
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
7,182
Name
Hugh
If what you say is true then there doesn't seem to be much we can do about it. Do you think they will ever relent?
Not unless the methods stop working. But with an all-too-trusting public who believe the rot-creators over those trying to expose the rot, it doesn't look good.