baseball pays way too well for what it is

Over time, I'm sure the numbers will show that three games among the top four teams is somehow worse than one.

I've eaten ass hundreds of times.... I've eaten the ass of many, many people; too many to count, remember or name. Never once have I gotten sick from it let alone some serious bs pathogen you're afraid of. You do whatever, but eating ass is as safe as most other sex acts.

I'm 37, and not a serious niche fetishist. But I like being on the receiving end of a rimjob.

What a clutch throw by Romo.

If it were me, I would defer to the refs whose job it is to know the rulebook. It really doesn't matter how many steps he takes if he is falling the entire time, which he is because his legs got caught up with the defenders as he was trying to land. He didn't dive forward. He was falling forward and then tried to…

Yeah, trust me, I'm a Giants fan, and Beckham's grasp of the rules is tentative at best. Being able to catch a ball doesn't give you some sort of superior insight into the rules.

Notice that every step he takes brings his body closer to the ground. That is, by definition, "going to the ground."

It's not nearly the indecipherable rubric you are pretending it is. He didn't maintain possession to the ground.

It wasn't a catch because he was falling towards the ground when he gained possession of the ball (note he double clutches it before he gains possession).

I saw the live play and the gazillion replays on Fox. I saw it come loose after he hit the ground and rolled over but I thought it was clear he had control and stretched for the end zone. But thanks for the perspective.

Oh, ok. Well, sorry for knowing the rules and telling you why it wasn't a catch. Go ahead and impotently rage more.

Calvin Johnson rule.

A Big Fuck You Dallas,

- Lions Fans

"Yes. It does."

It doesn't matter if he was reaching for the endzone or not, he was going to the ground and didn't maintain possession. The rules are clear about this.

You mad?

Except he was going to the ground and didn't maintain possession. Pretty clear dude.

and haunched over from the first half-step.

He was going to the ground. It's not even debatable at this point. The rule is the rule and that was not a catch.

That was a pretty amazing non-catch, but review got it right. Pretty similar to the Earl Thomas INT that was overturned last night, except the ball was bobble even more on this play.