IamNotADancer
Registered User
- Feb 16, 2017
- 2,421
- 2,707
Except you are watching from your couch. The multiple opinions, which are all the same, are from ice level and from people one both sides who know the people involved.
But yes, I'm sure your all seeing eyes know better.
Except we have the advantage to form our opinion after watching several replays (slow motion and regular speed).
Let me ask you this, not sure if you have ever played sports or not, but let's assume you did. Have you never been in a situation in which you were close to the play and while it happened you had one opinion and then afterwards when you had time to assess the play and watch it again on film your changed your opinion?
I can say I have which is why there is no point to react one way or another in the heat of the moment.
So you can have your opinion, even though it seems like you are heavily relying on what others say but I don't think you have any reason to be condescending given the circumstances here.
Arguments from authority only work if the "authority" has a clear, logical, evident reason as to why X should be the case. In this scenario, I'll take Lowry seeing the play directly in front of his bench over a slow-motion replay perspective from a biased fan.
See above answer. The refs didn't see it and that is what counts, still doesn't mean it didn't happen.
As I said, I still trust my eyes and my super inferior understanding of physics (acceleration, force, counter-force, mass, etc.) over emotionally charged individuals.
The point isn't to believe Adam Lowry or anyone else over your own senses and judgement. The point is that it's possible to see this as a fluke without being biased against the Jets/in favor of the Wild.
I have zero stake in this game. I couldn't give a damn about either of those teams. If both teams moved I wouldn't shed a tear, if both teams somehow co-win the Stanley Cup and cure cancer in the process I might shrug my shoulders.