This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

• Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
• Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
• If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.

Post being replied to

Kyrie Irving was in the replay booth. by rockmcd

I remember that the angle which was apparently the best indicator that it was out of bounds was an overhead shot in which you couldn't see any space between the ball and the sideline. The problem is that a football, like Earth, is not a flat object like the bottom of a cleat. The replay official failed to consider whether the curved part of the football may have been raised above the edge of the sideline while the bottom of the football may have only been touching the field of play.

I think the ball probably touched the sideline, but we all know that "probably" isn't enough to overturn a call. It was one of those plays where the call on the field should have stood regardless of which way it went.