*** Official Flying Stupidity Wagering thread ***

[Muck Ficon]

Holy shit. Just saw the replay. The ref in the back of the end zone was staring at KJ Wright as he batted the ball out. The ref didn't miss the call, the ref didn't know the rules.

Back judge is quoted as saying he didn't feel it was overt, so he didn't call it. Many others are saying it was going out anyways so who cares. I disagree 1000%. The last bounce the ball checked up hard. There's a huge chance it doesn't go out without the tap. And it doesn't matter, a rule is a rule.

SVP is railing in reviewable vs non-reviewable and I agree with him too. It's a turnover, which is automatically reviewed yet this aspect isn't subject to review?? WTF?

Agreed, that ball was probably not going out of bounds. KJ Wright realized that, and that's why he batted it out.

[Muck Ficon]

Holy shit. Just saw the replay. The ref in the back of the end zone was staring at KJ Wright as he batted the ball out. The ref didn't miss the call, the ref didn't know the rules.

Back judge is quoted as saying he didn't feel it was overt, so he didn't call it. Many others are saying it was going out anyways so who cares. I disagree 1000%. The last bounce the ball checked up hard. There's a huge chance it doesn't go out without the tap. And it doesn't matter, a rule is a rule.

SVP is railing in reviewable vs non-reviewable and I agree with him too. It's a turnover, which is automatically reviewed yet this aspect isn't subject to review?? WTF?

It wouldn't be classified as a turnover because Seattle never recovered the ball. It was obvious he fumbled the ball, it was obvious the ball never crossed the goal line. As far as that goes in the NFL...that means there is nothing to review. Complete bullshit, but that's how they will defend it. The fact is, the ref didn't know the rules.

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/10/06/kj-...calvin-johnson

And it turns out even Wright didn't know the rule. In his postgame press conference, he told Brian Floyd of SB Nation he intentionally batted the ball because he didn't want to take a chance diving on it. The Seahawks linebacker went on to admit he didn't know the rule.

When a Seattle reporter told Wright what he'd done was illegal, Wright replied, “People do it all the time though ... is that illegal? Explain that to me.”

[simpdog]

Conspiracy obviously.

Lions covering but not winning was best for Vegas.

[Daly]

Di Di no hit +165 or better

[handicapme]

Di Di no hit +165 or better

My guy only has +135, -160 hit

[Daly]

Di Di no hit +165 or better

My guy only has +135, -160 hit

I got it about 50/50 he gets a hit. Small chance he only sees 3 AB's hitting 9th. Not expecting a high scoring game. I still think 135 was playable but 150+ is where the value is.

This is a spot play. I make no guarantee he doesn't get a hit tonight, but I think if you played it 10 times it would be 5/10.

[Daly]

2 hitter through 6. Di Di won't see another at bat until the bottom of the 8th.......

But of course this Punch and Judy .200 hitting POS has one of the hits.

When good bets go bad... We move on.

[handicapme]

2 hitter through 6. Di Di won't see another at bat until the bottom of the 8th.......

But of course this Punch and Judy .200 hitting POS has one of the hits.

When good bets go bad... We move on.

That was a tough one, didn't take it just because I wasn't given near the odds you recommended, but would have followed... took the astros pretty large as I just liked the situation. You're up a ridic amount on props, just keep at it.

[handicapme]

Thinking of taking Colts +185 on the ML. Almost certain Luck/davis doesn't play, but honestly I kind of see ALOT of value in this play. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

[simpdog]

Thinking of taking Colts +185 on the ML. Almost certain Luck/davis doesn't play, but honestly I kind of see ALOT of value in this play. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

UPDATE (10:41 a.m. ET): Andrew Luck will not start Thursday, per ESPN's Adam Schefter. Matt Hasselbeck will start for the second consecutive week.

Hasselback isn't 100% either.

[handicapme]

Thinking of taking Colts +185 on the ML. Almost certain Luck/davis doesn't play, but honestly I kind of see ALOT of value in this play. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

UPDATE (10:41 a.m. ET): Andrew Luck will not start Thursday, per ESPN's Adam Schefter. Matt Hasselbeck will start for the second consecutive week.

Hasselback isn't 100% either.

Yea that's why I may hold off, but if hasselback does play, maybe it's a sucker bet but I just like the value.

[handicapme]

Grabbed it at +195, maybe I'm a sucker but I truely don't believe that Houston should ever be giving this much vs any team in the league.

[smiflorida]

Grabbed it at +195, maybe I'm a sucker but I truely don't believe that Houston should ever be giving this much vs any team in the league.

i'm with you on the value. took small action on colts +190

[Daly]

M Davis Over 18.5 comp -130

[Brittney Griner's Clit]

Not betting til I get paid for last week. I'm sure its a slow pay, but regardless, locals suck.

[Lannister]

Indy +5. Matt Hasselbeck god mode.

[DRK Star]

you guys are a lock. I bet on Houston. Obv int to ruin that drive.

[VegasJim]

you guys are a lock. I bet on Houston. Obv int to ruin that drive.

We been on a lot of the same depressing picks together lately lol

Was very pleased watching them get down the field with ease and then Foster misses the easiest catch ever. It was a good pass...smh

[VegasJim]

Just caught a break at least as that call should have stood. Ill take it though....hopefully they can answer back now.

[jsearles22]

you guys are a lock. I bet on Houston. Obv int to ruin that drive.

I'm on fuck Houston tonight. Royals gonna win. Indy gonna cover and likely win outright. And SMU gonna cover

Book it bitches