NYJetsFan.com Forums: Bay Area Woman Trapped In Airport For Eight Days - NYJetsFan.com Forums

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

Jets win 3-1. Beat dolphins so bad that philbin isnt allowed back from england.
Jetsfan115 Icon : (06 October 2015 - 06:37 PM) call em a liar if you want, but I seen it man
santana Icon : (07 October 2015 - 12:52 AM) guess I should enable a character limit for the shoutbox
santana Icon : (07 October 2015 - 12:53 AM) getting a bit out of hand
Jetsman05 Icon : (07 October 2015 - 06:30 AM) Rob you're brutal
MikeGangGree... Icon : (07 October 2015 - 01:30 PM) Who should I start this week in fantasy football? Its a PPR league. I can start 3 of the WRs Edelman-/D-Thomas/Mike Evans/James Jones
MikeGangGree... Icon : (07 October 2015 - 01:30 PM) Edelman and Thomas are must start
MikeGangGree... Icon : (07 October 2015 - 01:31 PM) So do I start Evans against Jax or James Jones vs STL
Jetsfan115 Icon : (07 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) jones. winston likes jackson more then evans
RetireChrebet Icon : (Yesterday, 01:47 PM) My two year old daughter is less manic and is able to maintain her composure much better than someone we know here ....
azjetfan Icon : (Yesterday, 03:07 PM) Dolphins have also fired their DC
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:24 PM) I am composed. 115 and I may see things differently but he has never pissed me off. He is just trying to make his point of view and I mine nothing more
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:25 PM) I just feel the rule is a very bad rule to give the offense the ball back for losing the ball in the endzone because of a batted ball and feel the NFL is far to offense firendly these days thats all
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:27 PM) I know many agree with that. I get that many changes have been made to limit things like brain damage and other injuries some season ending and career ending but defenses cant play hard like they used to and pathetic calls on defenses have ruinbed many games.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:29 PM) Thats why brought up the Jets Fish game. The balls were clearly uncatcahable and a light tug on the jersey shouldn't be a pi. Whatever happened to the uncatchable ball rule?"
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:33 PM) and as far as that montage I did have ESPN on for 2 hours after the game because I wanted to see all the reactions and get a clear understanding of this old rule and I never saw a bunch of clips where flags were thrown for the play in question. So I asked for proof. If it was on ESPN it wasn't on ESPN1 maybe ESPN 2 ,3 or news. Its not wrong or brutal to ask for proof when he stated he saw it on ESPN I had the channel on and didn't see what he claimed he saw and still haven't seen any video of proof of his claims
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:36 PM) But as I said not mad at all. 115 and I are cool and always have been Ive never been mad at him in anyway. This is a fan forum and we dispute. If we all agreed on everything there would be no point of the forum. Disputes on stats and calls make things interesting, and makes each of use see things from different points of view
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:56 PM) it was on whatever channel the game itself came on
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:56 PM) and for the record I don't have any issue with anything rob said. I just disagree with it
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:57 PM) I do think rules are too offense friendly, but I think in this case, when someone blatently breaks a rule ti should be punished
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:57 PM) but then again pacman got away with ripping off a players helmet and didn't get a penatly
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:57 PM) refs need to be more consistent
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:04 PM) Hell yeah! Pac 12 AZ State Jaelen Strong. Not a Texans fan but and dont watch a ton of college football but do watch the Pac 12 for football and basketball growing up in Phoenix and also a Suns fan and liking the Cardinals since they moved to AZ .Was a Jets fan though before Az got the cardinals . Strong was really good for AZ State.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:05 PM) Havent studied up on strong for the Texans but will have to since the announcers said he hasnt played much. I want to know if he has been injured or not performing. He has good hands and size
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:08 PM) I actually was debating on starting the Colts witth Jets D on bye week glad I dropped them. Wasn't much to choose from. Some decent defenses but bad matchups. took a chance on the Jags this week hoping they can shut down Tampa
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:10 PM) Oh and thanks for that 115. people took it wrong. we were simply debating our opinions with passion for our love of football with no animosity and people took it wrong. Easy to misunderstand texts
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Today, 11:21 AM) yeah people don't realize it's ok to disagree on the internet without it being 2 people hating each other lol
RetireChrebet Icon : (Today, 12:30 PM) I think if the defense touches a live football in the end zone, period, it should be ruled a touchback.
RetireChrebet Icon : (Today, 12:30 PM) Talking about fumbles, not passes, of course.
RetireChrebet Icon : (Today, 12:31 PM) That's the simplest way to combat any confusion about the rule.
RetireChrebet Icon : (Today, 12:32 PM) If you don't like that rule, then don't fumble in the end zone your trying to score in.
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Today, 02:21 PM) it's gotta be possession.
RetireChrebet Icon : (Today, 04:03 PM) I know what the rule is. In proposing a rule change. Evidently, the way it is now is too complicated. If a defense touches a live football in the end zone it should be their ball at the 20. Problem solved.
RetireChrebet Icon : (Today, 04:03 PM) I'm*
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Today, 04:44 PM) what if the defense touches it whole trying tor ecover but doens't get it and the offense jumps on it first?
ROBJETS Icon : (Today, 05:56 PM) You may not agree with it 115 but the way I look at it is if the offense recovered it it would be a touchdown. Its ok for a punter, qb, or rb ,etc. to deliberately take a safety so they dont get a punt blocked for a td or to avoid giving the ball up on the 1-2 yard line giving up a near definite td. An also those safeties by the O sometimes saves the game because giving up 2 instead of 7 keeps the game in reach at times.
ROBJETS Icon : (Today, 06:03 PM) Thats why I disagree with the rule. The offense gets the breaks of only giving up 2 points on O. but when fumbkling into the endzone and out it is always ruled a touchback even if the defender or O tries to recoiver the ball in the endzone and the ball goes out of bounds. Thats why I think batting the ball out of the endzone should still be a touchback instead of giving the ball back to the O that fumbled the ball into the endzone. Just dont feel that they should get a chance to get the ball back for an almost automatic td when they fumbled into the endzone just because of a batted ball. Its something that could litterally cause the defense that made a great play to lose simply because of a vbatted ball. Yet if they try to recover it it and it goes out its a touchback. I just feel its to game changing and a bad rule to give the O the ball back after they messed up bad because that play was the difference between a win and loss. The O fumbles so giving the O the ball back is like saying your great def play was worthless.
ROBJETS Icon : (Today, 06:04 PM) Just feel that its a bad rule since it would have almost definitely changed the game winner.
ROBJETS Icon : (Today, 06:08 PM) Just to many good rules for the O these days and to many bad rules for the D. this isn't college where offense dominates in most games. In the pros I want to see an equal playing field and not how its become so offensive friendly. Our own Jets have lost a lot of games on defensive calls alone after stopping the O. 3rd down and a mile and a penalty cost a 1st down and in many cases the game for us. Basically that's why I'm against the rule. I want an equal playing field in the pros nothing more.
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Today, 06:26 PM) Offense is in control of the ball, they should have that option. Both teams get to play offense it's not unfiar
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Today, 06:26 PM) a major defensive play is more game changing then a major offensive play too.
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Today, 06:26 PM) turnover ratio is better linked to win/loss then any other stat
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Today, 06:27 PM) even in your case the offense gives up 2 point and posession back with good field position and ball control
ROBJETS Icon : (Today, 06:33 PM) Lets just a agree to disagree on this topic. We both see the situation different and neither of us will budge on this. best we just let it go and see if the NFL starts enforcing the rule more or changes it at some point. Either way. All the coaches and players in the league now know the rule so I doubt it will deliberately happen again any time soon....but then again who knows...in the games there are a lot of stupid fouls out of frustration, taunting, etc.
ROBJETS Icon : (Today, 06:34 PM) And the fans and officials are now aware of a rule almost no one but the officials knew.
ROBJETS Icon : (Today, 06:37 PM) Heck Im upset that we arent 4-0 right now with all thr mistakes against the Eagles and still almost coming back. I feel we need every win we can get especially with the Bills looking decent and always having to deal with the pats every year. Be nice to win the division for once. So tired of seeing the Pats win and get a bye almost every year.
Resize Shouts Area

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Bay Area Woman Trapped In Airport For Eight Days

#1 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,169
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 03 November 2011 - 04:54 PM

This is why I only fly Southwest


Sure, hurricanes and unseasonal blizzards can create major delays in air travel. And the ordinary air traveler faces plenty of exasperation via the heightened, and not always rational, security measures of the Transportation Safety Administration.

But Terri Weissinger, a native of Sonoma County, Calif., has suffered a new scale of airport indignity: Seeking to start a new life in Idaho, Weissinger was condemned to eight days in the limbo of the San Francisco International Airport--because she was unable to pay the fee her airline assessed for an additional piece of checked baggage.

As Michael Finney, a correspondent with the local ABC news affiliate KGO, reports, Wessinger, "was broke" when she left for the airport. (You can watch Finney's report in the video clip above.)

"She had nothing but an airline ticket and $30 in her pocket." She also hadn't traveled by air in the last five years--meaning that when she stepped to the ticket counter to check her bags, she was in for a serious case of sticker shock. The U.S. Airways agent checking her in told her that it was cost $60 to check both her bags. Weissinger offered to pay the fee when she arrived in Idaho, but the agent declined. She also offered to leave one bag there at the San Francisco Airport. That, the agent explained, would be in violation of security regulations.

Wessigner's next move was to try to scare up the full fee by calling friends in the area. She came up empty, and by the time she'd finished working the phones, she missed her flight. That's when things started to get truly Kafka-esque. To get a new flight "she'd have to pay her bag fees plus $150 in change fees," Finney notes. Without a place to stay nearby, Weissinger stayed the night at the airport. She awoke to more bad news: U.S. Airlines explained that, since she couldn't pay a change fee, she'd have to book a new flight from scratch. That would run about $1,000.

For the next week, Weissinger could do nothing but wander up and down the San Francisco air terminal. At one point, she says, she was treated for anxiety at the terminal's medical clinic; when she sought police assistance, she reports, she was nearly brought in on vagrancy charges. Her ordeal stretched out over eight days--and it only came to an end with the generous assistance of parishioners at a chapel called "The Airport Church of Christ." They gave her $210 that covered the original fee arrangement that Weissinger was able to restore with U.S. Air--the $150 change fee together with the $60 to check her bags.

Weissinger says that she never saw any baggage fee notification when she booked her flight on the online travel service Orbitz--nor did her travel itinerary carry any such notification. There is, however, one small silver lining in this whole grim Tom Hanks-style saga: Weissinger was traveling in April, and since then, federal rules have forced online travel services and airline reservation sites to feature prominent notification of baggage fees prior to booking a flight. As for U.S. Airways, an airline representative told Finney that "We have apologized to Ms. Weissinger, but unfortunately are unable to offer a refund. When you purchase a non-refundable ticket, you accept the terms and conditions. If a passenger cannot travel with their bags, they need to make other arrangements."

Translation: A U.S. Airways apology and $60 will get you two checked bags.

Posted Image

#2 User is offline   Jetsfan115 Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Assistant Admin
  • Posts: 23,792
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cali

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 05 November 2011 - 12:08 PM

wow just wow

#3 User is offline   NJAzrael71 Icon

  • Formerly FlyHi
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,653
  • Joined: 06-August 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 13 November 2011 - 01:31 AM

That's insane. This is one of the reasons why I always check for changes in fees when booking my flights.
I will not be forgotten. This is my time to shine. I've got the scars to prove it. Only the strong survive.

When someone annoys u, it takes 42 muscles in ur face 2 frown. BUT, it only takes 4 muscles 2 extend ur arm & b!tch-slap that mother@*?!&! upside the head!!

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users