Jump to content

I Feel Like All Of The Ranting/trolling Is Distracting From The Main Story Here


Recommended Posts

interesting i remember seeing detroit snap the ball during the game a full second after the clock hit zero. yet, it's called under that scenario.

to the OP's point, it's not the main story, but there are a ton of rules in the NFL that don't allow for a well flowing sporting event. replay is waaaaayyyy over blown. at this point replay should be scrapped all together and go back to refs deciding plays on the field. i remember when replay was being toyed with and people didn't like the flow of the game as a result. everyone has totally blown that up. the flow of the game is atrocious. every int, every td, every fumble, every close catch, every play is reviewed ad nauseum. it is honestly a rediculous sporting event today. the fact that people live and breath football is the only reason these idiotic rules and replays haven't cost the league fans and dollars.

the NFL from the 90's and prior, is and always will be faaarrrr faaarrrr superior.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Detroit committed a penalty *and* missed a field goal kick as time expired. They were allowed to kick again.

That is a massive exploit in the NFL rulebook that needs to be addressed.

I would love to hear the explanation of this rule to the English folks at the stadium and watching on TV.

The Lions didn't use it as an exploit of the rules, but they sure could have. Why not get down there, clock the ball & instead of rushing your FG team out onto the field have them take their time, let the clock run down and then have plenty of time to set up and kick the FG after the 5 yard penalty? Rule definitely needs to be addressed and a 10 second runoff should occur.
Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting i remember seeing detroit snap the ball during the game a full second after the clock hit zero. yet, it's called under that scenario.

to the OP's point, it's not the main story, but there are a ton of rules in the NFL that don't allow for a well flowing sporting event. replay is waaaaayyyy over blown. at this point replay should be scrapped all together and go back to refs deciding plays on the field. i remember when replay was being toyed with and people didn't like the flow of the game as a result. everyone has totally blown that up. the flow of the game is atrocious. every int, every td, every fumble, every close catch, every play is reviewed ad nauseum. it is honestly a rediculous sporting event today. the fact that people live and breath football is the only reason these idiotic rules and replays haven't cost the league fans and dollars.

the NFL from the 90's and prior, is and always will be faaarrrr faaarrrr superior.

HERE HERE!

As a life long fan of the NFL for over 50 years now I am disgusted by so many things Goodell has done to ruin this game, and I keep hoping against hope he will be disposed SOON!

As you stated, the game has slowed to a crawl with the endless, and sometimes useless replays. Furthermore, I honestly don't think it has reduced the number of bad calls as intended.

Football is a game, not a courtroom where every decision gets reviewed by a higher court as lawyers like Goodell would have it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still don't see how the delay of game penalises a team that misses a field goal and gets another shot. It penalises the opposition.

Even Neil Reynolds who is the main contributor to the sky broadcast over here yesterday didn't understand 1) why the delay of game was called and 2) why theres only a 10 second run off when the clock is running.

Especially with no time run off, if a play is completed then the opposition should have the option to decline the penalty.

The original kick could've easily been made, then the second one missed. If you watch the replay, the Ref begins waving the play off as the kicker is making contact with the ball. There is no way he would've known at that point whether the kick was good or bad. There was no conspiracy from the grassy knoll! The point of most observers and even Mike Pereirra was that typically the way delay of game is called is that there is allowed one beat or some small amount of time after the play clock reaches zero before the flag flies. In this case, the Ref almost anticipated the count of zero and blew the whistle simultaneously with it reaching zero. That is what was unusual about it. If the results had gone the other way the Lions fans would be crying now instead of us but I don't think there was a conspiracy either way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My problem will this is,

With 4 seconds left in the game, why is there even a delay of game called? Especially JUST AS the clock strikes zero.

We know they are kicking a FG. It's not like they were purposefully trying to take a delay penalty. The play should have stood.

Especially when multiple times during the game they snapped the ball well after the play clock hit zero...

What if the kick had been made? Should the play stand then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The original kick could've easily been made, then the second one missed. If you watch the replay, the Ref begins waving the play off as the kicker is making contact with the ball. There is no way he would've known at that point whether the kick was good or bad. There was no conspiracy from the grassy knoll! The point of most observers and even Mike Pereirra was that typically the way delay of game is called is that there is allowed one beat or some small amount of time after the play clock reaches zero before the flag flies. In this case, the Ref almost anticipated the count of zero and blew the whistle simultaneously with it reaching zero. That is what was unusual about it. If the results had gone the other way the Lions fans would be crying now instead of us but I don't think there was a conspiracy either way.

Oh no I wasn't crying conspiracy by any means. I thought that they were over a second delayed in snapping the kick as it was. I was jumping up and down for a delay of game, just don't necessarily agree with them not really being penalised for it when they've got extra time to prepare to kick and only get 5 yards on a stopped clock.

Maybe the hooded jedi in New England will bring that up next off season like he did with the increase in goalpost length.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh no I wasn't crying conspiracy by any means. I thought that they were over a second delayed in snapping the kick as it was. I was jumping up and down for a delay of game, just don't necessarily agree with them not really being penalised for it when they've got extra time to prepare to kick and only get 5 yards on a stopped clock.

Maybe the hooded jedi in New England will bring that up next off season like he did with the increase in goalpost length.

I just realized that i quoted the wrong post. Sorry, I meant to quote the one that suggested the conspiracy. As far as taking the 5 yard penalty as a trade off for more time, If you're willing to do that on a field goal, go for it in my opinion. I understand it for a punt but for a field goal, and one that is already of a significant distance, I think that's one of those decisions a coach should have to make. Leave it in the game in my opinion, the more interesting choices that have to be made by coaches the better. They took a lot of those choices and complexities out of baseball when they instituted the DH, to the detriment of the game in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is making my head hurt.

1. The clock was stopped, not running.

2. Teams have 40 seconds to run a play. The back judge watches the play clock and calls a penalty if it expires before the snap. Which is what happened Sunday.

3. In your minds, the fact that the Lions snapped the ball and kicked it matters. It doesn't matter. The attempt was the kicker humoring himself. (Matt Bryant insists on going through with kicks that are whistled dead, for example. It's his routine.) By the same logic, if the Lions needed a touchdown, snapped late, whistle blows, but Stafford throws incomplete, so what. The play doesn't count, just as it wouldn't have counted if 15:00 were on the clock. The Falcons can't "take the down" just because the dead play went their way. That's simply not the rule, and it shouldn't be.

4. Imagine that the Lions were still in the huddle when the play clock expired. Would you feel that the game should have just ended with no kick? If so, kill yourself, if you think the penalty for taking too long on a stopped clock should be loss of a down. The other team is not harmed enough to justify that.

5. If Prater had made a dead-ball 57 yard kick, then been moved back and missed the 62 yarder, you'd be fine with the result.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Domed, when there is a delay of game, no play happens. I don't understand why that is difficult for people to comprehend.

There is no play.

Domed, when there is a delay of game, no play happens. I don't understand why that is difficult for people to comprehend.

There is no play.

Again, it's not an issue of understanding. It's a mistake in rule structure. A penalty is designed to damage the opposition. In this case, the play *did* transpire. The results were negative. The team committing the infraction was aided by the punishment. It's like giving a guy $10 when you catch them shoplifting.

Dead ball fouls in general are problematic, but that's almost a side issue to this specific instance. I maintain that if an offensive team commits a penalty in the final two minutes, 10 seconds of gametime should be run off, dead ball or not.

But yes, the Falcons still did so much wrong in the second half that they deserved the L as much as any NFL team has this season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is what was unusual about it. If the results had gone the other way the Lions fans would be crying now instead of us but I don't think there was a conspiracy either way.

I haven't read the other threads, so I have no idea what all of these "conspiracy" posts mean. My original post had more to do with a significant flaw in the current structure of NFL rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Falcons can't "take the down" just because the dead play went their way. That's simply not the rule, and it shouldn't be.

It absolutely should. When an infraction aids rather than injures a team, there is a problem.

As someone else noted, the best example is when a team takes delay of game in order to have a better chance at pinning a team inside the 20. The opposing team should have the opportunity to decline the penalty. If the Falcons hadn't played so poorly yesterday and had more supportive fans, there would be extreme outrage over what transpired yesterday. Instead, the focus is on the usual noise rather than a clear flaw in the NFL rulebook.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, it's not an issue of understanding. It's a mistake in rule structure. A penalty is designed to damage the opposition. In this case, the play *did* transpire. The results were negative. The team committing the infraction was aided by the punishment. It's like giving a guy $10 when you catch them shoplifting.

Dead ball fouls in general are problematic, but that's almost a side issue to this specific instance. I maintain that if an offensive team commits a penalty in the final two minutes, 10 seconds of gametime should be run off, dead ball or not.

But yes, the Falcons still did so much wrong in the second half that they deserved the L as much as any NFL team has this season.

If somehow, after Stafford spiked the ball to stop the clock, and in the process of setting back up, an OL throws his back out & has to be helped off the field, a 10 second runoff would have occurred. It would have happened during the dead ball time, but it still would have been a runoff of the clock. I don't see how this penalty is any different, especially since there is a way it can be used to gain an advantage for the kicking team (more time to set up for the kick).
Link to post
Share on other sites

It absolutely should. When an infraction aids rather than injures a team, there is a problem.

As someone else noted, the best example is when a team takes delay of game in order to have a better chance at pinning a team inside the 20. The opposing team should have the opportunity to decline the penalty. If the Falcons hadn't played so poorly yesterday and had more supportive fans, there would be extreme outrage over what transpired yesterday. Instead, the focus is on the usual noise rather than a clear flaw in the NFL rulebook.

This is depressing that NFL fans don't know what declining a penalty means. It means that a play was run, and the non-penalized team can take the result of the play instead of accepting the penalty. It means, "I liked the result of the play, so I don't want to take the penalty." "Delay of game" means "you didn't run a play in the time allowed," so obviously THERE IS NO PLAY TO TAKE THE RESULT OF.

There are some penalties that always result in the loss of a down. They are significant infractions that occur during play, not something as harmless as "you took too long between downs." Your example of giving loss of down for delaying the game before a punt would result in immediate change of possession at the line of scrimmage instead of a punt, which could equate to a penalty of 40 to 50 yards! They would literally be the biggest penalties in all of football, just for taking too long to snap the ball! Come on now. These are the loss of down penalties:

Combination Penalty. A combination penalty involving both distance and loss of down is enforced for the following fouls:
  • A forward pass from beyond the line (8-1-2-Pen. a); or
  • A forward pass that is intentionally grounded (8-2-1); or
  • Handing the ball forward beyond the line of scrimmage; or
  • Kicking a Loose Ball.

If a loss-of-down penalty is enforced prior to fourth down, the number of the ensuing down is one greater than that of the previous down. If it is enforced on fourth down, the ball is awarded to Team B; if there is a combination penalty on fourth down, the distance penalty is also enforced.
Edited by windu
Link to post
Share on other sites

If somehow, after Stafford spiked the ball to stop the clock, and in the process of setting back up, an OL throws his back out & has to be helped off the field, a 10 second runoff would have occurred. It would have happened during the dead ball time, but it still would have been a runoff of the clock. I don't see how this penalty is any different, especially since there is a way it can be used to gain an advantage for the kicking team (more time to set up for the kick).

No, no, no. A spiked ball is an incomplete pass. Time is not "in" until the ball is snapped. If an offensive player is injured before the snap, there is no runoff, even if the offense is out of timeouts and the refs have to give an excess timeout. There is only a runoff if the clock was running.

The rule:

"If an excess team timeout is charged against a team in possession of the ball, and time is in when the excess timeout is called, the ball shall not be put in play until the time on the game clock has been reduced by 10 seconds, if the defense so chooses. "

Edited by windu
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is depressing that NFL fans don't know what declining a penalty means.

It's more depressing that people do not understand the intention of a penalty. It is to PUNISH the team committing the infraction.

"you didn't run a play in the time allowed," so obviously THERE IS NO PLAY TO TAKE THE RESULT OF.

I honestly don't understand the point you feel you are making with the rest of your reply, so I cannot even frame a reply to that. You tangent about irrelevant theoreticals rather than discuss the very real scenario that transpired.

The simple fact of the matter is that Jeff Fisher had a similar situation occur back in 09 that led to him suggesting that delay of game penalties should be enabled as instant replay challenges. So, it is not only possible but has in fact happened that entire plays have been run after delay of game that were negated by penalty. Since that is a known, we circle back to the fact that when a known play transpires, the team committing the infraction should not be rewarded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, no, no. A spiked ball is an incomplete pass. Time is not "in" until the ball is snapped. If an offensive player is injured before the snap, there is no runoff, even if the offense is out of timeouts and the refs have to give an excess timeout. There is only a runoff if the clock was running.

The rule:

"If an excess team timeout is charged against a team in possession of the ball, and time is in when the excess timeout is called, the ball shall not be put in play until the time on the game clock has been reduced by 10 seconds, if the defense so chooses. "

My polite suggestion would be that you focus less on the letter of the law as currently written and more on the flaw inherent in the system that needs to be address. Otherwise, the discussion becomes an exercise in pendantics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there is anything wrong with the delay of game rules. The Lions committed a penalty, and they were penalized by the ball being moved back 5 yards.

If there were a discussion to be had, I think it is whether or not a team should be charged for a delay of game when the kicker kicks the ball after the whistle has blown. I think that is a discussion that could be had as often as it happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried. The notion that a team should not just be penalized yardage, but should instead be penalized by not getting to kick or run a play because they took too long to hike the ball with a stopped clock is silly.

People feel aggrieved because they think they've seen the outcome that might have happened if the play wasn't blown dead. For all they know, the holder relaxed when he heard the whistle and knew the play wouldn't count. Next time around, maybe the O-line relaxes and the kick gets blocked, so they'll argue that the block should stand. Then next time, the holder just doesn't even bother catching the snap after the whistle blows, and a defensive player grabs it, so they'll argue it's a recovered fumble.

It's a dead ball, play never officially started, the play can't count. The only other option is to penalize all delay of game penalties from a stopped clock with a loss of down, which would be just stupid and ridiculously harsh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...