Jump to content

NFL officials explain call against Falcons


Recommended Posts

NFL officials explain call against Falcons

from CBSSports.com

The Falcons' efforts to come back against the Buccaneers on Sunday were thwarted in part by a controversial third-down roughing-the-passer penalty against Tom Brady. Fans and analysts across the NFL had no trouble calling the flag unnecessary, seeing as Falcons defensive lineman Grady Jarrett delivered a textbook takedown of the star quarterback, whose head made no contact with either Jarrett or the field in the process. But referee Jerome Boger told the media after Sunday's game that the only thing unnecessary about the situation was Jarrett's way of taking Brady to the ground.

"What I had," Boger said when asked why the tackle deserved a penalty, "was the defender grabbed the quarterback while he was still in the pocket, and unnecessarily [threw] him to the ground. That is what I was [basing] my decision ... upon."

Asked whether his officiating crew was especially critical of those kinds of tackles in light of the Dolphins' Tua Tagovailoa recently suffering head and neck injuries on a sack in which he was swung down, Boger downplayed the possibility: "No, not necessarily."

Jarrett's sack, in motion, had similarities to the hit that hurt Tagovailoa, but there was a key difference: Brady's head, again, never made any contact with either the defender hitting him, or the ground into which he was swung. Jarrett also avoided going high or low on the hit, embracing Brady's midsection for the tackle, then flinging him toward the grass. Officials only flagged the hit after Brady, visibly frustrated by the sack, began complaining about its legality.

The roughing-the-passer penalty ended up extending the Bucs' fourth-quarter drive, despite the would-be sack threatening to get the ball back in the Falcons' hands, with Atlanta down six, and about three minutes left on the clock. Tampa Bay went on to win 21-15 and remain atop the NFC South.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/tom-brady-roughing-the-passer-controversy-nfl-officials-explain-call-against-falcons-in-week-5/

---------------------------

Please.  🙄

Edited by Falcon Freddie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PriMeTiiMe said:

Next time I guess Grady should kindly ask him to fall over Peyton style so he does not hurt the senior citizen while "unnecessarily" taking him down.

No, next time take his **** head off since he's gonna get flagged anyway. Just rush 11 the entire game and NFL blitz slam him every ******* play 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FalconFanSince1969 said:

No, next time take his **** head off since he's gonna get flagged anyway. Just rush 11 the entire game and NFL blitz slam him every ******* play 

I am for this. First drive send a message. Have all 11 defenders scream at him. First one there suplexs him to the ground while the others do blitz style leg drops one by one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FalconFanSince1969 said:

No, next time take his **** head off since he's gonna get flagged anyway. Just rush 11 the entire game and NFL blitz slam him every ******* play 

I support this! old school Gritz Blitz the whole game. I don't care if we lose 56-0, hit Brady every play

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Falcon Freddie said:

NFL officials explain call against Falcons

from CBSSports.com

The Falcons' efforts to come back against the Buccaneers on Sunday were thwarted in part by a controversial third-down roughing-the-passer penalty against Tom Brady. Fans and analysts across the NFL had no trouble calling the flag unnecessary, seeing as Falcons defensive lineman Grady Jarrett delivered a textbook takedown of the star quarterback, whose head made no contact with either Jarrett or the field in the process. But referee Jerome Boger told the media after Sunday's game that the only thing unnecessary about the situation was Jarrett's way of taking Brady to the ground.

"What I had," Boger said when asked why the tackle deserved a penalty, "was the defender grabbed the quarterback while he was still in the pocket, and unnecessarily [threw] him to the ground. That is what I was [basing] my decision ... upon."

Asked whether his officiating crew was especially critical of those kinds of tackles in light of the Dolphins' Tua Tagovailoa recently suffering head and neck injuries on a sack in which he was swung down, Boger downplayed the possibility: "No, not necessarily."

Jarrett's sack, in motion, had similarities to the hit that hurt Tagovailoa, but there was a key difference: Brady's head, again, never made any contact with either the defender hitting him, or the ground into which he was swung. Jarrett also avoided going high or low on the hit, embracing Brady's midsection for the tackle, then flinging him toward the grass. Officials only flagged the hit after Brady, visibly frustrated by the sack, began complaining about its legality.

The roughing-the-passer penalty ended up extending the Bucs' fourth-quarter drive, despite the would-be sack threatening to get the ball back in the Falcons' hands, with Atlanta down six, and about three minutes left on the clock. Tampa Bay went on to win 21-15 and remain atop the NFC South.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/tom-brady-roughing-the-passer-controversy-nfl-officials-explain-call-against-falcons-in-week-5/

---------------------------

Please.

Crybaby ***** gtfoh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dudouble said:

Over now. The nfl not gonna give us the ball back. Hopefully we can get to 3-3 next week

No, but the Falcons and media can and should continue to raise a stink about it. The Saints were able to get a rule temporarily changed after a bad call that didn't even cost them a chance to win. There's a much stronger argument for reviewing RTP, especially since it's regarded as a safety issue rather than a competitive one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, octoslash said:

Roughness penalties should be reviewable.

They're too important to not be. 

 

It wouldn't change anything. It's not like the official didn't see the play, he saw the play and called it. What would change if he saw the play again and in slow motion? He would make the exact same call, the NFL officials response confirms this. It's a judgment call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dr Long Shot said:

It wouldn't change anything. It's not like the official didn't see the play, he saw the play and called it. What would change if he saw the play again and in slow motion? He would make the exact same call, the NFL officials response confirms this. It's a judgment call.

Unfortunately this is true. It might change a few calls but it won't do too much. 

Link to comment
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...