So punters cannot be touched after a kick but are allowed to make the tackle? If so, this is the fundamental problem of the recent NFL rule changes. None of this has really been thought through. . How could they not see the contradiction here when making this change and how that would affect punt returns as a whole? I get they want to protect players but at least try to be consistent and think through an entire sequence.
The state of NFL refereeing
- Thread starter Soxy
- Start date
I fail to understand the outrage here. Punters can be touched after a kick, they just can't be hit in the head or legs. You can still block a punter. Most NFL players should be able to block a punter without a head shot or cutting the punters legs. Punters can still try to make a tackle.
Is it that hard to understand a rule that prevents the smallest person on the field from getting blown up unnecessarily? I don't see how this rule negatively effects anything, just don't hit the punter in the head.
Is it that hard to understand a rule that prevents the smallest person on the field from getting blown up unnecessarily? I don't see how this rule negatively effects anything, just don't hit the punter in the head.
No it would not have been legal because he hit the punter in the head. Punter or no punter, you are not allowed to launch a block or hit in the head.
I didn't see this posted anywhere so I thought I'd pass along... Peter King (who deservedly gets a lot of shit around here) did a three part story where he went behind the scenes with NFL officials. I thought it was interesting because it goes in depth on their preparation, the review they get from the league after each game, and the lives they balance (i.e. other jobs)etc. Apologies if this was posted elsewhere - here's part 1:
http://mmqb.si.com/2013/12/04/peter-king-spends-week-with-nfl-refs/
http://mmqb.si.com/2013/12/04/peter-king-spends-week-with-nfl-refs/
riboflav said:
On page 2 of this thread after the mega-Gronk defenseless discussion and some of you still don't understand the rule?
Here is the Defenseless player rule. It outlines who is defenseless and what conduct is prohibited. Some of you should read it before you post in this or the "How low can you go" thread.
Again:
Can we stop mixing up the prohibited contact of hitting a defenseless player in the head with hitting a defenseless player at all. Right now you have from the chin down, and unlike the Gronk discussion, it doesn't take much of a block to take a punter or QB out of a play when they are trying to make a tackle. You don't NEED to tee off on their head and break the jaw to take them out of the play. It's simple, you can knock the shit out of the punter if he's trying to make a tackle, just don't do it with your head or his head.
PaulinMyrBch said:
Oh I understand the rule. It's a stupid rule that is inconsistent with player safety, which was my point.
Here, Bruschi does a good job explaining what should be done to fix it:
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4755598/tedys-take-rule-proposal-for-specialists
EDIT: Also, a defenseless receiver cannot be hit at all, meaning anywhere on his body.
PaulinMyrBch said:
It was an admittedly poor attempt at humor to expose the confusion over the rule that many have.
Anyway, I still stand by what I wrote earlier and I think Bruschi's take is a good one. No inconsistency. No contradictions. If you're going to have special rules for certain players in certain situations then go all the way with it and really protect them, i.e. punters should not be allowed to tackle as they are smaller after all.
Wasn't this a blindside block, regardless of whether the guy is a punter or not?
"The initial force of a blindside block cannot be delivered by a helmet, forearm or shoulder to an opponent's head or neck." (Blindside block: when a player is running towards or parallel to his own endline, and he is blocked by an opponent who approaches from behind or from the the side)
Why does the rule need to be changed, if that's the case?
"The initial force of a blindside block cannot be delivered by a helmet, forearm or shoulder to an opponent's head or neck." (Blindside block: when a player is running towards or parallel to his own endline, and he is blocked by an opponent who approaches from behind or from the the side)
Why does the rule need to be changed, if that's the case?
Punters and kickers should be fitted with a harness and lifted off the field with a crane immediately after they kick the ball. It's the only way to be consistent
I guess I don't understand why folks are upset at Garvin's facing NFL discipline.
The hit was illegal by the rules, as well as unnecessary. The rule is a good one. Seriously, I want the NFL to protect the punters and kickers from getting nailed in the head. The fact that some people hate kickers and punters should have no bearing whatsoever.
The referees messed up by not calling the penalty; that's their fault, not the fault of the rule.
The hit was illegal by the rules, as well as unnecessary. The rule is a good one. Seriously, I want the NFL to protect the punters and kickers from getting nailed in the head. The fact that some people hate kickers and punters should have no bearing whatsoever.
The referees messed up by not calling the penalty; that's their fault, not the fault of the rule.
I find it hard to fathom that I could not really enjoy a 34 point road stomping of the Ravens, but that game was an atrocity to watch. No flow, took forever (but not in that "I hope this never ends" way), and I was just left flummoxed wondering what had happened too many times. Is it too much to ask that when a call is made and then randomly reversed a few minutes later that they at least provide some sort of explanation?
At least twice the refs huddled, announced a penalty call, waited a couple of minutes, got screamed at by the Ravens, rehuddled, and reversed the original call. No explanation. No reason. No hint of knowing what the hell they were doing or talking about. The industry is worth billions and billions of dollars, they can't explain what's going on in their product?
At least twice the refs huddled, announced a penalty call, waited a couple of minutes, got screamed at by the Ravens, rehuddled, and reversed the original call. No explanation. No reason. No hint of knowing what the hell they were doing or talking about. The industry is worth billions and billions of dollars, they can't explain what's going on in their product?
Yea that largely a disgraceful shone from the refs tonight. Not just the amount of flags but the long delays, uncertainty and some flags thst came out very very slowly. Just poor execution.
Really terrible officiating both ways. I thought most disturbing was the fact that the refs seemed to either/and or both:
1. Make calls based on reaction from fans and coaches of a home team;
And/or
2. Change calls based on what they saw on the big screen.
I think, honestly, that it was just a really shitty crew. I hope we don't see them again this year.
1. Make calls based on reaction from fans and coaches of a home team;
And/or
2. Change calls based on what they saw on the big screen.
I think, honestly, that it was just a really shitty crew. I hope we don't see them again this year.
Awful refereeing tonight, really distracting from enjoyment of the game. Bad calls both ways, general cluelessness, and a ton of inconsistency about what was and was not a penalty. Interminable delays that had no impact.
Yep. The head ref took 3 or 4 steps towards Flynn to tell him the clock was running too. Flynn was directing traffic instead of snapping the ball immediately.
Not 100% sure what you mean here but it just seems to me the refs got together and decided the call was incorrect. That happens on a fairly regular basis.lars10 said:
I've not heard anyone explain or show in a replay what the actual call even was.
The only time I've ever seen defensive holding on a play like that would be when on DL holds the OL so another D player can loop around. That play happens fairly regularly and I've seen it called once or twice(maybe). The play in question was a blitz and multiple D players were in on Brady in a heartbeat.
I will say that it was odd that the ref made the call over the mic before they huddled. I see refs huddle all the time but always before making the call. This was like if the ref in Carolina got on the mic, said "pass interference, # whatever on the defense, ball will be placed on the one"... and then huddling again, and saying "there was no foul on the play." Man Pats fans would have rioted even harder at that.
Ok.Byrdbrain said:
Here's my question stated (hopefully) better.
What is the implication of a ref getting on mic and stating that there was a penalty and then conferring with the other refs and then deciding there was no penalty but then giving a reason for removing the penalty that isn't actually in the rule book. IE potentially what happened. Defensive holding is called (and has been stated no replay was given to even judge what was talked about…maybe a back trying to come out of the backfield?) then the flag is picked up and the reason stated was 'the qb was sacked'. Was this a legitimate reason for removing the original penalty? The call and the sack seemed to occur almost simultaneously…but let's say for arguments sake that the play was a shuttle pass or something…and Brady had to eat the ball because his running back was being held. Wouldn't the penalty then be legit?
Basic question: is a QB being sacked a legitimate reason to waive defensive holding? (I have to peruse the rulebook, but it may be written in that if the QB is in the grasp that then all penalties for PI and holding are off…that would make sense, but that's not what was said).
My problem with this and the Carolina game is that the reasons for picking up the penalties were just not well stated…and in both cases the fan is sort of left questioning why a call is made and either evidence is given where Gronk is obviously being held or not given where nobody can actually judge where the holding call was actually made. And on top of that a false start is also called and then completely reversed after the player being called actually complains? It just seems at some point that the refs are making up the rulebook on the field (or the rulebook is so poorly written) and the average fan is left wondering what calls are legit or not. The NFL should really do those Shanahan like videos …maybe explaining for instance why Connolly was called for a false start and Oher was not for doing more or less the exact same thing.
Without any further information, there are 3 possibilities for the picked up flag:
1.) Brady had been ruled to have left the pocket when the holding occurred. The 5-yard contact rule on eligible receivers no longer applies once the QB leaves the pocket. I can't recall the play all that well, but this is a possibility.
2.) Brady had been ruled down at the time of flag being thrown.
3.) There was simply no holding.
The "QB was sacked" was likely an attempt to communicate that the play stands as called. In any event, the officials did indeed screw up when the announced the penalty and then withdrew it; they should huddle up first.
1.) Brady had been ruled to have left the pocket when the holding occurred. The 5-yard contact rule on eligible receivers no longer applies once the QB leaves the pocket. I can't recall the play all that well, but this is a possibility.
2.) Brady had been ruled down at the time of flag being thrown.
3.) There was simply no holding.
The "QB was sacked" was likely an attempt to communicate that the play stands as called. In any event, the officials did indeed screw up when the announced the penalty and then withdrew it; they should huddle up first.
That's my thinking too...lexrageorge said:
I think the nfl... If they truly want to expand has to make sure that the ref says something that any new or old fan would understand... That and they could probably go much farther in tightening up the rule book. Calls that aren't supposed to be judgement calls have been made so since there are so many truck size holes in how the rules are written or they're just not clear.
Mainly I don't understand why they don't do what the nhl has done (make a centralized HQ where calls are reviewed)..makes way too much sense. Not like these games aren't stopped every five seconds anyway. That way calls would be consistent league wide and the crew on the field wouldn't be intimidated or blamed.
I think the issue is a lack of training of the officiating crews rather than issues with the rulebook. Each official does have certain areas of responsibilities; I can't blame an official for throwing a flag for defensive holding; it's not possible for anyone to be watching both the QB and the def. backfield at the same time. But that's why the crew needs to discuss the penalty and make the best call possible *before* announcing their decision to the fans and the coaches.
Also, the NHL doesn't review penalty calls in HQ; I don't want the NFL to do that either.
Also, the NHL doesn't review penalty calls in HQ; I don't want the NFL to do that either.
There was a PI in the Monday night game in San Francisco this week that might have been the worst of the year. It came in the 3rd quarter on a 3rd and 17 I believe, and instead of having to try a 56 yard field goal or punt, San Fran got the new downs and kicked a much easier field goal, which certainly effected how the rest of the game played out. Even Jerry Rice, who was in the ESPN booth for that series as part of their candlestick tribute, said he had to admit it was an awful call.lars10 said:
I don't know what grounds they can overturn such a call through replay, (there is always going to be some contact), but I wouldn't mind them going to a booth after throwing the flag on such a play before making a final ruling. Have it initiated upstairs or something.
In addition to the blown calls above including the play clock error that greatly decreased the Cowboys' win probability, Pats had at least two noncalls go their way. Early in the game Hoomananui was called for illegal formation for coming up to the line of scrimmage and not stopping completely before the snap. He did it once more I saw that was not called as did Edelman.
bougrj1 said:
That article was pretty good. But there is a tidbit, buried into the second article that he glosses over and just ruins it.
King spends many words talking about how precisely these refs are judged and measured and scrutinized and that a handful of wrong calls will earn them demerits. However, he then casually drops this nugget:
"Postscript: The league supported the call, and didn’t give a downgrade to either official, Seeman or Paganelli, because it was so close. “Support” usually means the call was technically incorrect but so close they’re not going to sanction either official."
King fails to tell us how many calls per week/game/ref that the NFL chooses to "Support" vs. "Sanction". Now the NFL is probably right in calling out many judgement calls as simply too close to call, that's a reality of the speed of the game. But don't make these guys out to look like heroes that perform with 99% accuracy without telling me how often the NFL tells them they are technically incorrect, but it's not a problem because of some undefined judgement buffer.
The officials basically blew 3 calls at the end of that Chargers game, each to San Diego's benefit....
The NFL admits its referees blew a call on the play that cost Pittsburgh a playoff spot.
http://www.pennlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/12/nfl_admits_error_on_missed_fie.html#incart_river_default
http://www.pennlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/12/nfl_admits_error_on_missed_fie.html#incart_river_default
Shouldn't Andy Reid have caught that real time and said something to the Refs? They had one timeout remaining, they could have called it and demanded the replay official look at it, I believe, and correct me if I am wrong, that is reviewable, like a 12 men on the field penalty or non call.
He was ticked off about something. I didn't realize that it could have been that until this story came out. I have no way of knowing whether the formation was the cause of his angst, thought.
But yeah, the NFL made it clear that an illegal formation ruling isn't open for review.
Jeff Triplette, who blew an instant replay call in the Colts Bengals game by overturning a correct call and who screwed up the downs in the Redskins-Giants, grades out well enough to get a playoff assignment. Congratulations Jeff, and congrats to the NFL for holding refs accountable
RT @footballzebras: Source w/ knowledge of grading says chain fiasco in Wk13 did not apply to Triplette's grades http://bit.ly/KrKFVfStitch01 said:
I have no clue why that did not apply to his end of game grade..
Well, I know that there is a lot of "let them play" going on in the playoffs but there were several blatant holds and PIs not called in the SF-GB game. Crabtree was grabbed at least twice in the endzone and the Niners got away with one or two.
Plus the incredible holding that took place on the 4th and 2 play where Rodgers got away. At first I was upset that the Niners could not finish the sack, then I saw how the Niner defender was being pulled any way possible, and no flag. Also no comment from anyone showing the highlights.
Plus the incredible holding that took place on the 4th and 2 play where Rodgers got away. At first I was upset that the Niners could not finish the sack, then I saw how the Niner defender was being pulled any way possible, and no flag. Also no comment from anyone showing the highlights.
trekfan55 said:
Aikman eventually mentioned it about 10 minutes later. Broadcast showed a replay that was too flagrant to ignore and after an awkward moment of silence Aikman had to say something. Buck of course says nothing. Of course, as you rightly point out both teams were committing muggings all game when it was clear they weren't going to call anything.
The inconsistency between the regular season and playoffs is the icing on the crap cake of this year's refereeing. This might also play well for the Seahawks since Carroll has them playing wrestling defense.
jimc said:
I was mostly talking about the post game highlights I caught. Since the Packers lost the game anyway, someone might have mentioned it since it's pretty clear.
And to their credit, the Latin guys on Fox alluded to the holding immediately, and then pointed it out on the replays.