Their team is DEAD. Maybe he would give them a boost but to not even try is coaching malpractice . Unless he was specifically told he was not allowed to which if that was the case then why the hell did you draft Hurts in the 2nd round ?
When there is a massive TOP advantage, how come the defense is always gassed but not the offense that is out there forever? Is it the ability of the offense to sub in and out more liberally?
Just have always accepted that without understanding it completely.
wasn't even close to the LOS. Since intentional grounding is a spot foul, the Eagles looked like they would have lost at least 25 yards if it had been called.
Not the point. Unless the rule was changed recently, 8 remember the rule was near the LoS. Yes, it is ridiculous to say NEAR in a rule but I haven't heard it changed to past the LoS.
That wasnt NEAR the line of scrimmage. But maybe we need another lecture as to how us dumb yokels just dont understand the intricacies of reffing an NFL game. Fucking dumbshits.
The stupidest thing about the missed Intentional Grounding
Not the point. Unless the rule was changed recently, 8 remember the rule was near the LoS. Yes, it is ridiculous to say NEAR in a rule but I haven't heard it changed to past the LoS.
no the rule is it has to get to the line of scrimmage, it is not near..
if you remember in 2011 eli was called for grounding that missed the line of scrkmmage by 2 yards and it was a safety
Item 1. Passer or Ball Outside Tackle Position. Intentional grounding will not be called when a passer, who is outside, or has been outside, the tackle position,throws a forward pass that lands at or beyond the line of scrimmage, even if no offensive player(s) have a realistic chance to catch the ball (including when the ball lands out of bounds over the sideline or endline). If the ball crosses the line of scrimmage (extended) beyond the sideline, there is no intentional grounding. If a loose ball leaves the area bordered by the tackles, this area no longer exists; if the ball is recovered, all intentional grounding rules apply as if the passer is outside this area.
RE: Question: cause I’ve never quite understood it
When there is a massive TOP advantage, how come the defense is always gassed but not the offense that is out there forever? Is it the ability of the offense to sub in and out more liberally?
Just have always accepted that without understanding it completely.
jpkmets,
My theory on that has always been this: Defense is more read and react, so you have a lot more stopping and starting, a lot more cutting, which I’ve always found more tiresome than a lot of straight line running without so much stopping and starting. (This makes sense too when you think of a car and how much more gas it uses per mile when it has to stop and start a lot.)
On Offense you know where you’re running on every play. A WR makes one cut and goes. The only exception is if you get the ball, THEN you may need to stop and start and make more cuts of course, but all offensive players don’t get the ball every play. Defenders need to stop and start a lot more: read where their man is going, stop, follow him, if he makes a cut, stop, follow him, then see who has the ball, stop, sprint toward that guy to tackle him, etc. (that’s the other thing— oftentimes most of the 11 defenders sprint toward the ball carrier in case they need to be the one to make the tackle, whereas offensive players, unless they’re in a position to make a block, are often able to just stop and watch the play when it’s far enough away from them)
Does that make any sense? It’s always made sense in my head but I’ve never actually written it out like that. I don’t mean for these statements about offense and defense to sound like absolutes— it’s all relative: It does seem like it takes a bit more energy to play D than to play O so there has to be something there? Idk
That wasnt NEAR the line of scrimmage. But maybe we need another lecture as to how us dumb yokels just dont understand the intricacies of reffing an NFL game. Fucking dumbshits.
Again, not the point. The point is what is the rule? The announcers are awful so I don't trust them with anything. The last I remember the rule it was near the LoS. Yes, that is open for interpretation which is dumb but just because people don't like it doesn't mean they get to change the language of the rule. If IG is not reviewable then that tends to lean toward near as opposed to past the LoS. No?
Not the point. Unless the rule was changed recently, 8 remember the rule was near the LoS. Yes, it is ridiculous to say NEAR in a rule but I haven't heard it changed to past the LoS.
No it’s “lands at or beyond the LOS.” I don’t think it’s ever been “near”
Only exception would be if contact interfered with his motion. I do not believe that was 5he case c Grounding rule - ( New Window )
Item 1. Passer or Ball Outside Tackle Position. Intentional grounding will not be called when a passer, who is outside, or has been outside, the tackle position,throws a forward pass that lands at or beyond the line of scrimmage, even if no offensive player(s) have a realistic chance to catch the ball (including when the ball lands out of bounds over the sideline or endline). If the ball crosses the line of scrimmage (extended) beyond the sideline, there is no intentional grounding. If a loose ball leaves the area bordered by the tackles, this area no longer exists; if the ball is recovered, all intentional grounding rules apply as if the passer is outside this area.
If the Giants lose, it won’t be from lifeless defense devoid of effort.
Just have always accepted that without understanding it completely.
Did the rest of the half get ignored when firing off this brain synapse??
BA HA HA. Nice
HOLY SHIT
The rule is that the ball needs to get back to the LOS.
Refs are on a roll here. Hope Philly can capitalize.
That was clearly intentional grounding
what's the margin for error? +/- 4 yards?
Bravo. Tip of the hat to you, Sir.
One of the worst calls I’ve ever seen. No judgment, nothing. Just clear as fucking day.
If that changes this game it’s fucking criminal.
Quote:
?
what's the margin for error? +/- 4 yards?
Not the point. Unless the rule was changed recently, 8 remember the rule was near the LoS. Yes, it is ridiculous to say NEAR in a rule but I haven't heard it changed to past the LoS.
That was clearly intentional grounding
Absolutely. That was unbelievable.
Quote:
that is his call, that ball didnt come close, how do you miss that?
One of the worst calls I’ve ever seen. No judgment, nothing. Just clear as fucking day.
If that changes this game it’s fucking criminal.
safe to say he wont be doing a playoff game
That didn't happen here.
Quote:
In comment 15062440 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
?
what's the margin for error? +/- 4 yards?
Not the point. Unless the rule was changed recently, 8 remember the rule was near the LoS. Yes, it is ridiculous to say NEAR in a rule but I haven't heard it changed to past the LoS.
no the rule is it has to get to the line of scrimmage, it is not near..
if you remember in 2011 eli was called for grounding that missed the line of scrkmmage by 2 yards and it was a safety
Just have always accepted that without understanding it completely.
jpkmets,
My theory on that has always been this: Defense is more read and react, so you have a lot more stopping and starting, a lot more cutting, which I’ve always found more tiresome than a lot of straight line running without so much stopping and starting. (This makes sense too when you think of a car and how much more gas it uses per mile when it has to stop and start a lot.)
On Offense you know where you’re running on every play. A WR makes one cut and goes. The only exception is if you get the ball, THEN you may need to stop and start and make more cuts of course, but all offensive players don’t get the ball every play. Defenders need to stop and start a lot more: read where their man is going, stop, follow him, if he makes a cut, stop, follow him, then see who has the ball, stop, sprint toward that guy to tackle him, etc. (that’s the other thing— oftentimes most of the 11 defenders sprint toward the ball carrier in case they need to be the one to make the tackle, whereas offensive players, unless they’re in a position to make a block, are often able to just stop and watch the play when it’s far enough away from them)
Does that make any sense? It’s always made sense in my head but I’ve never actually written it out like that. I don’t mean for these statements about offense and defense to sound like absolutes— it’s all relative: It does seem like it takes a bit more energy to play D than to play O so there has to be something there? Idk
Again, not the point. The point is what is the rule? The announcers are awful so I don't trust them with anything. The last I remember the rule it was near the LoS. Yes, that is open for interpretation which is dumb but just because people don't like it doesn't mean they get to change the language of the rule. If IG is not reviewable then that tends to lean toward near as opposed to past the LoS. No?
Quote:
In comment 15062440 robbieballs2003 said:
Quote:
?
what's the margin for error? +/- 4 yards?
Not the point. Unless the rule was changed recently, 8 remember the rule was near the LoS. Yes, it is ridiculous to say NEAR in a rule but I haven't heard it changed to past the LoS.
No it’s “lands at or beyond the LOS.” I don’t think it’s ever been “near”
Only exception would be if contact interfered with his motion. I do not believe that was 5he case c
Grounding rule - ( New Window )
Never been more pissed at a non Giants call. Seahawks need to stop fucking around when they get 5he ball back.
Thank you. It should be reviewable then.