|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 02:13am
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you do not want to do this or if it is somehow against forum rules I understand and apologize. I realize that not being on the field is a huge disadvantage and you may not want to comment however, I want to show you two short clips both of the same play and give the best assessment that you can. I wish there was a way that nobody could see the others answer however we will just have to trust that it is your own opinion and not persuaded by anyone else's answer.
Given NFL rules Is this intentional grounding? http://ecosustainablevillage.com/images/grounding.wmv http://ecosustainablevillage.com/images/grounding2.wmv Given the following rules from the NFL digest of rules ntentional grounding of a forward pass is a foul: loss of down and 10 yards from previous spot if passer is in the field of play or loss of down at the spot of the foul if it occurs more than 10 yards behind the line or safety if passer is in his own end zone when ball is released. Pocket Area: Applies from a point two yards outside of either offensive tackle and includes the tight end if he drops off the line of scrimmage to pass protect. Pocket extends longitudinally behind the line back to offensive teams own end line. Intentional grounding will not be called when a passer, while out of the pocket and facing an imminent loss of yardage, throws a 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 if the ball lands out of bounds over the sideline or end line). Intentional grounding will be called when a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage due to pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. 
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 07:26am
|
|||
|
|||
|
No flag. No intentional grounding.
The second clip shows a receiver who was in the area but ran his pattern to the inside. He probably didn't see the blitz coming or he would have run an out pattern.
__________________
I got a fever! And the only prescription.. is more cowbell!
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 08:56am
|
|||
|
|||
|
No IG, under any rules that I'm familiar with.
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 09:21am
|
|||
|
|||
|
No penalty - there was a receiver in the area when QB released the ball. The receiver may have botched the route.
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 11:13am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
1) Immanent amount of pressure from the defense. 2) The receiver had no realistic chance at catching the ball. 3) The pocket includes the TE if he drops off the line to pass protect thus the pocket extended outside the hash marks. I didn't realize that officials asked the QB and/or receiver if they ran the wrong pattern and if so then no harm no foul regardless of the other evidence that points directly to IG. I guess it's kind of like the no fumble no sack rule that was instated two weeks before that game. Quote:
Anyway Thank you.
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 11:16am
|
|||
|
|||
Canadian Ruling
No flag for intentional grounding - my judgement is based upon a botched route.
As for NFL rules, I say he's out of the pocket, so no foul.
__________________
Pope Francis
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 11:36am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Thanks.
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 12:08pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'll give it a go.
The rule states that passer is outside the pocket + the pass crosses the line of scrimmage = no foul We all agree about the ball crossing the line of scrimmage - right! The outside the pocket part is a bit more tricky. Now I'm not a 100% sure about the NFL rule about the pocket. But it is most likely not a dynamic area (doesn't move during the play). As this would - in my opinion - give the defense an unfair advantage. Now at the right tackles right foot. Then look at the passers feet when he throws the ball. You could easily defend this as being outside the pocket. There is no TE on the play and there is also no ING.
__________________
In officiating - Rule no. 1: Anything that can happen, will happen.
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 12:28pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pocket Area: Applies from a point two yards outside of either offensive tackle.
I am assuming that "outside" refers to the area of the football field between the tackles and the sidelines. Is this not correct?
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 03:07pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Ok RamTime, here is my take. Not that I am an expert, but I do work NFL rules, have the "official" NFL rules from a current NFL official, and have been to two clinics and discussed things with two other NFL officials. You did seem to feel I was ok on my rulings in the other NLF post yesterday. First off, 9-3-1-note 1 states "IG will not be called a passer, while outside the tackle postion and facing imminent loss of yardage, throws a forward pass that lands near, or beyond the LOS, even if no offensive players have a realistic change to catch the ball (including if the ball lands OOB's over the sideline or endline." So they do not have to be 2 yards outside the tackles, just outside them, which would mean outside their outside shoulder at the snap. The 2nd clip shows the QB is close to that, would would mean no foul, but even if he is not, I think he throws what is supposed to be a timing pattern, and his receiver turned in, not out. This is what it looks like from when he releases the ball. He does not seem to be in imminent danger to lose yardage yet either in my opinion. Here is how I would handle it if I were the R on that play. I would process what I say, probably get together with my U, wing, and deep official and discuss it. If we feel he was not in imminent danger, was close to outside the tackle, and it looked like the receiver broke the route the wrong way, I would have NO foul. If any of those three were true, we would have NO foul. I think you could say that all of them may be true, so seeing that play, my vote would be, NO foul. All the AR's found in my NFL rule book state "to keep from being tackled" and I don't think the QB is worried about that at the point in which he throws the ball. I appears to me that he could step up "into the pocket" and the right tackle would ride his man around the outside, and thus not be sacked. That is my opinion anyway.
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 04:30pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Part of the confusion is the NFL rulebook and all the fan and betting sites include language defining "the pocket area" as the area extending 2 yards outside the tackles. Then the IG rule just mentions "the pocket". And all of us have heard and interpret that to mean tackle to tackle. The rule as enforced seems to limit the pocket to the area tackle to tackle. In fact, in that same Super Bowl, Kurt Warner threw a very similar throw and there was no flag so the play was called consisitently.
From the video clip provided, the actions of that QB look identical to those of many other QBs I have seen on many other Sundays and who were similarily NOT flagged for IG.
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 05:10pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 06:42pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Simply put, there was a receiver in the area when the ball was thrown. No grounding on this play.
__________________
I got a fever! And the only prescription.. is more cowbell!
|
|
Sat Jul 09, 2005, 10:28pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ok, here is the new rule change regarding the pocket area for 2005. Rule 3-24, definition of pocket area states, "The pocket area applies from the normal tackle position on each side of the center and extends backwards to the offensive team's own end line." It continutes to state as the effect of this rule change "There will be one definition of the pocket area for every play that covers intentional grounding, illegal contact, and an illegal cut block."
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
