Packers-Lions safety/int. grounding/holding

[bigwes68]

I must say, that was one of the strangest plays I've seen. For those that weren't watching the game, Green Bay had the ball on its own 1. Samkon Gado appeared to be wrapped up in the end zone for a safety when he pitched the ball forward and incomplete. There was also a flag for holding on the play, which apparently was ruled to have occurred out of the end zone. The WH (Mike Carey, I believe) originally said that it was intentional grounding from the end zone, safety, and that the holding penalty was declined.

Then, it starts to get fun. All seven officials huddle for about 5 minutes and discuss the play. Carey eventually comes back with since Gado was out of the pocket, the ball crossed the LOS, and there was an eligible receiver in the area, it was simply an incomplete pass. But the holding still happened, so 1/2 distance, still first down. The Lions then declined the holding penalty, so now second down. The two points would have been the difference in the game.

One question for those familiar with NFL rules -- Carey ruled that the hold occurred out of the end zone. Replays seemed to show that the hold occurred in the end zone, which, of course, would have meant a safety. Could the Lions have challenged the location of the penalty? I know you can challenge the spot of the ball, but I don't think I've ever seen a situation quite like that where the spot of a penalty could have potentially made the difference in the game.

Oh yeah, at the OT coin toss, Carey couldn't find his coin. They had to ask around on the sideline if anyone had a quarter.

[MJT]

Originally posted by bigwes68
I must say, that was one of the strangest plays I've seen. For those that weren't watching the game, Green Bay had the ball on its own 1. Samkon Gado appeared to be wrapped up in the end zone for a safety when he pitched the ball forward and incomplete. There was also a flag for holding on the play, which apparently was ruled to have occurred out of the end zone. The WH (Mike Carey, I believe) originally said that it was intentional grounding from the end zone, safety, and that the holding penalty was declined.

Then, it starts to get fun. All seven officials huddle for about 5 minutes and discuss the play. Carey eventually comes back with since Gado was out of the pocket, the ball crossed the LOS, and there was an eligible receiver in the area, it was simply an incomplete pass. But the holding still happened, so 1/2 distance, still first down. The Lions then declined the holding penalty, so now second down. The two points would have been the difference in the game.

One question for those familiar with NFL rules -- Carey ruled that the hold occurred out of the end zone. Replays seemed to show that the hold occurred in the end zone, which, of course, would have meant a safety. Could the Lions have challenged the location of the penalty? I know you can challenge the spot of the ball, but I don't think I've ever seen a situation quite like that where the spot of a penalty could have potentially made the difference in the game.

Oh yeah, at the OT coin toss, Carey couldn't find his coin. They had to ask around on the sideline if anyone had a quarter.

I work NFL rules and have an official book from an NFL official. Replay is covered by rule 15-9 in the NFL rule book, and the location of a foul is NOT a reviewable play.

Where the hold occured brings back a discussion on this, or one of the other boards earlier this year. If he starts to hold at the 1/2 yard line, and continues to hold in the EZ, which it appears he did, do you enforce from where he "began" his hold, where he "ended" the hold, or whichever is worse for the offending team. This was debated pretty heavily once before.

[Theisey]

My view on it says the hold started in the EZ.

Regardless, it seems to me that the attempt at a foward pass was nothing more than an attempt to save loss of yardage (or in this case, a safety). If not, why wasn't this considered a sack as the "passer" was nearly on the ground when he attempted to flip it forward. Isn't this what they call "in the grasp"?

One last comment, even if it is legal (NFL rules) to do this outside the tackle area, I think the pass has to land beyond the NZ. It was close, but I think it was short of that point.

[Edited by Theisey on Dec 12th, 2005 at 08:05 AM]

[mikesears]

Originally posted by Theisey
My view on it says the hold started in the EZ.

Regardless, it seems to me that the attempt at a foward pass was nothing more than an attempt to save loss of yardage (or in this case, a safety). If not, why wasn't this considered a sack as the "passer" was nearly on the ground when he attempted to flip it forward. Isn't this what they call "in the grasp"?

I didn't see the play so I can only comment from a rules perspective. In the grasp only applies when he is wrapped up and ANOTHER defender is bearing down on him.

[/B]

One last comment, even if it is legal (NFL rules) to do this outside the tackle area, I think the pass has to land beyond the NZ. It was close, but I think it was short of that point. [/B]

The NFL rule is that the pass must land near the line of scrimmage. It does not need to go to the line of scrimmage.

[Dommer1]

Spot of the foul is not reviewable. Here is the entire NFL rule on the subject (formating will probably be a bit off):

Rule 15, Section 9

Section 9 Instant Replay

For the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 seasons, the League will employ a system of
Referee Replay Review to aid officiating for reviewable plays as defined below. Prior to
the two-minute warning of each half, a Coaches’ Challenge System will be in effect.
After the two-minute warning of each half, and throughout any overtime period, a
Referee Review will be initiated by a Replay Assistant from a Replay Booth comparable
to the location of the coaches’ booth or Press Box. The following procedures will be
used:

Coaches’ Challenge. In each game, a team will be permitted two challenges that will initiate Referee Replay reviews. Each challenge will require the use of a team timeout. If a challenge is upheld, the timeout will be restored to the challenging team. A challenge will only be restored if a team is succesful on both of its challenges, in which case it shall be awarded a third challenge, but a fourth challenge will not be permitted under any circumstances. No challenges will be recognized from a team that has exhausted its timeouts. A team that is out of timeouts or has used all of its available challenges may not attempt to initiate an additional challenge.

Penalty: For initiating a challenge when all of a team’s timeouts have been exhausted or when all of its available challenges have been used: Loss of 15 yards.

Replay Assistant’s Request for Review. After the two-minute warning of each half, and throughout any overtime period, any Referee Review will be initiated by a Replay Assistant. There is no limit to the number of Referee Reviews that may be initiated by the Replay Assistant. His ability to initiate a review will be unrelated to the number of timeoutsthat either team has remaining, and no timeout will be charged for any review initiated by the Replay Assistant.

Reviews by Referee. All Replay Reviews will be conducted by the Referee on a field-level monitor after consultation with the covering official(s), prior to review. A decision will be reversed only when the Referee has indisputable visual evidence avilable to him that warrants the change.

Time Limit. Each review will be a maximum of 90 seconds in length, timed from when the Referee begins his review of the replay at the field-level monitor.

Reviewable Plays. The Replay System will cover the following situations only:
(a) Plays governed by Sideline, Goal Line, End Zone, and End Line:
1. Scoring Plays, including a runner breaking the plane of the goal line.
2. Pass complete/incomplete/intercepted at sideline, goal line, end zone, and end line.
3. Runner/receiver in or out of bounds.
4. Recovery of loose ball in or out of bounds.
(b) Passing Plays:
1. Pass ruled complete/incomplete/intercepted in the field of play.
2. Touching of a forward pass by an ineligible recevier.
3. Touching of a forward pass by a defensive player.
4. Quarterback (passer) forward pass or fumble.
5. Illegal forward pass beyond line of scrimmage.
6. Illegal forward pass after change of possession.
7. Forward or backward pass thrown from behind line of scrimmage.
(c) Other Detectable Infractions:
1. Runner ruled not down by defensive contact.
2. Forward progress with respect to first down.
3. Touching of a kick.
4. Number of players on field.
Note: Non-reviewable plays include but are not limited to:
1. Status of the clock
2. Proper down
3. Penalty administration
4. Runner ruled down by defensive contact
5. Forward progress not relating to first down or goal line
6. Forceouts
7. Recovery of loose ball in the field of play
8. Field goals

[starman]

I thought that the Lions should ahve challange that he was down before he threw the pass

[bluezebra]

From what I saw, including the numerous replays, the ball was released BEFORE Gado was down. The hold started OUTSIDE the end zone.

As a life-long Bears' fan, I was hoping it was a safety, but alas, I saw otherwise.

Bob