|
|||
Not true. An accepted live ball penalty would require an untimed down unless it was a loss of down or a dead ball penalty 3.3.4b. There would be no reason for the defense to allow another play so it would naturally be declined. 3.3.3.
__________________
Tom |
|
|||
I don't think that is the case in the NFL (based on my 39 years of watching multiple games on most Sundays during the months of Sep/Oct/Nov/Dec/Jan ), but I could be wrong.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR |
|
|||
I don't know about the NFL either. I am quoting NFHS. However, watching certainly doesn't qualify for rules knowledge by any means.
__________________
Tom |
|
|||
Quote:
The idea that a foul before a change of possession is still assessed against the possession-surrendering team seemed very odd - but that's what Pereria said the rule was in the NFL (and, I suppose, the justification is that 'Personal Foul' is not a foul because it is an unfair game-altering act like holding, but an offence of unauthorised violence towards another player which ought to be penalised when ever it takes place.) The technicalities on whose penalties extend the half are well beyond my amateur status, of course! |
|
|||
Quote:
The NFHS philosophy would have disadvantaged Pittsburgh because you cannot have the ball and the foul if the foul against you was pre-possession. NFHS has been leaning toward no personal foul goes unpenalized in the area of scoring. Personally, I think that should be the rule. My pet peeve over the years has been chipping -- contact on a defenseless player -- by the offense on the long run which officials hesitate to penalize per the rule. |
|
|||
Quote:
Roughing the snapper was so obvious that I'd fire anyone who didn't flag it. |
|
|||
Quote:
live wire 9:48 and at stop 10:12 you can see his left arm in the back and his right arm (i think) from behind is over the right shoulder. that is correct? http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80e9de21 anatomy 3:33 http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80e97cd9 Last edited by football-1; Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 02:24pm. |
|
|||
It does not matter whether he hit him in the back or not. The fact that he jumped in front and turned would not be a foul at any level. He did not see him in the back and hit him in the back; he might have made contact with the back after he ran in front of him. That is not a foul by the philosophy I have been working under for years.
Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
Quote:
|
Bookmarks |
Tags |
dumbass, fanboy, good night-gracie, idiot |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
** Superbowl XL Crew ** | JugglingReferee | Football | 65 | Sun Feb 26, 2006 06:11pm |
Superbowl Officials | menigirl | Feedback | 0 | Tue Sep 28, 2004 01:19am |
2 questionable calls | Greyhounds30 | Football | 6 | Fri Sep 24, 2004 06:59pm |
Anyone Going To Houston for the SuperBowl | whiskers_ump | Softball | 11 | Thu Feb 05, 2004 02:42pm |
Superbowl apartment for rent!! | SuperbowlHouston | Football | 1 | Mon Jan 19, 2004 03:46am |