There are 122 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

More proof that NFL refs are very biased in calling games.

Originally posted by 4ML:
This. Kaep was running...Brees wasn't. Though it was a bad call on the Brees hit...there is no conspiracy. lol

I agree with the first half and end of your statement, but not the middle.

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
drew brees neck looked like it stretched a foot when he got hit lol

Maybe he'll be able to see over the offensive line now!

Originally posted by Kauaiguy:
It's really a shame when a referee's call or non call has a major impact on the outcome of the game.

I agree. I couldn't believe they picked up the flag tonight on the Panthers on that final play where Gronkowski got bear-hugged from coming back to the ball.

Originally posted by solidg2000:
Defenseless player has nothing to do with that rule
You can't wrap around anyone's neck.
And a QB isn't defenseless, the only people who are "defenseless" are receivers who are going for the pass and get killed

RB's and WR's get taken down by their head/neck all the time actually, but a penalty won't be called because they are established runners; that is, unless they are also being taken down by their facemask or the horse collar.

As for the "defenseless player" deal, here's the rule from the rulebook...

"Article 7: Players in a Defenseless Posture. It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.

(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:

(1) A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass;


(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player's head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact of the defender's helmet or facemask is lower than the passer's neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him; or


Note 2: A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact."
[ Edited by IronSaint on Nov 19, 2013 at 12:46 AM ]
The game was becoming too violent (when was it not?) so these protection rules came into being. The Quarterback is the high profile centerpiece of the league, if they go down I don't think the advertisers are going to pay to see Scott Tolzien and Colt McCoy. They have to protect the investment and at the same time bring more scoring on the screen, we don't want this to become Futball, do we? So limit what the defense is able to do so we can have high scores and exciting finishes.
Now lets go in to the NFL Films vault and find all the triumphant plays replayed by the NFL to help recruit new fans, including children. How about the taunting of Brian Sims by Jack Lambert which the NFL reruns in memorial, even though, in their words is bad sportsmanship yet they continue to replay what is now illegal.
Check out how Lambert tackled...




The NFL gives him a bronze statue but everybody else gets 15 yards and a fine. What a bunch of hypocripts! Maybe we should start censoring the Hall of Fame then?
Originally posted by IronSaint:
I agree with the first half and end of your statement, but not the middle.


Maybe he'll be able to see over the offensive line now!


I agree. I couldn't believe they picked up the flag tonight on the Panthers on that final play where Gronkowski got bear-hugged from coming back to the ball.


RB's and WR's get taken down by their head/neck all the time actually, but a penalty won't be called because they are established runners; that is, unless they are also being taken down by their facemask or the horse collar.

As for the "defenseless player" deal, here's the rule from the rulebook...

"Article 7: Players in a Defenseless Posture. It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.

(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:

(1) A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass;


(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player's head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact of the defender's helmet or facemask is lower than the passer's neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him; or


Note 2: A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact."

Bla, bla, bla... How can they say it's OK here but not there? Make up your damn mind, is it or isn't it, that is the question, and unfortunately this type of hypocrisy takes the game out of the players hands and puts it into the officials hands. Once more, it gives the league the power to control and influence games. It's becoming more and more obvious that the league wants to control who wins and who loses.
[ Edited by vermonator on Nov 19, 2013 at 7:36 AM ]
I agree with the first half and end of your statement, but not the middle.

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
drew brees neck looked like it stretched a foot when he got hit lol




And brooks initial contact was the upper
Maybe he'll be able to see over the offensive line now!

Originally posted by Kauaiguy:
It's really a shame when a referee's call or non call has a major impact on the outcome of the game.

I agree. I couldn't believe they picked up the flag tonight on the Panthers on that final play where Gronkowski got bear-hugged from coming back to the ball.

Originally posted by solidg2000:
Defenseless player has nothing to do with that rule
You can't wrap around anyone's neck.
And a QB isn't defenseless, the only people who are "defenseless" are receivers who are going for the pass and get killed

RB's and WR's get taken down by their head/neck all the time actually, but a penalty won't be called because they are established runners; that is, unless they are also being taken down by their facemask or the horse collar.

As for the "defenseless player" deal, here's the rule from the rulebook...

"Article 7: Players in a Defenseless Posture. It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.

(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:

(1) A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass;


(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player's head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact of the defender's helmet or facemask is lower than the passer's neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him; or


Note 2: A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact."













Actually any neck tackle is illegal per NFL rules. Dick nighttrain lane is to thank for that. He was famous for the neck tackle. He is the reason it has been illegal for sometime now, whether on a qb, rb, wr, or anyone else.

And brooks initial contact was the upper part of Brees neck. Brees began going down and naturally his neck slid down towards brooks arm. Very bad call to determine the outcome of a game.
[ Edited by pwillis52beasty on Nov 19, 2013 at 7:56 AM ]
Originally posted by Kauaiguy:
It's really a shame when a referee's call or non call has a major impact on the outcome of the game.

I don't get it.

Brees hit = "Let them play. Stop throwing so many flags."
Gronk (and every time San Fran is on offense) = "Throw some flags refs!!"
[ Edited by maporsche on Nov 19, 2013 at 8:51 AM ]
Originally posted by maporsche:
Originally posted by Kauaiguy:
It's really a shame when a referee's call or non call has a major impact on the outcome of the game.

I don't get it.

Brees hit = "Let them play. Stop throwing so many flags."
Gronk (and every time San Fran is on offense) = "Throw some flags refs!!"
Brees hit was legit
Gronk did get held (Refs do call holding even on opposite side of the field to where the ball is thrown)
I don't know why people are pissed about the holding non-call vs the Pats. No way in hell was Gronk going to make that catch. Why give the Pats a second chance on a play that was not going to get completed? I think the refs finally used some common sense.
And brooks initial contact was the upper part of Brees neck. Brees began going down and naturally his neck slid down towards brooks arm. Very bad call to determine the outcome of a game.

Brooks' initial contact was on the upper part of Brees' chest, not his neck.
Originally posted by maporsche:
Originally posted by Kauaiguy:
It's really a shame when a referee's call or non call has a major impact on the outcome of the game.

I don't get it.

Breech hit = "Let them play. Stop throwing so many flags."
Gronk (and every time San Fran is on offense) = "Throw some flags refs!!"

If Kap had been hit in the same fashion, at the same spot, I would say it was a fumble. No sense talking to Hawk fans though, I would be willing to bet that according to you Golden Tate actually did catch that ball vs GB and it was a terrible offensive pi called in your superbowl loss, right?
Originally posted by Joecool:
I don't know why people are pissed about the holding non-call vs the Pats. No way in hell was Gronk going to make that catch. Why give the Pats a second chance on a play that was not going to get completed? I think the refs finally used some common sense.

Because the player was holding the TE. You can't say there was no way the player could not have made a catch in front of him when he is prevented from moving towards the ball due to interference. It's not about giving a team a second chance. It's about consistently enforcing the rules. If they were playing in NE, they never would have picked up the flag but the refs didn't want to get murdered on the way to their cars in Carolina.

Same rule applies to our game ... if that game was played in SF I don't think a flag gets thrown.
Personally I think that the refs should also be fined when making an obvious bad call. This would certainly stop the favoritism that some of these refs seem to have during a game. Maybe then they would start being more consistent in their calls.
  • 4ML
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 28,484
Originally posted by midrdan:
Originally posted by Joecool:
I don't know why people are pissed about the holding non-call vs the Pats. No way in hell was Gronk going to make that catch. Why give the Pats a second chance on a play that was not going to get completed? I think the refs finally used some common sense.

Because the player was holding the TE. You can't say there was no way the player could not have made a catch in front of him when he is prevented from moving towards the ball due to interference. It's not about giving a team a second chance. It's about consistently enforcing the rules. If they were playing in NE, they never would have picked up the flag but the refs didn't want to get murdered on the way to their cars in Carolina.

Same rule applies to our game ... if that game was played in SF I don't think a flag gets thrown.

They did enforce the rule. You can't have PI if the ball is intercepted before it gets to the receiver. Hence, they picked up the flag.
  • 4ML
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 28,484
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Brees hit was legit
Gronk did get held (Refs do call holding even on opposite side of the field to where the ball is thrown)

Holding can only be called on a defender if he holds before the ball is thrown. Once the QB throws the ball...a defender can be called for PI (but not for hold). It can't be PI if the ball is tipped/intercepted before it reaches the receiver.
Originally posted by 4ML:
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Brees hit was legit
Gronk did get held (Refs do call holding even on opposite side of the field to where the ball is thrown)

Holding can only be called on a defender if he holds before the ball is thrown. Once the QB throws the ball...a defender can be called for PI (but not for hold). It can't be PI if the ball is tipped/intercepted before it reaches the receiver.

If the Ball goes to the receiver being held is PI, Holding will be called away from the ball