There are 82 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

So why isn't the team credited with 5 sacks?

Originally posted by IWASATTHECATCH:
Originally posted by ziggy_gonna_rock:
Mcdonald -1
Haralson -2
smith - 2

Smith is credited with 1 . He had a sack on a 4th down play and at the end of game .

Haralson got Warner early on a bootleg type play . Why are they not credited for 2 sacks each ????

On that one play, Warner tried to hand off to Wells but Benie went the wrong way, so Warner tried to run, and it was for a loss. Thus that play was ruled as a run, not QB sack. Unfortunately. I would have preferred a sack, too.

EDIT: And I'm not referring to the last play on D. This was earlier in the game, when Benie would have had his 1st NFL carry but blew the direction.

So if the quarterback misses a handoff and gets tackled its considered a run?

That's ridiculous.

Haralson should have 2 sacks.
Originally posted by BrianGO:
Originally posted by IWASATTHECATCH:
Originally posted by ziggy_gonna_rock:
Mcdonald -1
Haralson -2
smith - 2

Smith is credited with 1 . He had a sack on a 4th down play and at the end of game .

Haralson got Warner early on a bootleg type play . Why are they not credited for 2 sacks each ????

On that one play, Warner tried to hand off to Wells but Benie went the wrong way, so Warner tried to run, and it was for a loss. Thus that play was ruled as a run, not QB sack. Unfortunately. I would have preferred a sack, too.

EDIT: And I'm not referring to the last play on D. This was earlier in the game, when Benie would have had his 1st NFL carry but blew the direction.

So if the quarterback misses a handoff and gets tackled its considered a run?

That's ridiculous.

Haralson should have 2 sacks.

No but i think it was because Warner started scrambling.

-9fA
Originally posted by 9ermex:
I think the last play was a fumble, and the 4th down play Warner just threw the ball away, he should have been penalized.

Too bad but at least we were in Warners face all day lets hope we can keep this up.

go niners!

that it looked a couple times as sacks he just threw the ball down. Strange he wasn't penalized.
Originally posted by BrianGO:

So if the quarterback misses a handoff and gets tackled its considered a run?

That's ridiculous.

Haralson should have 2 sacks.

how is it ridiculous? it was a run play. the only thing he could do is run. if he tried to throw it, there'd be a penalty for illegal linemen downfield.
Originally posted by Sinsation:
Originally posted by BrianGO:

So if the quarterback misses a handoff and gets tackled its considered a run?

That's ridiculous.

Haralson should have 2 sacks.

how is it ridiculous? it was a run play. the only thing he could do is run. if he tried to throw it, there'd be a penalty for illegal linemen downfield.

I think the point he's making is that if the QB is tackled behind the LOS it should be a sack.
the point i'm making is...QB or not, u cant have a sack on a run play.
Originally posted by Sinsation:
the point i'm making is...QB or not, u cant have a sack on a run play.

How do you define a "run play"?

If the quarterback fakes a hand off and then scrambles out of the pocket, he might decide to run it himself, or he might decide to throw a 50 yard touchdown.

The "rule" should be that a sack is any quarterback tackle behind the line of scrimmage.

That makes it simple, and avoids ambiguity, because there is no real way to define a "run play."
Originally posted by BrianGO:


The "rule" should be that a sack is any quarterback tackle behind the line of scrimmage.

I agree with you. The NFL, for some reason, does not. I also hate that when someone hits the QB and forces him to fumble, that the player gets credited with a FF & a sack. IMO, that contradictory. If he fumbles, he can't be down. If he's down, he can't fumble.

[ Edited by IWASATTHECATCH on Sep 13, 2009 at 22:14:38 ]
It's a technicality but it makes sense, if a defense shuts down the wildcat should that be a sack too? or stuffing a QB sneak? The second it becomes a penalty to throw the ball a sack is no longer an eligibility, makes sense to me.

In this instance I would want it to be a sack too.... but thats cause we are on the right side of that play, once it happens to us I wouldn't want it to be a sack. But that's why theres a rule
Originally posted by ziggy_gonna_rock:
Mcdonald -1
Haralson -2
smith - 2

Smith is credited with 1 . He had a sack on a 4th down play and at the end of game .

Haralson got Warner early on a bootleg type play . Why are they not credited for 2 sacks each ????

Like I said before the game, If the 9ers could not SACK a statue in Warner, this would be a long season.

Another statue is next in Seattle Hasselbeck...stay tuned!
Originally posted by King49er:
Obama

LIAR!!!!!
Originally posted by ziggy_gonna_rock:
Mcdonald -1
Haralson -2
smith - 2

Smith is credited with 1 . He had a sack on a 4th down play and at the end of game .

Haralson got Warner early on a bootleg type play . Why are they not credited for 2 sacks each ????

So who out there still believes that "SACKS" are not important?

So who out there still believes that today "SACKS" did not earn our team a WIN?

Like I been saying.... SACKS are game changers.

Pressure is scondary to actully getting the "SACK"
Originally posted by BigMar:
Originally posted by ziggy_gonna_rock:
Mcdonald -1
Haralson -2
smith - 2

Smith is credited with 1 . He had a sack on a 4th down play and at the end of game .

Haralson got Warner early on a bootleg type play . Why are they not credited for 2 sacks each ????

So who out there still believes that "SACKS" are not important?

So who out there still believes that today "SACKS" did not earn our team a WIN?

Like I been saying.... SACKS are game changers.

Pressure is scondary to actully getting the "SACK"

I still believe sacks arent that important.

What won us the game yesterday was the pressure we had on Warner all day, the pressure had him throwing ints, rushing his throws for tons of incompletions, the sacks were nice but that is not what won us the game.
we got 3 sacks...the pressure we caused led to ints...like i said in that other thread...if we're in the QB's face all day long, and hitting him as he throws, i could care less if we got 0 sacks.
Originally posted by niners94:
Does it matter? Warner was getting abused all day.

it matters because too many people on here whine about a lack of a pass rush and no sacks, which is a stat,so if the correct number of sacks are recorded people will be satisfied.