Week 4 Other Games

[Harlan Huckleby]

What's kind of funny is that seemingly no one on the planet - not Jim Caldwell, not Jon Gruden, not the fans, nobody - knew this rule. Tirico never said a word. The coaches didn't bitch at all. It wasn't until after when somebody postgame interviewed a ref that this came up.

So essentially the rule was there but no one really seemed to know that. Had Caldwell or one of his assistants known the rule, he might've immediately jumped the officials about it, so they might've then huddled briefly (pretending it was their idea) and then thrown a flag.

Very good point. The Lions should have raised a stink. I didn't know the rules exactly, but I knew a defender must not be able to earn a touch back by batting the ball out of the endzone. It was like the announcers and coaches just wanted to get out of the noisy stadium and turn in.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I was thinking the same thing no one said a word, including on this board

That sounds like a shot at pbmax. This happened on his watch as forum crier.

[Guiness]

Very good point. The Lions should have raised a stink. I didn't know the rules exactly, but I knew a defender must not be able to earn a touch back by batting the ball out of the endzone. It was like the announcers and coaches just wanted to get out of the noisy stadium and turn in.

I thought it was odd as well, like a holy roller in reverse, but no one said anything so I disregarded it. Funny though, this is the second time it's come up this season, another team fumbled the ball through the opponent's end zone and had possession taken away and I was surprised by the ruling.

[pbmax]

Wouldn't have even guessed at that one. All the cases I could think of once I heard about the missed call were legal. Barely knew that there was an illegal case.

However, I should have known. Database guys uncovered 12 calls of illegal batting of the football since 2010. 8 were accepted, 4 declined. Included in that is one by Pittsburgh, penalty accepted by Green Bay in 2010. Estus Hood batted a blocked FG kick illegally. Packers accepted and drive for a TD.

2 of these included balls in the end zone. Zebras should have know. Chris Maragos (Seattle-Badgers) had one called against him in 2013 versus the 49ers during a punt.

Near end of article: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/clu...ounters-week-4

Source: http://www.nflpenalties.com/

[pbmax]

Kevin Seifert @SeifertESPN 8h8 hours ago
Three years later, Lance Easley still receives email from people who want him to die: http://es.pn/1j4JoVn

This is one of those rare occasions where the internet mob is onto something. This guy needs to stop answering his phone. Does his agent email every NFCN reporter after every controversial call?

[Patler]

However, I should have known. Database guys uncovered 12 calls of illegal batting of the football since 2010. 8 were accepted, 4 declined. Included in that is one by Pittsburgh, penalty accepted by Green Bay in 2010. Estus Hood batted a blocked FG kick illegally. Packers accepted and drive for a TD.

Near end of article: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/clu...ounters-week-4

Source: http://www.nflpenalties.com/

You threw me on this. Estus Hood was a Packer DB in the late 70's. Thought maybe he had a kid with the Steelers in 2010.
Article states "E. Hood" a DL. That would be Evander "Ziggy" Hood.

[pbmax]

Would you believe that was today's second trivia question?

[pbmax]

In case you missed it:



Cleveland does something to a man, and it usually isn't good. #factoryofsadness

Tramon was done in not by his mistake, but by the collective shrug people give to the Browns about getting details right, like whether or not someone in an orange helmet is offside or not.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/10/08/nfl-says-it-didnt-concede-field-goal-error-to-the-browns/

Tramontana maintained that the League admitted an error, but they deny it. However, Florio thinks TW has a case:

The All-22 footage available the the NFL’s Game Rewind feature has two angles that suggest that the flag shouldn’t have been thrown. In one angle, it’s clear that Williams is lined up alongside his teammates. In the other angle, it’s clear that he times the snap perfectly, moving at the same instant the ball is lifted off the ground by the snapper.

[HarveyWallbangers]

In line, on the LOS and adjacent, I think that is still legal.

I do agree with Paul Zimmerman, they should just outlaw blocks below the waist.

Same play was called tonight on the LOS. The only problem was it was not egregious. In fact, I don't think the Texans blocker even hit the Colts rushed below the waist. He hit him above the hip. Kind of weird because the more I read about this, I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a penalty. Well, it should be illegal, but I"m not sure if it is. The Texans tonight was not nearly as bad as this block.

I did find video. I wish ESPN would have pointed it out. Maybe there'd be more buzz to make these blocks illegal.

This Ugly Block From The Seahawks Resulted In A Gruesome Broken Leg

[smuggler]

I don't know why they won't ban the low blocks. Is this wrestlinnnnnnnnnnnnnnng? No. Ban that shit.

[pbmax]

Same play was called tonight on the LOS. The only problem was it was not egregious. In fact, I don't think the Texans blocker even hit the Colts rushed below the waist. He hit him above the hip. Kind of weird because the more I read about this, I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a penalty. Well, it should be illegal, but I"m not sure if it is. The Texans tonight was not nearly as bad as this block.

I did find video. I wish ESPN would have pointed it out. Maybe there'd be more buzz to make these blocks illegal.

This Ugly Block From The Seahawks Resulted In A Gruesome Broken Leg

Yeah, I saw the block that got called tonight. It might be illegal, but the explanation from Dumb and Dumber wasn't right.

[pbmax]

Thanks for the link Harv. I am not sure that's illegal, and if it is, it's block from behind call and not a "while the defender was engaged" call.

It is immoral and unethical, because the Guard is diving with his full weight at the side of the DT's knee and leg and the only way to knock him down is to collapse the leg from the side. He doesn't move far enough to get his head or elbow in front of the player. He just collapsed his leg like they did to Jurko in Dallas.

He is barely, briefly engaged with the Center, who is running past him to get play-side and kick out the other DT or ILB. The Center is trying to run away from him and its the Lion who puts his hands on the Seahawks briefly after the C tired to rush pat him.

Its why they should just ban going low.

[pbmax]

From that link:

Again, to reiterate, this type of chop block is legal. On a running play, an offensive lineman can engage a player below the waist provided he is not more than one position away from the initial block. In layman’s terms, the right guard can chop the nose tackle engaged with the center. The right tackle cannot.

So the Colts-Texans call was because it was a pass. The Seahawks non-call was because even if you judged it to be a chop block (two guys engaged on one defender, one high and one low), its legal if its a run play and they are adjacent.

[Guiness]

From that link:



So the Colts-Texans call was because it was a pass. The Seahawks non-call was because even if you judged it to be a chop block (two guys engaged on one defender, one high and one low), its legal if its a run play and they are adjacent.

???

I always thought you couldn't hit low if he was already engaged. Never seen this convoluted verbiage before.

[Rastak]

We will.

Doesn't look that fun.