simpleman Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 I yelled at the TV. First time I've done it during a non Bills game. I rarely yell at the TV on non Bills/ playoff games but I too was yelling at that, if that wasn't IG ,I'm not sure what is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainwampus Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 Bridgewater, Dalton and Eli Manning all commited blantant intentional groundings yesterday without getting flagged for it. There is no consistent rulings in this league. I also notice Pacman Jones bumping an official, disputing a catch, at least as bad as Hughes last personal foul, but there was no flag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wraith Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 This is the text of the rule: "Intentional grounding of a forward pass is a foul: loss of down and 10 yards from previous spot if passer is in the field of play or loss of down at the spot of the foul if it occurs more than 10 yards behind the line or safety if passer is in his own end zone when ball is released. Intentional grounding will be called when a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage due to pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. Intentional grounding will not be called when a passer, while out of the pocket and facing an imminent loss of yardage, throws a pass that lands at or beyond the line of scrimmage, even if no offensive player(s) have a realistic chance to catch the ball (including if the ball lands out of bounds over the sideline or end line)." Nothing about distances at all. Mike Carey's "explanation" is complete crap. The name of the penalty is "intentional grounding" after all. A miscommunication is, by definition, not intentional. Carey claimed a lot of things that are not supported by the rule book. I wonder what CBS is paying for his dignity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jr1 Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 it's BS like baseball umpire strike zone fluctuations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zow2 Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 Anytime the league is mandating for MORE penalties (like is being done this year) is completely out of line. The only exception is to headhunting QB's, i can live with the stricter calls on those. IG is such a subjective call. Not calling it on Bridgewater yesterday after what they called on Orton was ridiculous. I would hope at least you would get consistent ref'ing with the same crew. I'd like someone to track the Bills/Miami ref crew and find out if they called IG in any other games this year? or if they've enforced holding and PI consistently against both teams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 This is the text of the rule: "Intentional grounding of a forward pass is a foul: loss of down and 10 yards from previous spot if passer is in the field of play or loss of down at the spot of the foul if it occurs more than 10 yards behind the line or safety if passer is in his own end zone when ball is released. Intentional grounding will be called when a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage due to pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. Intentional grounding will not be called when a passer, while out of the pocket and facing an imminent loss of yardage, throws a pass that lands at or beyond the line of scrimmage, even if no offensive player(s) have a realistic chance to catch the ball (including if the ball lands out of bounds over the sideline or end line)." Nothing about distances at all. Mike Carey's "explanation" is complete crap. The name of the penalty is "intentional grounding" after all. A miscommunication is, by definition, not intentional. Carey claimed a lot of things that are not supported by the rule book. I wonder what CBS is paying for his dignity. Refs are not going to try to interpret what route the receiver might have been running or not. So you can't use the "WR simply ran the wrong route" excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 Refs are not going to try to interpret what route the receiver might have been running or not. So you can't use the "WR simply ran the wrong route" excuse. They shouldn't be interpreting anything. If there is a receiver in the area and the ball lands in-bounds, it's not IG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 Or, you know, as I said before, if the ball travels 10+ yards, pocket or no pocket, pressure or no pressure, it's not IG. Add that freedom while taking away the loop hole Orton DID exercise against Miami at least twice and not allow QB's to essentially spike the ball into the heels of a blocking RB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 They shouldn't be interpreting anything. If there is a receiver in the area and the ball lands in-bounds, it's not IG. That's not what we are discussing in particular right now. Wraith claimed a miscomunication between QB and receiver (where the latter winds up not in the area of the ball) is "unintentional" and therefore should be immune from IG calls. It's not true... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wraith Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 That's not what we are discussing in particular right now. Wraith claimed a miscomunication between QB and receiver (where the latter winds up not in the area of the ball) is "unintentional" and therefore should be immune from IG calls. It's not true... You're overthinking this. It's not about trying to decide what the route was supposed to be. It's simply watching where the receiver was when the quaterback let go of the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 You're overthinking this. It's not about trying to decide what the route was supposed to be. It's simply watching where the receiver was when the quaterback let go of the ball. This. If the QB throws the ball before the WR makes his break, the ref can't say the QB was trying to throw it away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 You're overthinking this. It's not about trying to decide what the route was supposed to be. It's simply watching where the receiver was when the quaterback let go of the ball. Exactly. There are two clear components to IG. Is the QB throwing it just to avoid the sack, and is there a receiver in the vicinity the QB is throwing to that can possibly make the catch when it is thrown. Orton was clearly throwing just to avoid the sack, but when he threw the ball he clearly threw it where he wanted to and at the time if Watkins just went out instead of in, it would have been very close. You can even see Watkins stopping and looking the other way before the ball lands IIRC. That was definitely not IG. Watkins was running straight when the ball was released. Plus Orton was looking that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rumblefish Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 To be a top official in the NFL it's as simple as this follow the rules: Rule-1 Follow the rules Rule-2-there are no rules Rule-3 no poof-da's GET it, GOT it, GOOD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braedenstearns Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 anyone have a video of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 This. If the QB throws the ball before the WR makes his break, the ref can't say the QB was trying to throw it away. Yes he can. If the WR runs the wrong pattern and he ends up not near the ball, it's still IG. Otherwise a QB will always claim he wasn't avoiding the sack, his WR simply ran the wrong way.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Yes he can. If the WR runs the wrong pattern and he ends up not near the ball, it's still IG. Otherwise a QB will always claim he wasn't avoiding the sack, his WR simply ran the wrong way.... Not necessarily. It can end up that way but it doesn't necessarily have to be. If a QB throws the ball way downfield and the receiver, after the ball is thrown, makes a cut so he ends up ten yards away when it lands, it's not automatically IG at all. It's still the same judgment call it always is. Did he throw the ball just to avoid a sack, and was he throwing it to a potential receiver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Previously, I'd only seen IG called when there was no one near where the ball was thrown. To now start saying that you have to throw it at the receiver, even if it's a matter of going one way or another, is ridiculous. The refs can barely manage officiating games as it is. Now they're supposed to determine intent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Previously, I'd only seen IG called when there was no one near where the ball was thrown. To now start saying that you have to throw it at the receiver, even if it's a matter of going one way or another, is ridiculous. The refs can barely manage officiating games as it is. Now they're supposed to determine intent? No. I've already posted that they have said they will not consider intent, i.e. whether a receiver ran the wrong route while his QB passed the ball under duress. That's all.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 No. I've already posted that they have said they will not consider intent, i.e. whether a receiver ran the wrong route while his QB passed the ball under duress. That's all.... Most every time it is called they consider intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Not necessarily. It can end up that way but it doesn't necessarily have to be. If a QB throws the ball way downfield and the receiver, after the ball is thrown, makes a cut so he ends up ten yards away when it lands, it's not automatically IG at all. It's still the same judgment call it always is. Did he throw the ball just to avoid a sack, and was he throwing it to a potential receiver. If the QB throws "way down field", IG won't be called anyway... Most every time it is called they consider intent. The intent of the QB, not the WR and QB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts