NoSaint Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Oh, of course. But it was still cheating. Not only that, but you'd think any team posed with a bizarre formation that !@#$s up their coverage like that would call a time out. First half: disagree Second half: agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Belichick is smarter and better at his profession than any coach I have ever seen in any sport. Brady was unbelievably great in that game. His offensive line may have been worse than Buffalo's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Ravens needed a stop after going up 28-14 That drive could have won them the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 "Legal," yes. In that it was within the rules. But it was also a use of the rules in a manner in which they weren't intended to be used. It wasn't "playing the game" as much as it was "gaming the system." And that's cheating. Your comment is confusing. If it is by the book it is by definition not cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I just read through them and it seems pretty basic that its legal but coaches didn't want to risk a 4 man line. The ineligible player checks in, the ref notifies a defensive captain and you play ball. That the Ravens werent prepped for it seems to be the only issue. The first fake fg, first flea flicker, first wildcat were all the same thing, it seems like I think the hurry up meant it was a bit rushed and I didn't see any signal from the ref to indicate to the defense. They showed the whole replay and the RB quickly talks to the ref to notify him and then the ball is snapped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I think the hurry up meant it was a bit rushed and I didn't see any signal from the ref to indicate to the defense. They showed the whole replay and the RB quickly talks to the ref to notify him and then the ball is snapped. I'll have to peak at a replay.... I don't know what the signal even looks like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I'll have to peak at a replay.... I don't know what the signal even looks like Who knows... he made a motion to the side judge, they don't show if the side judge says something to defense. It was smart, they'll never be able to use it again, so hopefully that was the 1 time they needed to use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Legal or not, it was abusive. Not allowing the defense to know who the eligible receivers are is pure crap. No one else has done it because its a garbage move and only one team even thinks that way and stoops to tbat level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Who knows... he made a motion to the side judge, they don't show if the side judge says something to defense. It was smart, they'll never be able to use it again, so hopefully that was the 1 time they needed to use it. They could- just won't be as effective. It also forces this weeks opponent to prep for it which is a perk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 "Legal," yes. In that it was within the rules. But it was also a use of the rules in a manner in which they weren't intended to be used. It wasn't "playing the game" as much as it was "gaming the system." And that's cheating. Intended? If the league intended the rule to never be exploitable then they would have made it illegal to do what the Pats did, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Intended? If the league intended the rule to never be exploitable then they would have made it illegal to do what the Pats did, no?No this just exploited a wrinkle no one else had thought of because no one else stoops that low. Theybe been desparate ever since their spy cameras were taken away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 No this just exploited a wrinkle no one else had thought of because no one else stoops that low. Theybe been desparate ever since their spy cameras were taken away So what about when pick plays are called? Picks are illegal, yet someone thought up using it and make them not look like a pick. They are used quite a bit now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 No this just exploited a wrinkle no one else had thought of because no one else stoops that low. Theybe been desparate ever since their spy cameras were taken away Does it still chap you when teams kick onside without announcing it or fake a punt/fg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 It's actually a pretty risky move if the D is ready for it Only 4 blockers could be very bad news So I doubt we see it again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l< j Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I can't find a video of the whole sequence on the first time it's used. Just a vine edited down to a split second before the snap. I didn't watch the game and I want to see how the play unfolded. The key is whether the defense had sufficient time to digest the information. If I say "I'm going to punch you" and then swing immediately after the word "you", that's still a sucker punch. kj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Does it still chap you when teams kick onside without announcing it or fake a punt/fg?Completely bogus analogy. But from the defender of BountyGate I'm not surprised Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimp on da' net Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24953400/harbaugh-says-ne-ran-illegal-plays-tom-brady-says-study-the-rulebook One thing about Belicheat and staff is that they are very good situationally, I really hate to admit. But they have shown in the past that they will push the envelope (borderline cheating) if need be to win. He knows that Brady won't be around much longer and the clocks ticking...he getting desperate! I'll blame the league if they don't address this type of thing this week. At the least if an ineligible player is in the game, especially in cases like this, they should allow the defense to get set accordingly. Past practice has shown with the hurry up type or unconventional offenses for the sake of competition the defense is allowed the opportunity to adjust. Kudos to the cheaters, they got away with it this time and were able to advance. Belicheat has once again provided further proof that he's void of any moral fortitude and for Tammy Brady to rub it in with that comment, goes to show the respect they have for the spirit of competition. The Pats axiom should read when you can't beat them, cheat them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l< j Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 When the offense substitutes, by rule the defense has to be allowed to substitute. If the offense sends out a particular player grouping, the D sends out the appropriate package. If one of the players declares himself ineligible to the ref, that changes the grouping and the D should be able to substitute. That's the spirit of the rule, but apparently not the letter. kj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 It's not the fact that they did this that annoys me so very much but rather the smugness. They knew they were cheating at least the first time and we're proud of it. Winning because you Are the better team is honorable. Winning like they did smacks so much of desperation it is pathetic. This ^^ Well said, and I can't wait for the Pats to get beat before they win another ring. One of the reasons why I like the Rexy hire is that I do think if you gave Rexy a Brady he could coach circles around the hoodie. The hoodie is nothing without Brady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan_in_raleigh Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 look at the replays I believe both times the *TACKLE* was covered by a receiver one was at the line of scrimmage and one or two others were not on LOS. It should have been illegal man downfield at the least. I hope someone destroys these guys they cheated once and will always cheat and that is giving football a bad rep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Harbaugh got his pants pulled down and he cried about it. He could have called a TO.. In the second half, he totally mismanaged his TO's and thus had to save his last one for a hail Mary play with 4 seconds left. He was out-coached. Nothing at all illegal about what NE did. I bet BB had that move in mind for 30 years and he was waiting and waiting for years for just the right moment to spring it. Regardless, I thought the Ravens offensive plans were brilliant... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/8_Rule5_Players_Subs_Equip_GeneralRules.pdf See especially: Section 3, Article 1. Section 2, Article 10 and 11. There was a problem if the referee was not performing Sec. 3, Art. 1 and giving the defense the information and allowing the ball to be snapped. What the Patriots did was legal, but the officials did not officiate the game properly, IMO, giving them a clear competitive advantage. If the Patriots try this again, I hope the officials are instructed properly. Defensively, I think you line up in press and overwhelm the 4 blockers. They are basically playing 10 on 11 and relying on deception (and the officials to help with it) to get uncovered receivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Article and section of the rulebook is the greatest team ever... Cheap, obnoxious, slimy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/8_Rule5_Players_Subs_Equip_GeneralRules.pdf See especially: Section 3, Article 1. Section 2, Article 10 and 11. There was a problem if the referee was not performing Sec. 3, Art. 1 and giving the defense the information and allowing the ball to be snapped. What the Patriots did was legal, but the officials did not officiate the game properly, IMO, giving them a clear competitive advantage. If the Patriots try this again, I hope the officials are instructed properly. Defensively, I think you line up in press and overwhelm the 4 blockers. They are basically playing 10 on 11 and relying on deception (and the officials to help with it) to get uncovered receivers. Thanks for the link. As I suspected, this tactic at best occupies a gray area that most honest people would consider cheating. When such a substitution is made, the referee is required to prevent the offense from snapping the ball until the defense has a chance to adjust. This rule is part of the NFL's attempt to legislate substitutional trickery--as opposed to fake FGs, onside kicks, etc.--out of the game. The Patriots' scheme is designed to do one thing--confuse the defense with an unorthodox substitution then snap the ball quickly before they can adjust. If the referee enforces the rule properly, the Patriots would gain no advantage. By snapping the ball before the defense has had a reasonable chance to adjust, the Patriots are hoping to take advantage of the referee's failure to enforce the rule. How many honest people who would not call that cheating? They are trying to gain a competitive advantage from exactly what the rule is designed to prevent. The only way this is not cheating is if you believe "cheating" occurs only when you get caught. Edited January 11, 2015 by mannc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Sorry if already mentioned...but, don't refs announce when a player makes himself eligible? Seems to me that they do. The play I saw they didn't do that. The announcement would give the defense time to react (or call a TO if they were unsure). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Sorry if already mentioned...but, don't refs announce when a player makes himself eligible? Seems to me that they do. The play I saw they didn't do that. The announcement would give the defense time to react (or call a TO if they were unsure). He was being made "ineligible", no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jets Hater Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 As mentioned before, if the Bills had done it, we'd be claiming it was a smart move. I hate the Pats as much as anyone here, but BB is the best in the business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 its not cheating, its smart. as much as I hate to say it but brady is right they did nothing wrong. they exploited a loophole In the rules It was brilliant...don't expect it to stay in the rulebook very long, but I am shocked nobody has ever used this before...half the time the defenders are going to be covering a player that isn't even able to catch a pass because he isn't eligible, even though he might be a RB, WR or TE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 He was being made "ineligible", no? Only because he reported such to the ref. When a player (o-lineman) declares himself eligible don't they still announce that to all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/8_Rule5_Players_Subs_Equip_GeneralRules.pdf See especially: Section 3, Article 1. Section 2, Article 10 and 11. There was a problem if the referee was not performing Sec. 3, Art. 1 and giving the defense the information and allowing the ball to be snapped. What the Patriots did was legal, but the officials did not officiate the game properly, IMO, giving them a clear competitive advantage. If the Patriots try this again, I hope the officials are instructed properly. Defensively, I think you line up in press and overwhelm the 4 blockers. They are basically playing 10 on 11 and relying on deception (and the officials to help with it) to get uncovered receivers. You're totally correct--in particular Art 3, section 1's last sentence about the ball not being snapped until the referee is back in position (after telling the D about the eligibility situation) clearly indicates that the refs didn't call this game properly. Who here is really surprised, however? Only because he reported such to the ref. When a player (o-lineman) declares himself eligible don't they still announce that to all? According to the rule quoted, they are supposed to. What a crock. Harbaugh really needs to speak up about this. I really want to see a coach cheated by these guys grow a pair and say so to the media. Edited January 11, 2015 by MattM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Only because he reported such to the ref. When a player (o-lineman) declares himself eligible don't they still announce that to all? True. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 True. Refs screwed up because Belichick knew more about the rules than they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Refs screwed up because Belichick knew more about the rules than they did. That's a kind/benign reading of the situation. Note that Harbaugh pointed this out to the refs several times to no avail. Still think the benign explanation is correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 That's a kind/benign reading of the situation. Note that Harbaugh pointed this out to the refs several times to no avail. Still think the benign explanation is correct? After the fact. Should have called a time out if he actually recognized what was happening instead of crying about it to the refs afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) Only because he reported such to the ref. When a player (o-lineman) declares himself eligible don't they still announce that to all? They have to communicate it to the defensive captain. How that's officially communicated, I'm not sure. I'd assume some signal. Edited January 12, 2015 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 After the fact. Should have called a time out if he actually recognized what was happening instead of crying about it to the refs afterwards. According to Harbaugh, they did it multiple times, which is why he was seen repeatedly yelling at them from the sidelines on TV multiple times last night. He took the penalty on purpose he said because it was the only way they'd listen to him, and apparently still didn't. He needs to keep pressing this. Even under the benign explanation, the refs in that game should not be NFL refs next year--the rule book is amazingly clear on this point, so no excuse for them missing this, especially with a coach pointing it out to them. As for how they're supposed to announce it--just like they do for eligible players. In fact, they just audibly did it in the Colts-Broncos game about ten minutes ago. Seems pretty straightforward actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mabden Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Because the pats couldn't play straight up agginst a better team,they resort to cheap tactics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jletha Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Because the pats couldn't play straight up agginst a better team,they resort to cheap tactics. I would love a Bills coach to be this innovative. If it wins games and its legal, sign me up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 That's a kind/benign reading of the situation. Note that Harbaugh pointed this out to the refs several times to no avail. Still think the benign explanation is correct? Yeah, I do. I'm not one for grassy knolls. They have to communicate it to the defensive captain. How that's officially communicated, I'm not sure. I'd assume some signal. I just heard an announcement of an eligible receiver during the Denver game. Why would a ref announce that to everyone, not just the defensive captain (I assume you mean the defender who has the earpiece) for something that happens darn near every game and you and I understand when we see it (& don't need an announcement), but, not announce something that we've never seen before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) Yeah, I do. I'm not one for grassy knolls. I just heard an announcement of an eligible receiver during the Denver game. Why would a ref announce that to everyone, not just the defensive captain (I assume you mean the defender who has the earpiece) for something that happens darn near every game and you and I understand when we see it (& don't need an announcement), but, not announce something that we've never seen before? The refs have no obligation to announce anything to you or I. I was simply relaying the verbiage of the rule I read. The ref had to communicate it to 1 man as the minimum. In a loud stadium or if there's mic trouble, or in this case a hurry up- Id guess there's a signal or direct connect and not reliance on stadium pa and the defense having to determine between important announcements and normal jibber jabber Harbaugh also seemed upset about time to locate and adjust, not that they were never told. I'm not sure the refs are required to hold the play so the defense can adjust its matchups and playcalls any more than if a rb splits wide though. Edited January 12, 2015 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts