thebandit27 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 It wouldn't have been the "worst" sack ever whistled by a long shot & your post says nothing about the point I was making. Perhaps my response wasn't clear in the point that I was trying to make: I'm more afraid of the day that grabbing a guy with one hand becomes an in the grasp call than I am of my QB breaking a collar bone because he gets thrown down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Perhaps my response wasn't clear in the point that I was trying to make: I'm more afraid of the day that grabbing a guy with one hand becomes an in the grasp call than I am of my QB breaking a collar bone because he gets thrown down.It's not the throwing down part that worries me it's the landing on. Regardless, the Bills caught a break & got a win. Both are good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 It's not the throwing down part that worries me it's the landing on. Regardless, the Bills caught a break & got a win. Both are good. Was that a double entendre? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 It's not the throwing down part that worries me it's the landing on. Regardless, the Bills caught a break & got a win. Both are good. "In the grasp" is never called unless it's some sort of full-on bear hug. It hasn't been called for decades at this point. It's an artifact of an earlier era that ended in 1991, but in the minds of many fans it appears to have a vestigial afterlife despite its basic non-existence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Was that a double entendre?nope! I mean damn straight it was bucko! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Then everyone saying it wasn't a sack would be crying in their beer about Tyrod's busted collarbone. Like i have mentioned Tyrod really has some balls, trying beat Suh mano el mano. I could barely watch that play. Man could have easily killed him with a swipe of his paw and Taylor is still looking upfield. in regard to Rex and his Captains? I think Bills Players know who it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Like i have mentioned Tyrod really has some balls, trying beat Suh mano el mano. I could barely watch that play. Man could have easily killed him with a swipe of his paw and Taylor is still looking upfield. in regard to Rex and his Captains? I think Bills Players know who it is. Come on 3rd! Suh couldn't even get TT to the ground. He had no chance of killing him with a swipe of his paw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 I'm sorry, but I positively dread the day that having one hand on a guy becomes an "in the grasp" call so what if he has him by the "collar" dont you want to stop the play. I keep thinking back to his injury and the Horsed tackle that caused it. I dont want the penalty dont want the fine, i want the play stopped before he hurts our Boy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardinalScotts Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 with all the b.s. grounding calls we've had against us the last couple years then watch other qb's ground the ball with no call repeatedly I could care less Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 with all the b.s. grounding calls we've had against us the last couple years then watch other qb's ground the ball with no call repeatedly I could care less TT didn't ground the ball. It was a legal throwaway since he was outside the pocket and the ball travelled at least to the LOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 It wouldn't have been the "worst" sack ever whistled by a long shot & your post says nothing about the point I was making. I expected the call honestly. and was more pissed at TT trying to "make a play" against Suh who was coming downhill hard. i was yellin NOOO! Perhaps my response wasn't clear in the point that I was trying to make: I'm more afraid of the day that grabbing a guy with one hand becomes an in the grasp call than I am of my QB breaking a collar bone because he gets thrown down. hmmm. odd Come on 3rd! Suh couldn't even get TT to the ground. He had no chance of killing him with a swipe of his paw. let the all 22 tell us. From my angle , he surely could have maimed the arrogant little varmint called Tyrod! Why he run away? Make Suh angry , curse. and threaten. scare little Officials even. TT didn't ground the ball. It was a legal throwaway since he was outside the pocket and the ball travelled at least to the LOS. if you look upfield i think he had Hogan coming back. TT didn't ground the ball. It was a legal throwaway since he was outside the pocket and the ball travelled at least to the LOS. Kid is going to get himself killed being awesome. Just our luck . rather billsian, i think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimp Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 "In the grasp" is never called unless it's some sort of full-on bear hug. It hasn't been called for decades at this point. It's an artifact of an earlier era that ended in 1991, but in the minds of many fans it appears to have a vestigial afterlife despite its basic non-existence. Dave, how does the in the grasp differ from a qb being whistled down when he is stood up with his momentum stopped? I've seen qbs tied up by linemen and get a quick whistle before they hit the ground. They may call it as forward progress was stopped or some other term but it still exist is some way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 (edited) let the all 22 tell us. From my angle , he surely could have maimed the arrogant little varmint called Tyrod! Why he run away? Make Suh angry , curse. and threaten. scare little Officials even. if you look upfield i think he had Hogan coming back. Kid is going to get himself killed being awesome. Just our luck . rather billsian, i think No, he couldn't have maimed him, and if he had had a better chance to sack him, he would have done it. And Hogan might also have been in the area, but it didn't matter. Yes, it would be very Billsian, but if you want plays blown dead before a player potentially gets injured, there won't be much playing done. Dave, how does the in the grasp differ from a qb being whistled down when he is stood up with his momentum stopped? I've seen qbs tied up by linemen and get a quick whistle before they hit the ground. They may call it as forward progress was stopped or some other term but it still exist is some way. The QB has to be wrapped up by one defender with another one bearing down on him/them for the refs to blow the whistle. Suh didn't have complete control over TT as evidenced by the result of the play. Edited November 11, 2015 by Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 I'm sorry, but I positively dread the day that having one hand on a guy becomes an "in the grasp" call Suh had both hands on him. Watch the video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 TT didn't ground the ball. It was a legal throwaway since he was outside the pocket and the ball travelled at least to the LOS. did it? or are you just saying that wishfully? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 It shouldn't. That's the problem. The rules prevented Suh from making the sack, once he grabbed Taylor. He EASILY could have thrown Taylor to the ground when he spun him, but would have drawn a roughing the passer penalty. Suh was bound by a set of rules that prevented him from completing the play - he's required to take the QB to the ground to get the sack, butvhe can't take the QB to the ground without drawing a penalty. Call the Waaaambulance for Suh here. He knows the rules. If he wrapped Taylor up and tackled him, he'd have gotten his sack. He either couldn't or didn't, so no sack for you Suh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Suh had both hands on him. Watch the video. No need to be smart-alecky; I watched the video, and my comment was a slight exaggeration for emphasis. Suh didn't come close to wrapping him up, which is what a defender should do in that scenario. Pull the QB in and grasp him; hence "in the grasp". did it? or are you just saying that wishfully? Well, the rule actually says "at or near the LOS", which definitely was the case for Taylor's throw. It was the correct call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 I expected the call honestly. and was more pissed at TT trying to "make a play" against Suh who was coming downhill hard. i was yellin NOOO! hmmm. odd It's odd that someone doesn't want the league to become even more subject to the capricious judgement of officials? If we're so worried about preventing any conceivable injury, why not just change the game to two-hand touch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Call the Waaaambulance for Suh here. He knows the rules. If he wrapped Taylor up and tackled him, he'd have gotten his sack. He either couldn't or didn't, so no sack for you Suh. Exactly. He ought to be mad at himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 (edited) No need to be smart-alecky; I watched the video, and my comment was a slight exaggeration for emphasis. Suh didn't come close to wrapping him up, which is what a defender should do in that scenario. Pull the QB in and grasp him; hence "in the grasp". Well, the rule actually says "at or near the LOS", which definitely was the case for Taylor's throw. It was the correct call. my bad (maybe) for some reason I thought it had to reach or cross the LOS A ball carrier, in any location, commits intentional grounding when throwing a pass that does not reach the line of scrimmage; for instance, throwing the football down near himself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intentional_grounding Edited November 11, 2015 by BillsFan-4-Ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts