co_springs_billsfan Posted August 5, 2017 Share Posted August 5, 2017 When passing into the end zone from the 2 yard line, it's likely that PI occurred in the end zone. So yes, the ball is placed at the 1. It's a coincidence that that's also half the distance, but you're right - PI isn't a "half the distance" penalty. I'm guessing the penalty only moved the ball one yard, so the extra point would be snapped from the 14-yard line. But it wouldn't surprise me if it was at the 15 yard line, or the 7.5 yard line instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted August 5, 2017 Share Posted August 5, 2017 My question is can you line up at the 2 and drop kick for a 1 point conversion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dulles Posted August 5, 2017 Share Posted August 5, 2017 That gets subjective though. That's my point. It's a throw, in the pocket, not near an eligible receiver and not past the LOs. By definition that is grounding. By definition, it is a different category of pass. I believe the rule book defines that specific play. It's kinda like asking why a FT in basketball is only worth 1 point, when a shot from the same spot in the run of play results in 2. Additionally, grounding is an infraction motivated by a desire to avoid getting sacked. Spiking isn't. It is an immediate act by which the quarterback forfeits a down in order to preserve time, not yardage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuco Posted August 5, 2017 Share Posted August 5, 2017 (edited) That gets subjective though. That's my point. It's a throw, in the pocket, not near an eligible receiver and not past the LOs. By definition that is grounding. No, by definition that is not intentional grounding as long as the passer is not attempting to avoid a sack. Yes, technically it is subjective. In this case the official has to make the delicate decision of whether the passer was grounding the ball to avoid a loss of yardage or spiking the ball to stop the clock. They don't usually get it wrong. It's in the rule book. Spiking the ball (as long as it's done immediately after the snap) to stop the clock is not intentional grounding just because there was no receiver in the area. ARTICLE 1. DEFINITION. It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. Furthermore- Item 3. Stopping Clock. A player under center is permitted to stop the game clock legally to save time if, immediately upon receiving the snap, he begins a continuous throwing motion and throws the ball directly into the ground. According to the 2017 Official Playing Rules Of The National Football League, this is the answer to why spiking the ball is not intentional grounding. Edited August 5, 2017 by Tuco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted August 5, 2017 Author Share Posted August 5, 2017 The patriots would be awarded the game in this scenario and players on team B would be heavily fined. If it were us we might even be forced to move to Toronto and be sold to Bon Jersey if fat Bobby had his way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 5, 2017 Share Posted August 5, 2017 Wherever the Pats want it. And the Pats** get 2 extra points because the other team wasn't cheating hard enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts