Jump to content

Should season ticket holders protest?


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Braedenstearns said:

My questions is would have it worked the other way?

 

say he does his fist bump thing (or whatever he did to say “fair catch”) and tricked everyone and then took of running for a TD. Would it be called a TD because he never took a knee? Or would it have been called back because of him making no attempt to run...? I honestly think it wouldn’t have been called back if he took off running after pausing a moment

He would be assessed an unsportsmanlike penalty. You can’t fake a fair catch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality is that this same play has happened scores of times this year, and this is the first time the ref didn’t use common sense and call it a touchback immediately.  Not a single mention of it would ever have been made by anyone had the ref not been an idiot in the first place.  The time to start changing the way a rule is being enforced is not during the playoffs.  That would be like saying the refs in the NBA should decide to call a carry on an unguarded point guard in the backcourt halfway through game 3 of the Finals because he rolled his hand over it a little...like every player in the game does every single time.

Edited by Billl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, K-9 said:

And yet it’s been accepted in practice, if not specifically defined in the rule book,  by refs league wide. Indeed, I’ve seen numerous instances where the ref blew the whistle the moment the ball landed after the returner gave the safe signal in the endzone. 

I was taught to play to the whistle in F'ing Pee-wee football.

 

Was a whistle blown by the Head official?

Edited by Real McNasty
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, K-9 said:

He would be assessed an unsportsmanlike penalty. You can’t fake a fair catch. 

He didn't signal fair catch. This is the point. Fair catch is a legally defined motion, arm waving above head. He would have absolutely been within his right to take a few steps and then start running, as evidenced by Greg Olsen who saw Devin Hester do the exact thing:

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MAJBobby said:

I know it sucks being but hurt. Tell me again please cause it still won’t change a thing. RIGHT COMMON SENSE CALL

Refs don’t have the choice of making common sense calls, it’s black and white and you are so dug in you won’t admit that you are wrong, you’re like a 2 year old . The point isn’t people are hurt, the point isn’t interpreting what he meant to do, the point is the overriding by the off field officials was wrong and their is no arguing that. Common sense says if there is a written rule you follow it or this exact argument ensues. Be a man and admit you are wrong.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GoBills808 said:

He didn't signal fair catch. This is the point. Fair catch is a legally defined motion, arm waving above head. He would have absolutely been within his right to take a few steps and then start running, as evidenced by Greg Olsen who saw Devin Hester do the exact thing:

 

 


I don’t care what Devin Hester did BEFORE the KO rules are changed 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MAJBobby said:


 

cool No desire to Advance. Thanks. 

Well reading that rule, there is an AND in there after falling to the ground OR taking a knee and making no effort to advance.

 

In my line of work, dealing with a document that is written in legal jargon, the word AND would mean that it it needs to be used in conjunction with whatever comes before it. So in this case, they would need to kneel or fall down while also making no effort to advance.

  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Meatloaf63 said:

Refs don’t have the choice of making common sense calls, it’s black and white and you are so dug in you won’t admit that you are wrong, you’re like a 2 year old . The point isn’t people are hurt, the point isn’t interpreting what he meant to do, the point is the overriding by the off field officials was wrong and their is no arguing that. Common sense says if there is a written rule you follow it or this exact argument ensues. Be a man and admit you are wrong.....


really it is black and white. How many times has PI been called right?  Is there HOLDING called on Every play?  According to black and white rules their should be. 
 

guess what right call. And now I am done 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, apuszczalowski said:

Well reading that rule, there is an AND in there after falling to the ground OR taking a knee and making no effort to advance.

 

In my line of work, dealing with a document that is written in legal jargon, the word AND would mean that it it needs to be used in conjunction with whatever comes before it. So in this case, they would need to kneel or fall down while also making no effort to advance.


mans not in your line of work. In NFL where officials can apply common sense 

Just now, GoBills808 said:

Here are the new kickoff rules. They're not relevant to this discussion.

 

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/kickoff-rules/


they 100% are when then safe signal has been used ALL YEAR as I am not intending to return the Ball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Billl said:

So a runner who steps out of bounds isn’t down as long as he still has a desire to advance?  ***** is about to get interesting on the sidelines.

I think technically it should be written like this:

 

(e) (i)when a runner is out of bounds, or (ii)declares himself down by falling to the ground, or kneeling, and making no effort to advance

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

No desire to advance. Did he have a desire to advance?  
 

wait you don’t want common sense rules? 
 

 

So what you want is for officials to start making calls based on what they feel someone intends to do? Well the QB was being tackled behind the LOS and the ball came loose, but common sense says he was trying to throw it away so it's an incomplete catch even though he never threw the ball....

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MAJBobby said:


mans not in your line of work. In NFL where officials can apply common sense 

Not to mention the fact that judges absolutely take clear intent as well as precedent into account when making their ruling.  No judge is going to overturn hundreds of cases of precedent over an Oxford comma.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

He didn't signal fair catch. This is the point. Fair catch is a legally defined motion, arm waving above head. He would have absolutely been within his right to take a few steps and then start running, as evidenced by Greg Olsen who saw Devin Hester do the exact thing:

 

 

I know that and I don’t maintain that he did. I was answering a hypothetical regarding an attempted return after a fair catch. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

I think technically it should be written like this:

 

(e) (i)when a runner is out of bounds, or (ii)declares himself down by falling to the ground, or kneeling, and making no effort to advance

I don’t think you need the bold.  If you remove the last comma, it works.  As written (poorly), the “no effort to advance” portion applies to the entire section.  Rules simply can’t be written perfectly enough to cover every eventuality.  This is why common sense must be applied.  If it’s going to be enforced differently, it needs to first be made a public point of emphasis.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...