What constitutes an ineligible man downfield penalty?

[djp14150]

6 hours ago, thebandit27 said:

This penalty is the one that drives me batty every Sunday.

 

It happens all the time and doesn’t get called. And then, occasionally, an official will decide “yeah, you know what? I’m feelin’ it this time.” and throws a flag. I’d say it gets called 1 out of every 20 times I see it.

 

 

On the penslty i think there are some different rules if its a screen play ot a pulling guard on a run or a QB rollout with a run pass option.

[Billl]

1 hour ago, thebandit27 said:

There are bad takes, and then there’s this.

 

Yes, it’s a penalty. To say “perfectly legal play” is ignorance of the highest order. Do the officials let this particular penalty go uncalled all the time? Yes. Does that make it “perfectly legal”? No. Period.

 

And no, the reason Buffalo was in the game was because the LadyBeaters didn’t score enough points to put them out of it, and got lucky with Bass missing a FG and CEH fumbling 1/4 second after his knee went down.

 

Lineman can be downfield as long as the were engaged with defenders when they went downfield.  In this play, they clearly were.  It’s perfectly legal.  The rule is intended to prevent linemen from mimicking eligible receivers.  The defenders disengaged to chase the QB.  
 

it’s hilarious that you think the Chiefs were lucky to win a game in which they outgained their opponent 466-206.  The Bills got their asses kicked, and it wasn’t because of linemen illegally downfield.

[thebandit27]

8 minutes ago, Billl said:

Lineman can be downfield as long as the were engaged with defenders when they went downfield.  In this play, they clearly were.  It’s perfectly legal.  The rule is intended to prevent linemen from mimicking eligible receivers.  The defenders disengaged to chase the QB.  
 

it’s hilarious that you think the Chiefs were lucky to win a game in which they outgained their opponent 466-206.  The Bills got their asses kicked, and it wasn’t because of linemen illegally downfield.

They can move down the field when engaged, provided that they down move further downfield once they disengage. That didn’t happen...and take your misapplied stuffiness elsewhere. I didn’t say that penalty (which is definitely a penalty despite the fact that it rarely gets called) has anything to do with why they lost. Try reading.

 

And yes, the Chiefs benefited from some lucky breaks that helped them stay 2 scores ahead instead of it being a one score game on the final drive. To deny that, you’d have to have not watched the game. If you think I said they’re lucky to win, then once again I’d encourage you to try reading.

[whatdrought]

1 hour ago, Billl said:

There were 4 penalties called in the first half.  All were on the Chiefs.  Three gave Buffalo first downs following incompletions on third and long.  The fourth took a Chiefs TD away after a lineman blew up a DB.

Because the chiefs were mugging our receivers... That was their plan. They played tight coverage and touched up our guys to take flags instead of letting us get past them.

[ExiledInIllinois]

I am more concerned about the wicked hold the Chiefs put on Cam Lewis (I think it was #47, Cam Lewis) in order to break that ~40 yard run early in the game!  That was bruuuutal! That lead to their first TD I believe. 

[BobbyC81]

15 hours ago, nucci said:

whatever the rule , it's a dumb one...along with the illegal formation penalty where the end is uncovered....NFL needs to look at this along with D jumping over the line but getting back before the snap but OL points and it's a penalty....these bother me. Thanks for listening

Yeah, those pre-snap and formation penalties are bogus.  I don’t know why some even exist.  Why does the whole offense have to be motionless/set when the defense can move around at will ?    What advantage do they gain if someone moves if they’re not going over the line of scrimmage?   What’s the big deal about an offensive player flinching if that’s all he does?

 

Then the formation penalties.  What is the possible reason why the receivers have to be “covered up”?  How does that affect an advantage on a play?  I liked the Indoor League with the receivers running around before the snap and towards the LOS but I see where that would give an advantage to the receiver because he can be up to speed while the DB is starting from stop.

[Chandler#81]

I’ll bite. A streaker?😳

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

In this modern era of digital awareness, we could probably 'tag' the ineligibles electronically, so the booth could identify the play being rendered void due to the infraction.  Even better, rig the equipment to run 75 volts through them any time they wander too far downfield.  (Unless they're Patriots, then 10 'ineligible downfields' = 1 conditional draft pick. 😁)

Edited October 24, 2020 by Ridgewaycynic2013

[Doc]

13 hours ago, Billl said:

Lineman can be downfield as long as the were engaged with defenders when they went downfield.  In this play, they clearly were.  It’s perfectly legal.  The rule is intended to prevent linemen from mimicking eligible receivers.  The defenders disengaged to chase the QB.  
 

it’s hilarious that you think the Chiefs were lucky to win a game in which they outgained their opponent 466-206.  The Bills got their asses kicked, and it wasn’t because of linemen illegally downfield.

 

They clearly were.  LOL!