Billsfan1972 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 (edited) He was in the process of falling to the ground in the end zone. Yes his feet were in the field of play but to me that should have been called a safety as the play if completed would have been a sack in the endzone. Should thie rule be changed (yes probably a 1 in 100,000 occurance). Edited December 3, 2022 by Billsfan1972 1 12 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generic_Bills_Fan Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 He likely only did that because he knew it was going to avoid a safety so I’m not sure a rule change would’ve mattered there. if he took a sack in that same spot it would’ve been the same result but he would’ve taken an unnecessary hit 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanNH Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said: He was in the process of falling to the ground in the end zone. Yes his feet were in the field of play but to me that should have been called a safety as the play if completed would have been a sack in the endzone. Should thie rule be changed (yes probably a 1 in 100,000 occurance. I actually thought Jones was smart taking the intentional grounding there. It saved a safety possibly if the refs saw it wrong. (I do believe it is where the process of the tackle started as that’s his forward progress is the 1, so no safety.) He also probably did it so he didn’t get duplexes again by the Bills D. Lol (shocked that wasn’t flagged with how the refs been lately when you hit a QB. No I don’t say it should have been just saying how they been called lately that usually gets a flag.) Edited December 3, 2022 by PatsFanNH 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fergie's ire Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 And if he is falling backwards (as he was), forward progress would be outside the end zone and not a safety. 4 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7975 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 His feet were outside the endzone. Thats forward progress. No its not a safety 4 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsfan1972 Posted December 3, 2022 Author Share Posted December 3, 2022 5 minutes ago, Scott7975 said: His feet were outside the endzone. Thats forward progress. No its not a safety We all agree on that. I was making the point the he was in the process of falling down in the endzone which is where they should have marked the ball which is then a safety. Yes the call was right however to me it would've been a safety 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 36 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said: He was in the process of falling to the ground in the end zone. Yes his feet were in the field of play but to me that should have been called a safety as the play if completed would have been a sack in the endzone. Should thie rule be changed (yes probably a 1 in 100,000 occurance. Never going to get that call as a safety in that situation. The entire body and ball need to be inside the endzone and that wasn't close IMO. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7975 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 (edited) 39 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said: We all agree on that. I was making the point the he was in the process of falling down in the endzone which is where they should have marked the ball which is then a safety. Yes the call was right however to me it would've been a safety That wouldnt have mattered. Even if tackled with the ball its still not a safety. To be a safety he would have had to run into the endzone on his own accord then either got tackled or intentionally grounded the ball. Otherwise its forward progress. Think of it in the same situation as the open field. Lets say a reciever catches the ball right at the first down marker and the tackler hits him and he falls backwards a yard of the first down marker. He still gets the first down. Thats how forward progress works. Edited December 3, 2022 by Scott7975 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davefan66 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 Nope. Feet were in the field of play when he threw the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern_Bills Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 The way they generously give forward movement these days, don't be so sure the sack would have been counted a safety either. But at the end of the day, taking a penalty to avoid a worse outcome is not illegal. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 Heady play by mac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skibum Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 23 minutes ago, Scott7975 said: That wouldnt have mattered. Even if tackled with the ball its still not a safety. To be a safety he would have had to run into the endzone on his own accord then either got tackled or intentionally grounded the ball. Otherwise its forward progress. Not sure I agree with that - If that was the case, then wouldn't they place the ball at the line of scrimmage any time the QB gets sacked? Or does it become forward progress if he drops back, then moves forward? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codyny13 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 1 hour ago, Billsfan1972 said: We all agree on that. I was making the point the he was in the process of falling down in the endzone which is where they should have marked the ball which is then a safety. Yes the call was right however to me it would've been a safety Josh Allen was in the process of going out of bounds when he threw a td. Should that be just a dead play bc he’s on his way out? I’m not trying to be condescending but we can’t call plays bc what’s going to happen next. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsatlastin2018 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 Facts: 1) It was not a Safety. 2) L’il Mac is a very average QB, who will never amount to anything! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatdrinks Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 No. He’d have to be entirely in the end zone at the time and e clearly wasn’t. Easy call Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBear Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 Just rewatched the play and now I understand what the OP is saying. Mac Jones is actually falling back into the end zone on his own accord before any contact is made by a defender. He does release the ball outside of the end zone and before Groot gets to him, so obviously no safety, but if he holds onto it instead there appears to have been a decent chance he would have fallen flat on his azz in the end zone before being touched. So yes, the throwaway conceivably could have saved the two points there. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoPoy88 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 1 hour ago, Billsfan1972 said: Yes the call was right however to me it would've been a safety Uh huh. “To you.” So what? If you know the call was right what are you even proposing here then? The rule be changed? So you want to change the rule to add even more subjectivity to its enforcement. If you had your way, then the ref crews are now obligated to determine whether or not the guy would have fallen into the endzone, regardless of when and where he released the pass. think about that for a second. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7975 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 33 minutes ago, skibum said: Not sure I agree with that - If that was the case, then wouldn't they place the ball at the line of scrimmage any time the QB gets sacked? Or does it become forward progress if he drops back, then moves forward? Because the QB drops back. The ball is placed to where he drops back and gets sacked. When you are talking end zone it's where his feet are at. He didnt drop back into the endzone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPT Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 This was one of the few calls the refs got right in the game. His feet were in front of the goal line when he threw the ball so no safety. There's never any "if the play had continued..." speculation involved in sports because nobody can know what would have happened. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QLBillsFan Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 2 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said: He was in the process of falling to the ground in the end zone. Yes his feet were in the field of play but to me that should have been called a safety as the play if completed would have been a sack in the endzone. Should thie rule be changed (yes probably a 1 in 100,000 occurance. Not a safety. His feet were clearly outside the EZ. Ball in the EZ does not matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbs Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 1 hour ago, Big Turk said: Never going to get that call as a safety in that situation. The entire body and ball need to be inside the endzone and that wasn't close IMO. I don't know where they spot the ball in a grounding call but at that spot, the entire ball must be in the field of play or it is considered to be in the endzone and is a safety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo716 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 2 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said: We all agree on that. I was making the point the he was in the process of falling down in the endzone which is where they should have marked the ball which is then a safety. Yes the call was right however to me it would've been a safety It’s not a safety …the Tackle started in the field of play … and he got knocked into the endzone that’s completely different and never been a safety in football 1 hour ago, skibum said: Not sure I agree with that - If that was the case, then wouldn't they place the ball at the line of scrimmage any time the QB gets sacked? Or does it become forward progress if he drops back, then moves forward? Forward progress has been the same for sacking a quarterback for a long long long time Unless the quarterback is actively fighting off the sack attempt like Josh Allen… Like stiff arming and running backwards The ball gets marked where the sack started … Of course a 300 pound dude is going to knock a quarterback backwards a couple yards… but it’s marked where it starts unless he’s actively trying to break the tackle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbs Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 (edited) It wasn't a sack and it wasn't a tackle, it was intentional grounding. All I see on that page is: "if the passer is in his end zone when the ball is thrown, it is a safety." But I still don't know how they spot the ball in this case. Edited December 3, 2022 by mbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
co_springs_billsfan Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 1 hour ago, TheBrownBear said: Just rewatched the play and now I understand what the OP is saying. Mac Jones is actually falling back into the end zone on his own accord before any contact is made by a defender. He does release the ball outside of the end zone and before Groot gets to him, so obviously no safety, but if he holds onto it instead there appears to have been a decent chance he would have fallen flat on his azz in the end zone before being touched. So yes, the throwaway conceivably could have saved the two points there. Agreed. A few people have mentioned forward progress in their responses but if untouched and moving back on ones own there is no forward progress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJS Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 2 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said: We all agree on that. I was making the point the he was in the process of falling down in the endzone which is where they should have marked the ball which is then a safety. Yes the call was right however to me it would've been a safety Even if he fell down in the end zone, it would not have been a safety. His forward progress would have him down at the 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbs Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 I don't even know how to look up how to spot a ball in this situation. Is it where the ball is when he begins his throwing motion, where it left his hand, where his feet were, framework of the body? If he were contacted, wouldn't there be a sack credited? Either way, I don't think it matters. If a defender hits a qb and the qb falls backwards, the spot of the fumble (say it's 4th down) would not be the spot of the contact and I would assume intentional grounding would be the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skibum Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 This would make a great episode of 'YOU Make the Call'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ya Digg? Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 2 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said: We all agree on that. I was making the point the he was in the process of falling down in the endzone which is where they should have marked the ball which is then a safety. Yes the call was right however to me it would've been a safety Your whole logic doesn’t make sense. You admit he is outside of the endzone, you admit that the call was right, but you still think it should have been a safety? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyal2dagame Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 3 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said: He was in the process of falling to the ground in the end zone. Yes his feet were in the field of play but to me that should have been called a safety as the play if completed would have been a sack in the endzone. Should thie rule be changed (yes probably a 1 in 100,000 occurance. All this lets change the rules crap needs to stop. Play within the rules on the books and if you lose, or a rule causes some negative result, take it like a man. Be a good loser and a better winner. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Otreply Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 3 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said: He was in the process of falling to the ground in the end zone. Yes his feet were in the field of play but to me that should have been called a safety as the play if completed would have been a sack in the endzone. Should thie rule be changed (yes probably a 1 in 100,000 occurance. As much as I wanted a safety, ( and I wanted it a lot) it wasn’t a safety, the little pip squeak did the right thing at that moment, damn him! Go Bills!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 Once the season is over I think all Bills fans need to get their eyes checked. It just amazes me how seem to see every call some how is wrong (even up for discussion) and is questioned. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stank_Nasty Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 It 100% shouldn’t have been a safety. Never once did I think it should have been. Why was a thread started on this when it’s obvious as hell… *checks Name of OP*… Ohhhh. That explains it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billzgobowlin Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 4 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said: He was in the process of falling to the ground in the end zone. Yes his feet were in the field of play but to me that should have been called a safety as the play if completed would have been a sack in the endzone. Should thie rule be changed (yes probably a 1 in 100,000 occurance. Seems like we have been getting a lot of this the past year... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_In_NH Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 I thought it was the correct call. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ControllerOfPlanetX Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 It was probably his best pass of the night. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan_34 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 4 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said: He was in the process of falling to the ground in the end zone. Yes his feet were in the field of play but to me that should have been called a safety as the play if completed would have been a sack in the endzone. Should thie rule be changed (yes probably a 1 in 100,000 occurance. No- he was in the field of play (not endzone) when the foul occurred. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djp14150 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 5 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said: He was in the process of falling to the ground in the end zone. Yes his feet were in the field of play but to me that should have been called a safety as the play if completed would have been a sack in the endzone. Should thie rule be changed (yes probably a 1 in 100,000 occurance. no its market where he did it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrimeTime101 Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 no. moving on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 Let's ask Mcorkle what he thinks: Mcorkle: "OH MY GOD GET HIM AWAY FROM ME!"" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Success Posted December 3, 2022 Share Posted December 3, 2022 Mac Jones is a bust. Pats fans were going bananas about that guy all offseason - "best QB of that class! First to practice, last to leave!" He's fine when opposing defenses get zero pressure on him (i.e. Vikes game). He can pass well in an immaculate pocket. As to the OP - it was the right call. Safeties are kind of hard to get - I've seen so many borderline like that & it always goes as a non-safety. You have to get a guy IN the EZ, with his feet and the ball clearly behind the plane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.