PDA

View Full Version : QB's Knees and Penalties (What about that penalty?)



Craic
09-18-2011, 07:43 PM
Okay, you all know which one I am talking about. Steelers are driving, it's 2nd and 8 at Seattle's 20. Brock comes through and hits Ben in the knees and it's a roughing the passer penalty.

Personally, I think it was a good call--but a very poor rule. I think it is wrong to penalize a player that has been tripped for falling into a QB's knees (unless a ref see intent to aim for them). I understand the reason for the rule. Matter of fact, I think the tackle around Ben's ankles SHOULD HAVE been called. But Brock's tackle was a good, clean play from a guy working hard to get to the ball. The only dirty on that play was Gilbert's leg whip.

Dino 6 Rings
09-18-2011, 09:04 PM
Saw a non-call low hit in the NE vs SD game, some dude hit Brady really low on the leg and it looked as bad if not worse than the hit on Ben, yet, no flag. And this was a hit on the guy they made the freakin rule for, yet, no flag. Now I have no idea what the heck is a penalty anymore.

siss
09-18-2011, 09:31 PM
Saw a non-call low hit in the NE vs SD game, some dude hit Brady really low on the leg and it looked as bad if not worse than the hit on Ben, yet, no flag. And this was a hit on the guy they made the freakin rule for, yet, no flag. Now I have no idea what the heck is a penalty anymore.
Im shocked there was a non call against Brady :jawdrop2:. Someone will be fined and fired for such an egregious act :banned:. The lows hits on Ben...nothing...its Ben. The NFL figures Ben can stand the pain!:frusty:

SteelerFanInStl
09-18-2011, 09:36 PM
Saw a non-call low hit in the NE vs SD game, some dude hit Brady really low on the leg and it looked as bad if not worse than the hit on Ben, yet, no flag. And this was a hit on the guy they made the freakin rule for, yet, no flag. Now I have no idea what the heck is a penalty anymore.

I was surprised that there wasn't a flag on that play but I don't agree that it was as bad, and certainly not worse, than the hit on Ben. The hit to Ben was harder and a more direct shot to the knee.

BigNastyDefense
09-18-2011, 09:39 PM
Saw a non-call low hit in the NE vs SD game, some dude hit Brady really low on the leg and it looked as bad if not worse than the hit on Ben, yet, no flag. And this was a hit on the guy they made the freakin rule for, yet, no flag. Now I have no idea what the heck is a penalty anymore.

Hell Dino. The NFL has made the rules so damn complicated, I wouldn't be surprised to one day hear a referee say after retiring that he didn't know or understand over half of the rules.

Example:

Catching the football used to be as simple as you catch it, you control it, you hit the ground, you're down and it's a catch. Two feet in bounds if it's a boundary catch.

Now you have to "control the ball throughout the catch," so once you hit the ground or go out of bounds and should be considered "down," you can't lose control of the ball whatsoever.

I don't understand how the ground cannot cause a fumble, but it can cause an incomplete pass. Makes no fucking sense whatsoever.

O'Malley
09-18-2011, 11:45 PM
Hell Dino. The NFL has made the rules so damn complicated, I wouldn't be surprised to one day hear a referee say after retiring that he didn't know or understand over half of the rules.

Example:

Catching the football used to be as simple as you catch it, you control it, you hit the ground, you're down and it's a catch. Two feet in bounds if it's a boundary catch.

Now you have to "control the ball throughout the catch," so once you hit the ground or go out of bounds and should be considered "down," you can't lose control of the ball whatsoever.

I don't understand how the ground cannot cause a fumble, but it can cause an incomplete pass. Makes no fucking sense whatsoever.

Also the ball can hit the ground as long as it doesn't move... If control the ball it's a catch... What the hell is that all about? There was also a helmet to helmet hit to Matt Ryan's head, no call... It's so confusing now I have a hard time understanding half the rules... Especially when they're called different every time.

Craic
09-19-2011, 12:52 AM
The one where Mike Piera (however you spell his name) explained that a chop block IS LEGAL if It is done by, let's say, a center and a guard, but illegal if it is done by the center and tackle gets me.

In that pile of bodies, how the heck are you going to see that?

NCSteeler
09-19-2011, 01:51 AM
The one where Mike Piera (however you spell his name) explained that a chop block IS LEGAL if It is done by, let's say, a center and a guard, but illegal if it is done by the center and tackle gets me.

In that pile of bodies, how the heck are you going to see that?

but did you hear the reasoning? Because a player can see it coming from the guard and not from a tackle. WTH

GodfatherofSoul
09-19-2011, 02:05 AM
Pierera or whatever his name is is nothing but a hack PR man for the league. I loved it when Siragusa was trying to explain the difference between bad play etiquette (thank God he showed the footage of a hit on Hampton) and what's prohibited by rule. Pierera just went into a excuse making rant about why the "competition committee" didn't think it was important.

X-Terminator
09-19-2011, 02:09 AM
Pereira is also the head of officials for the Pac-12 conference. I'd love to hear his explanation to one of the schools if one of their DL gets his knee blown out by a chop block. Good for Goose to take him to task on it, and he's right - ALL chop blocks should be illegal.

BlacknGoldBabe
09-19-2011, 04:09 AM
Hell Dino. The NFL has made the rules so damn complicated, I wouldn't be surprised to one day hear a referee say after retiring that he didn't know or understand over half of the rules.

Example:

Catching the football used to be as simple as you catch it, you control it, you hit the ground, you're down and it's a catch. Two feet in bounds if it's a boundary catch.

Now you have to "control the ball throughout the catch," so once you hit the ground or go out of bounds and should be considered "down," you can't lose control of the ball whatsoever.

I don't understand how the ground cannot cause a fumble, but it can cause an incomplete pass. Makes no fucking sense whatsoever.

I'd be putting up the head banger smilie if they were working right now.

I agree with you Nasty.....seems like the rule makers are trying to deliberately complicate the game.

suitanim
09-19-2011, 05:38 AM
The rule about the QB knees needs abolished. I understand why they implemented it (although I don't agree), but if they aren't going to apply it, or apply it with any consistency, what was the point in the first place?

86WARD
09-19-2011, 06:59 AM
You could say that about a lot of the rules...lol.

Vis
09-19-2011, 07:37 AM
The rule about the QB knees needs abolished. I understand why they implemented it (although I don't agree), but if they aren't going to apply it, or apply it with any consistency, what was the point in the first place?

You have to look to see if the ref was looking. "Non-calls" are different than "didn't see its"

tube517
09-19-2011, 07:54 AM
Hell Dino. The NFL has made the rules so damn complicated, I wouldn't be surprised to one day hear a referee say after retiring that he didn't know or understand over half of the rules.

Example:

Catching the football used to be as simple as you catch it, you control it, you hit the ground, you're down and it's a catch. Two feet in bounds if it's a boundary catch.

Now you have to "control the ball throughout the catch," so once you hit the ground or go out of bounds and should be considered "down," you can't lose control of the ball whatsoever.

I don't understand how the ground cannot cause a fumble, but it can cause an incomplete pass. Makes no fucking sense whatsoever.

That "football move" nonsense makes many receiving calls even more "grey".

HollywoodSteel
09-19-2011, 08:36 AM
Pereira is also the head of officials for the Pac-12 conference. I'd love to hear his explanation to one of the schools if one of their DL gets his knee blown out by a chop block. Good for Goose to take him to task on it, and he's right - ALL chop blocks should be illegal.

I get everyone's frustration here, but I wouldn't say Goose to Pereria to task. He doesn't make the rules he just explains them, and I've always thought he's done a much better job at explaining them than anyone else. Most talking heads think they know the rules, but they often have it wrong or don't know how to explain it.

El-Gonzo Jackson
09-19-2011, 09:28 AM
but did you hear the reasoning? Because a player can see it coming from the guard and not from a tackle. WTH

I can see how if a DT is lined up in the gap and one player on either side goes high-low on him that its somewhat acceptable and that is why the rule is what it is. The advent of Zone blocking schemes where one guy is engaged with the DT and the backside guy cuts him makes it dangerous and cowardly. I think they will look at it in the offseason.

Pereria is a very bright man that knows the rules in and out. I think he did an excellent job of explaining the rule. He knows more about close line play than 100% of the people on this board.

El-Gonzo Jackson
09-19-2011, 09:32 AM
The only dirty on that play was Gilbert's leg whip.

Very true....so similar to the play by Kemo Von Olhoffen on Carson Palmer in 2005.

Not so much dirty by Gilbert, but instinctive of a guy that just got beaten like a rented mule on an inside spin move.

Craic
09-19-2011, 03:21 PM
Very true....so similar to the play by Kemo Von Olhoffen on Carson Palmer in 2005.

Not so much dirty by Gilbert, but instinctive of a guy that just got beaten like a rented mule on an inside spin move.

I stand corrected. You're right, I don't think you can call reactions "dirty". IF it becomes a habit, that's different. Of course, he can always be credited for not giving up :chuckle:

Craic
09-19-2011, 03:24 PM
I can see how if a DT is lined up in the gap and one player on either side goes high-low on him that its somewhat acceptable and that is why the rule is what it is. The advent of Zone blocking schemes where one guy is engaged with the DT and the backside guy cuts him makes it dangerous and cowardly. I think they will look at it in the offseason.

Pereria is a very bright man that knows the rules in and out. I think he did an excellent job of explaining the rule. He knows more about close line play than 100% of the people on this board.

Oh come one. 99.9% (I can't have you and I agreeing completely in a thread. The world might cave in).

El-Gonzo Jackson
09-19-2011, 03:39 PM
Oh come one. 99.9% (I can't have you and I agreeing completely in a thread. The world might cave in).

The world won't cave in. You may have to goto the penalty box for 2 minutes and feel shame. Then you go free.

Count Steeler
09-19-2011, 03:59 PM
The rules are the rules. Unfortunately, the human factor of the officials is making these rule changes harder and harder to swallow. The non calls on Ben are just taken for granted now. But I could not believe the non call on Brady.

I wonder if there will be any fines handed out for these plays.

O'Malley
09-19-2011, 04:21 PM
Bigger no call on Matt Ryan.. He got creamed with a helmet to helmet no call Sunday night.

Count Steeler
09-19-2011, 04:22 PM
Bigger no call on Matt Ryan.. He got creamed with a helmet to helmet no call Sunday night.

Did not see that play yet. Maybe officials should be fined for blown calls?

masonsdad79
09-19-2011, 06:06 PM
Saw a non-call low hit in the NE vs SD game, some dude hit Brady really low on the leg and it looked as bad if not worse than the hit on Ben, yet, no flag. And this was a hit on the guy they made the freakin rule for, yet, no flag. Now I have no idea what the heck is a penalty anymore.

thank you i think these new rules and calls are so bias and bullshit if you ask me.