Pats getting spanked!

[SteelerFanInStl]

If you know it's against the rules and what you're doing may look like an illegal hit, don't even do it. It's just a selfish play.

You just don't get it. What the defensive player did was 100% LEGAL!!!!! It was a bullshit penalty. There was nothing even close to illegal about it.

[X-Terminator]

You can touch the quarterback.

Every defensive player can do that to a runner, too.

He's saying that you can't touch the QB during an INT/fumble return, but the QB is allowed to make a tackle. How the hell is that remotely fair? If a defender can't touch the QB in that situation, then the QB shouldn't be allowed to make a play.

[Nadroj 20]

I'm going to have to wait to see the play for my opinion, but it does sound questionable at the very least.

[Chidi29]

You just don't get it. What the defensive player did was 100% LEGAL!!!!! It was a bullshit penalty. There was nothing even close to illegal about it.

For a guy who didn't even know the rule existed twenty minutes ago, you sure have claimed to become a sudden expert.

[Chidi29]

He's saying that you can't touch the QB during an INT/fumble return, but the QB is allowed to make a tackle. How the hell is that remotely fair? If a defender can't touch the QB in that situation, then the QB shouldn't be allowed to make a play.

No, you can you touch the QB on those plays. It just can't be a hit to the shoulders or above.

I'm not positive exactly where the Bills' defender hit him, but it was high enough to make it look bad. My point is that there's no reason to even hit Brady there because no good will come from it.

[SteelerFanInStl]

He's saying that you can't touch the QB during an INT/fumble return, but the QB is allowed to make a tackle. How the hell is that remotely fair? If a defender can't touch the QB in that situation, then the QB shouldn't be allowed to make a play.

Exactly. If you don't want your precious QBs to get touched, then they shouldn't be allowed to make a tackle after the turnover.

[XxKnightxX]

Exactly. If you don't want your precious QBs to get touched, then they shouldn't be allowed to make a tackle after the turnover.

There you go, thats how you settle that situation. There is no argument whatsoever that this rule is completely one sided. If a QB is gonna throw a pic, be ready to suffer the consequences of having a wall of hungry savages coming to get you. Just lie down on the ground the minute you throw it.

[Chidi29]

You guys aren't understanding the rule. You're allowed to block/touch the QB!

[SteelerFanInStl]

For a guy who didn't even know the rule existed twenty minutes ago, you sure have claimed to become a sudden expert.

Didn't know the rule existed? WTF are you talking about? Brady was NOT a defenseless player like you said. He was following the ball, which means that he was involved. If he doesn't want to get hit, then he should just run off the field.

[Chidi29]

Didn't know the rule existed? WTF are you talking about? Brady was NOT a defenseless player like you said. He was following the ball, which means that he was involved. If he doesn't want to get hit, then he should just run off the field.

You said it yourself.

Bullshit. There's no such rule. A QB is the same as any other player after he throws an interception. The officials just proved that they're protecting Brady.

[X-Terminator]

No, you can you touch the QB on those plays. It just can't be a hit to the shoulders or above.

I'm not positive exactly where the Bills' defender hit him, but it was high enough to make it look bad. My point is that there's no reason to even hit Brady there because no good will come from it.

OK, I see. You can block him, but you can't hit him high. Got it now.

[The Patriot]

Ha! I was at this game. Buffalo just quit.

[vader29]

[st33lersguy]

No way in hell that is called if the QB was wearing a black and gold uniform and the #7 on his chest

[LLT]

If you know it's against the rules and what you're doing may look like an illegal hit, don't even do it. It's just a selfish play.

Only one thing wrong with this statement....When blocking a player, you dont take time to look at their number or the name on their back!!!!....you are looking to block any player in an opposing uniform who is in pursuit of your teammate with the ball.

You want to get someone hurt? Keep making idiotic rules like this that will make players hesitate on the field.

Just another stupid rule from that loses EVERYTHING in actual application because those who made it have never played the game at a REAL level.

[tube517]

The QB becomes a "defenseless player" on an INT/fumble. So, if they didn't hit Marsha in the head or neck, no penalty should've been called. I didn't see the play but if he just shoved Brady and got a penalty, that's BS.

[LLT]

It was at the near the end of the play, Brady was a good five to seven yards away and was in a half-jog. Clearly it wasn't a defender trying to make a good block on a player, it was looking for a shot at the QB.

Sorry Chidi...your wrong on this one on two counts. Take a look at the replay....the block was legal and there is NO WAY that he was 5-7 yards from the runner. He was about 6 ft from the man with the ball when he is blocked....NOT 21 feet!!!!!

The blocker had every right to initiate contact...he did it legally and he did it close to the action.

[The Patriot]

Wow, that call was a total joke. But it's a league-wide problem. Of course nobody posts the video of the Pats being flagged 15 yards for hitting a "defenseless" Bills receiver.

[LLT]

Wow, that call was a total joke. But it's a league-wide problem. Of course nobody posts the video of the Pats being flagged 15 yards for hitting a "defenseless" Bills receiver.

You are exactly correct. I wrote an editorial before this season started in which I predicted that the new rules...which demand officials make "determinations" on instantaneous bang bang plays...would lead to arbitrary rulings and penalties. The ineptness of our commisioner and his lack of football intellect, would fall on the shoulders of the officials who are being put into a no-win situation.

In short....they are stuck between the wrath of the fans and the total cluelessness of our commisioner.

[43Hitman]

You are exactly correct. I wrote an editorial before this season started in which I predicted that the new rules...which demand officials make "determinations" on instantaneous bang bang plays...would lead to arbitrary rulings and penalties. The ineptness of our commisioner and his lack of football intellect, would fall on the shoulders of the officials who are being put into a no-win situation.

In short....they are stuck between the wrath of the fans and the total cluelessness of our commisioner.

I saw something yesterday with Bill Parcells where he found that one particular officiating crew had 800 yards more in personal foul penalties than the next closest crew. If that doesn't show the inconsistencies that arise when officials have to make judgment calls I don't know what will.

[tube517]

Wow, that call was a total joke. But it's a league-wide problem. Of course nobody posts the video of the Pats being flagged 15 yards for hitting a "defenseless" Bills receiver.

Even worse, he will get fined because Marsha was technically "defenseless". Such a joke.

[GBMelBlount]

If it wasn't for those damn 49 unanswered points...

[fansince'76]

Wow, that call was a total joke. But it's a league-wide problem. Of course nobody posts the video of the Pats being flagged 15 yards for hitting a "defenseless" Bills receiver.

Yes, absolutely it's a league-wide problem.

[X-Terminator]

Having seen the replay, I can't see how that was called a penalty, even taking the rule into account. There was no hit to the head or neck, it was to the shoulder and wasn't really all that hard a shot. If you can't do that to the QB when he is relatively close to the returner, then he should just run off the field and definitely should not be allowed to get in on the tackle.

[43Hitman]

Having seen the replay, I can't see how that was called a penalty, even taking the rule into account. There was no hit to the head or neck, it was to the shoulder and wasn't really all that hard a shot. If you can't do that to the QB when he is relatively close to the returner, then he should just run off the field and definitely should not be allowed to get in on the tackle.

Exactly. I remember us having this exact same discussion when we played Philly in preseason game #3. After a Vick interception where Harrison pulled up on Vick, didn't hit him, and Vick preceded to take out the ball carrier at his knees.

[Chidi29]

Sorry Chidi...your wrong on this one on two counts. Take a look at the replay....the block was legal and there is NO WAY that he was 5-7 yards from the runner. He was about 6 ft from the man with the ball when he is blocked....NOT 21 feet!!!!!

The blocker had every right to initiate contact...he did it legally and he did it close to the action.

You're right that it was closer than what I originally thought, but it is still a good three yards away (Barnett at the 39, Brady hit at the 42). Brady was slowing up on the play and was not going to even try and tackle Barnett.

I never said I was certain the hit was illegal. I said there was no reason to even tempt it by hitting Brady when he wasn't involved on the play. Quarterbacks are under a watchful eye with the rule change and no good is going to come from getting to hit Brady.

[LLT]

You're right that it was closer than what I originally thought, but it is still a good three yards away (Barnett at the 39, Brady hit at the 42). Brady was slowing up on the play and was not going to even try and tackle Barnett.

I never said I was certain the hit was illegal. I said there was no reason to even tempt it by hitting Brady when he wasn't involved on the play. Quarterbacks are under a watchful eye with the rule change and no good is going to come from getting to hit Brady.

3 yards is a diving tackle. Even at the high school level I would demand that my players block anyone within 5-10 yards of the ballcarrier...regardless of wether they were jogging or running at full steam.

Back to my original point that the players are not on the field reading numbers or seeing if it says "Brady" on the back of the jersey. The player blocked an opponant within the area of play.

[Dino 6 Rings]

Brady took a huge Dive on that play! HA! That's classic!

That was a bad call on the Penalty. Pretty funny.

[Chidi29]

3 yards is a diving tackle. Even at the high school level I would demand that my players block anyone within 5-10 yards of the ballcarrier...regardless of wether they were jogging or running at full steam.

Back to my original point that the players are not on the field reading numbers or seeing if it says "Brady" on the back of the jersey. The player blocked an opponant within the area of play.

The day Brady makes a three yard diving tackle from that angle is the day I pick a fight with James Harrison.

Florence saw it was Brady the whole time. He stopped turned, saw other players like Welker in pursuit but chose to hone in on Brady.

Jarius Byrd was smart enough on the play to start to block Brady right between the numbers and then pulled up and looked for someone else.

[Dino 6 Rings]

I think the rule about hitting the QB after an interception was put in place after guys on Defense started using the int as an opportunity to take a free hit on the QB because they were "blocking" him. There were some pretty brutal hits put on QBs with Crack Black Blind Side "Blocks" when the QB was in "pursuit" of the guy who made the INT.

You pretty much just need to get in the QB's way these days and not really block him. A guy like Ben, or I'd say even Cam Newton or Josh Freeman or some of your Bigger QBs will not get the "call" for being Blocked Too Hard the way some smaller more fragile guys like Brady or Breese or Manning (Payton not Eli) will get the call.