They were talking about this on Boomer and Asswipe this morning. And apparently there's a rule in place for multiple violations if the refs believe it's being done intentionally. I didn't catch the whole conversation but they said the penalty is to award a touchdown.
what kind of nonsensical argument is this? false starts are already dead ball calls, and I am not advocating that the league change that. how does anything I have written have anything to do with what you just typed? you're the one advocating for the league to change the rules in regards to all penalties, not me. how could you reasonable have attempted to apply your own argument to me and then argue with me as if I actually said it?
The refs can award a team a touchdown if they think the other team is flagrantly abusing the rules. It's in the rule book.
if the Giants get a big sack on an INT it's negated. Not very smart. Also, you could see the mis-communication and the extra man trying to get off of the field. All of these excuses as to why the Giants shouldn't have won or underhanded play. Please.
Wow. If only you were as correct as you are sure... From the NFL Rulebook, page 87: PALPABLY UNFAIR ACT (PLAYER) Article 3 A player or substitute shall not interfere with play by any act which is palpably unfair. Penalty: For a palpably unfair act: Offender may be disqualified. The Referee, after consulting his crew, enforces any such distance penalty as they consider equitable and irrespective of any other specified code penalty. The Referee could award a score. See 15-1-6. From the NFL Rulebook, page 113: Score Awarded Repeated fouling by defense to prevent score…............. 12-3-2 Touchdown Awarded Committing palpably unfair act which deprives opponent of a touchdown…………..................................12-3-3 and 13-1-7 http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/2011_Rule_Book.pdf
You just missed my point. Other than offense or defense committing it, what is the difference between a false start and an offsides? What is the difference between 12 men in the huddle and 12 men on the field? All 4 of those penalties could seriously put the QB at risk, yet only 2 are dead ball fouls. It's hypocrisy in the rules and it should be fixed. I honestly don't care which way but would lean towards them all being dead balls.
I've advocated putting 13-15 men on the field in that situation. I remember a team did it with 14 in 1977 or 1978 with like 25 seconds left and the other team at their own 20 or so.
I see how the rule reads, but its not intended to award a score as a punishment for any bad acts on the field Its more along the lines of a penalty shot in hockey I think the NCAA version of the rule was called in the Cotton Bowl in the 50s, when a player came off the bench and tackled another player who was in the clear and running back a Kick off for a touch down
The Patriots too many men penalty was the one that really cracked me up. 12 men on the field and they still couldn't cover Cruz on a 3rd and short.
The 12 men on the field did nothing to help the Giants coverage wise, Brady snapped the ball as the 12th man was running off the field.
i thought about that play in the back of my head as the game was going on and thought it was a smart move.
Yes but it wasn't flagrant as you argue to help them in coverage. See my above post. If Brady waits 1 extra sec to snap the ball there there's no penalty. Looked like it was canty rushing off the field
I never said it was flagrant. As a matter of fact, I said that we don't know if it was done on purpose or not. I'm simply pointing out that in the event that teams abuse the exploit, the refs have the option to award a touchdown.
I believe a score would be awarded only in the event of a palpably unfair act. If a team put 20 players on the field, if a player came off the bench to make a TD-saving tackle or if a player picked up a sideline marker or end zone pylon and used the object in some way against an opponent are three types of actions that would be deemed palpably unfair. It has to be something really off-the-wall for a score to be awarded. I believe the referee in the 1982 Dolphins-Patriots game could have disallowed the John Smith field goal because the Patriots use of a snowplow to clear a spot for the placeholder and kicker could have been deemed a palpably unfair act.
Agreed. And I don't think anyone here was advocating the refs awarding a TD for the Giants having 12 men on the field. I think the discussion is more about what would happen if a coach, realizing that if he puts 12-14 on the field a couple of times in a row with the goal being to eat clock while at the same time minimizing the chance that the D will complete a big pass, tries to take advantage of the fact that there is no specific rule that seems to deal with that situation. The play didn't deprive the Fins of a TD, so I don't think the refs could award one. More fitting would have been to either move them back or to the side so they'd have to kick in the snow.
Is that actually in the rule book ???? No, that's akin to a crowd making noise. Advantage home team for sure, but not against the rules.
