Public Service Announcement: Intentional Grounding

[MHSL82]

I have heard so many people getting this rule wrong. I'll give you an example to illustrate: on holding, you redo the down and you lose 10 yards. For intentional grounding, you lose 10 yards and do not redo the down. So if Alex had taken a sack, that down would be lost anyway. And that sack would've been 8 yards instead of the 10 yards. So that play cost us 2 yards. It was 2nd and 7 then if he took the sack, it would've been 3rd and 15; instead, it was 3rd and 17. If the refs miss that call, it would've been 3rd and 7, better than 3rd and 15. So at that point Alex had to throw the ball.

If he had gotten out of the pocket and threw the ball away we would still lose that down. So I guess you could say we lost 10 yards. I don't think he had any time to get out of the pocket. But people keep saying that we lost a down and 10 yards. Learn the rules people.

 

[Fountain City Blues]

I have heard so many people getting this rule wrong. I'll give you an example to illustrate: on holding, you redo the down and you lose 10 yards. For intentional grounding, you lose 10 yards and do not redo the down. So if Alex had taken a sack, that down would be lost anyway. And that sack would've been 8 yards instead of the 10 yards. So that play cost us 2 yards. It was 2nd and 7 then if he took the sack, it would've been 3rd and 15; instead, it was 3rd and 17. If the refs miss that call, it would've been 3rd and 7, better than 3rd and 15. So at that point Alex had to throw the ball.

If he had gotten out of the pocket and threw the ball away we would still lose that down. So I guess you could say we lost 10 yards. I don't think he had any time to get out of the pocket. But people keep saying that we lost a down and 10 yards. Learn the rules people.

Intentional Grounding lacks quite a bit of common sense in my opinion as constructed. But, on to Smith, um, he didn't really have time to respond, it was either chuck it out of bounds or take a huge hit and risk injury (Chase Daniel is not taking this team to the promised land) which would be catastrophic. I floors me how badly the casual fan gets this wrong.

 

[MHSL82]

Intentional Grounding lacks quite a bit of common sense in my opinion as constructed. But, on to Smith, um, he didn't really have time to respond, it was either chuck it out of bounds or take a huge hit and risk injury (Chase Daniel is not taking this team to the promised land) which would be catastrophic. I floors me how badly the casual fan gets this wrong.

Yeah, but I don't know why the announcers worded it that way. They say "and loss of down." I realize that is because most penalties are added onto the play and a repeat the down. But people act like it went from 2nd and 7 to 4th and 17. That's not what happened. I would prefer the refs or announcers to say that the play counted. Then, would people be acting like it was any different than a sack? And you can criticize a quarterback for taking a sack when they need a field goal, but the criticism would then also go on the offensive line, unless the quarterback held on the ball too long. Intentional grounding sounds like it's just the quarterback fault, as if the quarterback without pressure from a leaky offensive line would ever just throw a ball to no one.

 

[flaraider]

Intentional Grounding lacks quite a bit of common sense in my opinion as constructed. But, on to Smith, um, he didn't really have time to respond, it was either chuck it out of bounds or take a huge hit and risk injury (Chase Daniel is not taking this team to the promised land) which would be catastrophic. I floors me how badly the casual fan gets this wrong.

I thought he should have stayed left, thrown the ball out over his players on that side of the field.

 

[NJBuckO's]

They shouldve had better protection in that situation, they didnt need to send everyone out they were gradually moving and chewing clock at the same time. A sack or grounding is a killer there.

 

[Fountain City Blues]

Could be wrong and I would have to look at the play again to confirm my suspicion, but that was a botched screen play and Alex after seeing the play looked left to complete (he could not, the play was busted on a good defensive play by the Colts) but looked right to run as he had some success running the ball on numerous occasions. Unfortunately, there was a passrusher in Smith's face, so Smith threw it anyway probably knowing it was intentional grounding in the hopes he avoids a big hit and possibly an injury or turnover. (would have been sacked anyhow had he kept the ball)

 

[Black Adam]

They shouldve had better protection in that situation, they didnt need to send everyone out they were gradually moving and chewing clock at the same time. A sack or grounding is a killer there.

Considering the play was supposed to be a bubble screen (i think) i totally agree with your thinking on this...