Bruce Arians is a whiny bitch

[jarntt]

Palmer was calling the cadence from the sideline for the FG?!?

That's what made it so easy to hear

 

[shopson67]

That's because they aren't blatant about it. A grab here, a tug of the jersey there, where the officials can't see it. That's how corners play defense. If you disallow any touching of the receivers you've just turned the NFL into the arena league where teams pretty much score every time they have the ball.

The best corners in the league have long used their hands and position to disrupt routes and timing.

Except for Norman, who does it obviously and doesn't understand why he's getting flagged.

 

[shopson67]

That leaping FG block was pretty much the only exciting play that happened the entire night. How is it bad for football Bruce?

Like Sherman said, there is no reason to change the rule since all Palmer had to do was make his cadence less predictable and Wagner wouldn't have been able to time his jump so perfectly.

How is it bad for football? It's exploiting a loophole designed to protect the long-snapper. Now he has to worry about standing up into an airborne defender? It should be illegal for the same reason launching is illegal; it's not within the intent of the rules of the game.

 

[shopson67]

C'mon now. How is that remotely logical? Whether you're standing on the ground or are 5 ft above it, you're either within a yard of the line of scrimmage at the snap, or you're not.

If he times his jump to start his jump at the snap, then no, he's NOT at the LOS. Same as if he's timing a blitz, either you time it right or you don't.

If the center pauses the hike a quarter second, then yep, he's off-sides.

The line judge looks DOWN THE LINE.

Wagner, on the ground or airborne, is either over the LOS or he's not. He's either offsides or he's not.

It's not about being offsides. You aren't even allowed to stand over the long-snapper - you can't be within 1 yard of the line of scrimmage, you literally have to be standing behind the other defensive linemen. If you can show where he jumped from behind the defensive linemen (or was 1 yard behind them at the snap before he started his approach and jump) and still cleared the long-snapper, then it's legal.

 

[chf]

It's not about being offsides. You aren't even allowed to stand over the long-snapper - you can't be within 1 yard of the line of scrimmage, you literally have to be standing behind the other defensive linemen. If you can show where he jumped from behind the defensive linemen (or was 1 yard behind them at the snap before he started his approach and jump) and still cleared the long-snapper, then it's legal.

I still don't understand what logic you can possibly be using. In order to jump, he has to be able to push off from the ground. So he's either offsides or he's not. He either times the jump so that he takes off from onsides at the snap of the ball, or he mistimes it and is offside.

After review, Wagner was determined to be legally far enough away from the snapper before the play began.

The Seahawks weren’t called for leaping after blocking a field goal. This is why

 

[shopson67]

I still don't understand what logic you can possibly be using. In order to jump, he has to be able to push off from the ground. So he's either offsides or he's not. He either times the jump so that he takes off from onsides at the snap of the ball, or he mistimes it and is offside.

The rule quoted there completely ignores the protections in place for the long-snapper. No player can be lined up over the long-snapper within one yard of the line of scrimmage and cannot contact him until 1 second after the snap. The contact part was addressed above, but not the part about lining up across from the snapper.

 

[chf]

The rule quoted there completely ignores the protections in place for the long-snapper. No player can be lined up over the long-snapper within one yard of the line of scrimmage and cannot contact him until 1 second after the snap. The contact part was addressed above, but not the part about lining up across from the snapper.

Can't land on him, not 'contact' him. Please feel free to link me up to something that says otherwise. I haven't seen anything on the time frame either. Link that too.

The rule was instituted to prevent teams from purposefully obliterating the LS, there's no harm to the LS from what Wagner did.

At any rate, the article I linked suggested, despite the early misinformation by Collinsworth, that the play was called correctly. Mind you I haven't DL'ed the PDF of the rulebook or anything, so if you've got specifics, I'll eat crow.

 

[shopson67]

Can't land on him, not 'contact' him. Please feel free to link me up to something that says otherwise. I haven't seen anything on the time frame either. Link that too.

The rule was instituted to prevent teams from purposefully obliterating the LS, there's no harm to the LS from what Wagner did.

At any rate, the article I linked suggested, despite the early misinformation by Collinsworth, that the play was called correctly. Mind you I haven't DL'ed the PDF of the rulebook or anything, so if you've got specifics, I'll eat crow.

Again, I'm not referring to the incidental contact. Any defender opposite the long-snapper cannot be within 1 yard of the LOS at the snap.

 

[chf]

Again, I'm not referring to the incidental contact. Any defender opposite the long-snapper cannot be within 1 yard of the LOS at the snap.

Can't be or can't be lined up?

 

[shopson67]

Can't be or can't be lined up?

Are you implying airborne doesn't count?

 

[packerzrule]

apparently, so is Pete Carroll

 

[jarntt]

How is it bad for football? It's exploiting a loophole designed to protect the long-snapper. Now he has to worry about standing up into an airborne defender? It should be illegal for the same reason launching is illegal; it's not within the intent of the rules of the game.

You misunderstand. Good for Seattle = Good for Football

 

[chf]

Are you implying airborne doesn't count?

We've covered this already, if he's airborne, and past the line, then he's offsides.

 

[chf]

You misunderstand. Good for Seattle = Good for Football

Conversely on SportsHoopla, bad for Seattle, NE, good for football.

So it goes.

 

[shopson67]

We've covered this already, if he's airborne, and past the line, then he's offsides.

At the snap, he can be airborne as long as he's 1 yard behind the LOS. Otherwise, penalty.

 

[chf]

At the snap, he can be airborne as long as he's 1 yard behind the LOS. Otherwise, penalty.

Heh. That's your interpretation of how the rule is written. The NFL apparently disagrees. AGAIN, the rule was designed to prevent guys from lining up ON the LS, and smashing him as he snaps the ball.

You find me the distinction in the rules were it sets out an airborne player having to be 1 yd behind the LOS. You won't find it.

 

[shopson67]

Heh. That's your interpretation of how the rule is written. The NFL apparently disagrees. AGAIN, the rule was designed to prevent guys from lining up ON the LS, and smashing him as he snaps the ball.

You find me the distinction in the rules were it sets out an airborne player having to be 1 yd behind the LOS. You won't find it.

Whether your feet are on the ground or not, you can't line up over the long-snapper. Simple enough for even a Seattle fan to understand, or so I thought.

 

[chf]

Whether your feet are on the ground or not, you can't line up over the long-snapper. Simple enough for even a Seattle fan to understand, or so I thought.

'Whether your feet are on the ground or not.' Heh.

So why does the NFL disagree with it's own simple rule?

'lined up.'

To be 'lined up', your feet have to be where?

Hint: It's so simple a rams fan could understand it. (fun PA game!)

 

[shopson67]

'Whether your feet are on the ground or not.' Heh.

So why does the NFL disagree with it's own simple rule?

'lined up.'

To be 'lined up', your feet have to be where?

Hint: It's so simple a rams fan could understand it. (fun PA game!)

So, by your "understanding" of the rules, a defender can line up over the long-snapper as long as he hops at the snap?

 

[chf]

So, by your "understanding" of the rules, a defender can line up over the long-snapper as long as he hops at the snap?

I didn't write the rule, and I'm not the one who interpreted it TWICE in that game, and TWICE also, when Kam Chancellor did it a couple of years back.

The onus is on you to provide support for your assertion.

Which you can't by the rulebook, so you're now moving on to 'common sense' and ad hominem attacks on my intelligence.

Usually that's the sign of the white flag being waved.

But to play along still, no hopping up and down wouldn't work, because the player would still be 'lined up' in the wrong spot.

A player that 'lines up' in the right spot, and then times his run/jump to not be offsides, would APPARENTLY BY THE JUDGEMENT OF THE REFS, be just fine.

If you can find me something in the rules that covers airborne players who were once lined up in the right spot, I'll keep an open mind.