Kendall Hunter's "attempt"

[clyde_carbon]

So apparently that play ended being recorded as a sack. Does that make sense to anyone?

 

[NinerSickness]

So apparently that play ended being recorded as a sack. Does that make sense to anyone?

He was motioning to throw right? I'll buy it.

 

[ChrisPozz]

I thought it was officially recorded as a sack the minute it happened? At least that's what gamecenter said. Oh, well. Makes sense to me, though.

 

[clyde_carbon]

So in that case, does he get the same protection as a QB would?

 

[clyde_carbon]

He was motioning to throw right? I'll buy it.

I guess. He moved his arm to throw it but never really set his feet and just kept running with it.

 

[CalamityX11]

at first i was going to say yes due to him being behind the LOS but then that would apply to all RBs taking a rush attempt....

that shouldn't be a sack.

 

[arsenal6106]

So if a qb draw attempt loses yards, then does that count as a sack also?

 

[Bemular]

So if a qb draw attempt loses yards, then does that count as a sack also?

No, that is a TFL - Hunter squared his shoulders to the LOS and appeared clearly to be looking downfield to throw a pass. The ruling as to whether Hunter was attempting to pass is up to the official scorekeeper and I agree with the ruling.

 

[clyde_carbon]

No, that is a TFL - Hunter squared his shoulders to the LOS and appeared clearly to be looking downfield to throw a pass. The ruling as to whether Hunter was attempting to pass is up to the official scorekeeper and I agree with the ruling.

But a QB looking clearly to run and gets tackled behind the LOS is considered a sack.

 

[Bemular]

But a QB looking clearly to run and gets tackled behind the LOS is considered a sack.

That would be a scorekeeper mistake and not in harmony with the rules. As an example, QB sneaks that fail to advance beyond the LOS are not sacks as with kneel downs. If the intent is clearly to run the ball and no other intent is evident then that loss should be a TFL not a sack.

That said, I think the conversation is good and it serves to illuminate the subjectivity that often lurks behind some statistics.

 

[threelittleturds]

But a QB looking clearly to run and gets tackled behind the LOS is considered a sack.

I don't think so, because in week 1 Rodgers tucked it to run outside but Aldon got him behind the LOS and they counted it as a TFL instead of a sack.

 

[supreme_clientele81]

That would be a scorekeeper mistake and not in harmony with the rules. As an example, QB sneaks that fail to advance beyond the LOS are not sacks as with kneel downs. If the intent is clearly to run the ball and no other intent is evident then that loss should be a TFL not a sack.

That said, I think the conversation is good and it serves to illuminate the subjectivity that often lurks behind some statistics.

Not sure if we are saying the same thing but it also has to be a clear pass attempt. Because if a QB attempts to pass then scrambles that's a sack. if he has no intention to pass IE QB draw then that would be TFL

 

[Bemular]

Not sure if we are saying the same thing but it also has to be a clear pass attempt. Because if a QB attempts to pass then scrambles that's a sack. if he has no intention to pass IE QB draw then that would be TFL

Yeppers - we're saying the same thing. The o'line can also be used to aid the scorekeeper to determine if the play was intended to be a pass or run. (Hats up/Hats down)

 

[clyde_carbon]

Yeppers - we're saying the same thing. The o'line can also be used to aid the scorekeeper to determine if the play was intended to be a pass or run. (Hats up/Hats down)

That's what I'm talking about. Hunter never even set his feet. Plus, is he a considered a QB in that case? Does that mean the defense can't aim at his ankles? I think there's a lot of ambiguity there.

 

[TheNinerMind]

This is a big gray area. The sack Michael Strahan received to break the single season record was a called run by Brett Favre.

 

[SFAnthem]

So apparently that play ended being recorded as a sack. Does that make sense to anyone?

Clearly this is a sign the niner's o-line sucks.

Stats don't lie!

 

[threelittleturds]

Clearly this is a sign the niner's o-line sucks.

Stats don't lie!

Ha ha... ZING!!!

ha, dork

 

[Bemular]

That's what I'm talking about. Hunter never even set his feet. Plus, is he a considered a QB in that case? Does that mean the defense can't aim at his ankles? I think there's a lot of ambiguity there.

Setting the feet is not required for a scorekeeper to determine whether the intent was/is to throw a pass, think RG III/Cam Newton/roll out passes etc. However, it may play a role in determining protection.

Once a QB/passer is out of the pocket but still in a "passing posture", roughing the passer protection applies but low hits do not.

Once the passer tucks the ball and begins to advance as a runner from anywhere, all bets are off - unless he again resumes passing posture then roughing the passer comes back in play. I think this is what got Harrison in trouble with McCoy.

As for the ambiguity, yes it is and QBs like Kap/III/Newton will serve only to make it more ambiguous. Probably something the rules committee need to figure out.

I hope this helps - at least a little.