Tom Brady want's new rule

[dkmightyhammer]

The tuck rule was a controversial rule in American football used by the National Football League from 1999 until 2013. It stated:

NFL Rule 3, Section 22, Article 2, Note 2. When [an offensive] player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble.[1]

You know its a good rule when people are still talking about it more than a decade later.

 

[redseat]

You know its a good rule when people are still talking about it more than a decade later.

and it was called in favor of the Patriots

 

[dkmightyhammer]

and it was called in favor of the Patriots

Which is the reason the only fan base to ever defend that rule is New England's.

 

[redseat]

Which is the reason the only fan base to ever defend that rule is New England's.

When was the last time prior to that game it was called? It just happened to be called in such a HUGE game, correctly... Just never really had been called before... If it weren't in the Super Bowl, this probably wouldn't still be talked about.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

I want to bang Tom Brady's wife.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

When was the last time prior to that game it was called? It just happened to be called in such a HUGE game, correctly... Just never really had been called before... If it weren't in the Super Bowl, this probably wouldn't still be talked about.

Be that as it may, I'll bet you lunch that when you watched that live you were thinking "oh shit, we fumbled!". Just like holding calls, or intentional grounding, PI, etc it is up to the discretion of the official to call it as he sees it. I think in that case 99% of the world outside of Boston thought that looked like a fumble. And then when the official used such an obscure rule to verify his ruling it just made it worse for the public at large. And keep in mind that was long before anyone was tired of the Pats winning all the time so it's not like most people were rooting against Brady and the Pats.

 

[night]

This rule would make games 5 hours long because of flags being constantly thrown.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

So you are advocating for the repeal of the chop block rule, et al.?

I look at that as 2 separate issues.. right now NFL receivers have never had it so good.. We can't make it even harder on DB's.. Let's not give NFL refs even more reasons to throw more flags, it's already beyond ridiculous... If a rule is implimented telling defensive players they can't hit a receiver low making a tackle, were not playing football anymore...

 

[dkmightyhammer]

I look at that as 2 separate issues.. right now NFL receivers have never had it so good.. We can't make it even harder on DB's.. Let's not give NFL refs even more reasons to throw more flags, it's already beyond ridiculous... If a rule is implimented telling defensive players they can't hit a receiver low making a tackle, were not playing football anymore...

Amen brotha! Monday night's game had at least 16 accepted penalties when I stopped counting. It's gone beyond officiating and is now nitpicking. Hell, at one point in our game vs Minny the Vikes got iffy flags on two or three plays in a row which had them playing a down at 1st and 38. Ridiculous.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

"defenseless" is the key word you are all missing

Another rule for refs to throw more flags, not what the NFL needs ... There are already rules on not hitting defenseless receivers... Tackling someone by the legs is football, it can't be taken away or the game as we know it is done... How much can we take from defensive players ? The job is to stop the offense not get out of there way...

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

I want to bang Tom Brady's wife.

Don't get your tongue caught on her Adams apple

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

and it was called in favor of the Patriots

Remember when you watched that in real time and said "oh shit fumble"


You were right

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Don't get your tongue caught on her Adams apple

Are you implying that you would not bang her?

Before you answer, understand that if you say you would not, my follow up question is going to be "what is your favorite penis size to be fucked with".

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

Are you implying that you would not bang her?

Before you answer, understand that if you say you would not, my follow up question is going to be "what is your favorite penis size to be fucked with".

Sure, but she doesnt rank in the Top 1000 celebrities Id like to bang list

I live in NYC, I see 10,000 girls a day Id like to bang more than him

 

[NEPatsfan]

You know its a good rule when people are still talking about it more than a decade later.

I'm going to assume when you made that comment that you do realzie it was still in effect up till 2013.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Sure, but she doesnt rank in the Top 1000 celebrities Id like to bang list

Doesn't make the top one thousand? I find that hard to believe.

I live in NYC, I see 10,000 girls a day Id like to bang more than him

Unlikely.

 

[The Q]

the only part that should be considered is banning any diving at players legs during blocking. Any diving at the legs for blocking.

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

Doesn't make the top one thousand? I find that hard to believe.


Id probably bang Alexandra Daddario 998 times

Unlikely.

Take a vacation

 

[DirtDirtDirt]

Dwayne Bowe has 5 LESS receiving yards this season than Tom Brady

 

[dkmightyhammer]

I'm going to assume when you made that comment that you do realzie it was still in effect up till 2013.

I'm talking about the rule in general when it was being enforced. Many times incorrectly in my opinion. Sometimes a fumble is pretty obvious and the tuck rule just bailed out a few QB's. I also think refs let QB's get away with obvious intentional grounding too much to. Just my opinion.