Brady to Ravens: 'Study the rule book and figure it out'

[rmcjacket23]

No it doesn't put an end to it because as I already pointed out to you IN THE RULEBOOK it might be legal, but it is still unethical.

And yeah, like the NFL would EVER say Bellicheat was cheating. They only got called out on the spygate thing because there was video evidence.

The problem with playing the "ethics" card is that ethics, by definition, are incredibly subjective and personal. What one person finds ethical isn't the same for anybody else.

 

Generally speaking, this is why laws/rules exist... to remove the subjectivity of determining what is considered "ethical" and what is not. If there is something that society deems unethical, it generally becomes illegal. Same thing applies in a sporting event such as an NFL game.

[rmcjacket23]

Um..no. The rulebook says this about substitution rules (which I've already posted). "These rules are to prevent a team from using substitutions to deceive their opponent". Clearly stated. Means exactly what it says. Therefore, using substitutions in that manner goes against the very spirit of the intention of the rules. Unethical period. No subjective there.

Ahh, but there's the rub...the rulebook is written in a subjective manner, hence the word usage and the ability to interpret it (which the NFL's officiating office already has, and interpreted basically the exact opposite of what you did).

 

They lined up in a legal formation, and they followed the proper protocol in alerting the officials which players were ineligible. This idea of "deception" is completely based upon how quickly the Patriots snapped the ball, which again, is legal, and the Ravens knew it was legal.

 

Harbaugh's beef (and he's already acknowledged this after the fact) is that he didn't feel the officials alerted the Ravens in a timely manner of which players were ineligible and allowed us to match up accordingly. That is where the perceived "deception" comes into play, which again, is SUBJECTIVE, not objective.

 

We sort of already know its subjective, because the NFL disagreed entirely with Harbaugh's notion of deception. If something was objective, there is no disagreement.

[ravensdfan]

Ahh, but there's the rub...the rulebook is written in a subjective manner, hence the word usage and the ability to interpret it (which the NFL's officiating office already has, and interpreted basically the exact opposite of what you did).

 

They lined up in a legal formation, and they followed the proper protocol in alerting the officials which players were ineligible. This idea of "deception" is completely based upon how quickly the Patriots snapped the ball, which again, is legal, and the Ravens knew it was legal.

 

Harbaugh's beef (and he's already acknowledged this after the fact) is that he didn't feel the officials alerted the Ravens in a timely manner of which players were ineligible and allowed us to match up accordingly. That is where the perceived "deception" comes into play, which again, is SUBJECTIVE, not objective.T

 

We sort of already know its subjective, because the NFL disagreed entirely with Harbaugh's notion of deception. If something was objective, there is no disagreement.

Except we already knew, even if the rulebook said "you cannot snap the ball one second after your substitution declares to the ref" the NFL would have said it was legal. It is the Pats and Bellicheat.

The NFL can "interpret" all they like. It is clearly stated in the rules. They are simply covering their own butts because again, officials failed to actually enforce the rules and notify the defense in a timely manner because it was so deceptive, even the refs were confused.

It is clearly stated what the intent of the rules are. To prevent deception in this manner. Unethical. Not illegal. But unethical.

[rmcjacket23]

Except we already knew, even if the rulebook said "you cannot snap the ball one second after your substitution declares to the ref" the NFL would have said it was legal. It is the Pats and Bellicheat.

The NFL can "interpret" all they like. It is clearly stated in the rules. They are simply covering their own butts because again, officials failed to actually enforce the rules and notify the defense in a timely manner because it was so deceptive, even the refs were confused.

It is clearly stated what the intent of the rules are. To prevent deception in this manner. Unethical. Not illegal. But unethical.

Right, and if they don't find it unethical, then it means nothing.

 

Ethical arguments always end the same way... nothing happens. If its an egregious unethical act, it becomes illegal.

 

Fans can interpret all they like as well... doesn't mean anything. The interpretation of the officials is literally the only thing that matters.

[ravensdfan]

Right, and if they don't find it unethical, then it means nothing.

 

Ethical arguments always end the same way... nothing happens. If its an egregious unethical act, it becomes illegal.

 

Fans can interpret all they like as well... doesn't mean anything. The interpretation of the officials is literally the only thing that matters.Al

Alright, how about this then. Once the refs were made aware of what was going on, they put a stop to it. Guess they thought it was unethical and outside the spirit of the rules as well.

[Moderator 2]

Except we already knew, even if the rulebook said "you cannot snap the ball one second after your substitution declares to the ref" the NFL would have said it was legal. It is the Pats and Bellicheat.

The NFL can "interpret" all they like. It is clearly stated in the rules. They are simply covering their own butts because again, officials failed to actually enforce the rules and notify the defense in a timely manner because it was so deceptive, even the refs were confused.

It is clearly stated what the intent of the rules are. To prevent deception in this manner. Unethical. Not illegal. But unethical.

I agree with you in an off the wall way!

I think the Browns gave them the idea with all the off the wall crap they we pulling trying to win.

[rmcjacket23]

Alright, how about this then. Once the refs were made aware of what was going on, they put a stop to it. Guess they thought it was unethical and outside the spirit of the rules as well.

Did they? Can you cite a specific play where that actually happened again, or are you basing that off of what John said, which is that they WOULD do it, not did do it.

 

Considering the NFL has already said they weren't required to do anything more than what they did, you're essentially just asking for generosity on the refs part at this point.

[salamander]

I guess "get over it"..."what's done is done" is the best attitude since nothing will change the outcome and we did plenty to let the win slip away ourselves. BUT if the Patriots go on to and win the Super Bowl, I am going to have a momentary Round 2 of pissedoffness.

[Firstdown]

Let's say we agree to race from here to the wall, and agree that I will count to three before we go.  Then I say "onetwothreego" as fast as I can and beat you to the tree.  Was it legal?  Yes.  Does it technically count as a win?  Yes.  Is that how we ought to conduct races?  No.

 

I think Harbaugh is wrong to infer that the tactic was illegal, because that puts the onus on him to substantiate it and as a technical matter he is incorrect.  What he should have said was that the way the Patriots handled the substitution was technically legal but that the NFL needs to look at ways to prevent it from happening again in future.

 

Clearly the Patriots caught the Ravens and the officials both unaware, and they were within the letter of the law in doing so.  That said, this is just another cheap Patriots victory from a cheap Patriots team with a cheap coach, a cheap quarterback, and a history of manipulating every last corner of the rulebook to their advantage.  Did they win?  Yes.  Is it anything to be proud of?  No.  It is cheap, underhanded crap.  

Ya ya ya......we get it, you don't like the Pats because they are NOT your team. Imagine if several years ago, before Flacco, there was a Dumberville type contract situation with Brady and he ended up on the street and he signed with the Ravens....and played EXACTLY the same way he has in NE. I guarantee you would have a shrine in your basement of him today, and would LOVE how he argues for flags and how he plays. But he is on a team you hate, so yep, I get it....we both know what it is, so go ahead and vent, but staying in reality would be refreshing , don't ya think??

[redrum52]

Can we trust Peyton or Luck to go in there and win? Not sure we can.

It would make my YEAR if Peyton did it though. They would never get over it.

I think the Colts have a good chance.

I know how people feel about Isray, but they have people on that team I like, so the lesser of the evils to me, would be them. I don't even want the Pats making the SB to risk it. I think Pagano will have something for Belichick next week, though I'm not going predict who wins.

[ravensdfan]

Did they? Can you cite a specific play where that actually happened again, or are you basing that off of what John said, which is that they WOULD do it, not did do it.

 

Considering the NFL has already said they weren't required to do anything more than what they did, you're essentially just asking for generosity on the refs part at this point.

yes they did after Harbs took the penalty and told them what was happening. We already know they bent the rules for the Pats because we have seen in our own games (Titans) where they have stopped us from snapping the ball to give the defense time for subs after we've subbed. This is what they were required to do, and did not do. Plus, the rules DO state that a sub must check in with the ref immediately, and the ref MUST NOTIFY THE DEFENSE OF THEIR STATUS. So no, the NFL is lying because the refs were not notifying us of their status. They are required, by the rule book, to do more than they did.

[ravensdfan]

I think the Colts have a good chance.

I know how people feel about Isray, but they have people on that team I like, so the lesser of the evils to me, would be them. I don't even want the Pats making the SB to risk it. I think Pagano will have something for Belichick next week, though I'm not going predict who wins.

They can go, they just then have to get destroyed.

[redrum52]

Ya ya ya......we get it, you don't like the Pats because they are NOT your team. Imagine if several years ago, before Flacco, there was a Dumberville type contract situation with Brady and he ended up on the street and he signed with the Ravens....and played EXACTLY the same way he has in NE. I guarantee you would have a shrine in your basement of him today, and would LOVE how he argues for flags and how he plays. But he is on a team you hate, so yep, I get it....we both know what it is, so go ahead and vent, but staying in reality would be refreshing , don't ya think??

I wouldn't want him on the Ravens. Wouldn't want LeBron on my NBA team either. Would probably stop being a fan to be honest.

[Tank 92]

Ya ya ya......we get it, you don't like the Pats because they are NOT your team. Imagine if several years ago, before Flacco, there was a Dumberville type contract situation with Brady and he ended up on the street and he signed with the Ravens....and played EXACTLY the same way he has in NE. I guarantee you would have a shrine in your basement of him today, and would LOVE how he argues for flags and how he plays. But he is on a team you hate, so yep, I get it....we both know what it is, so go ahead and vent, but staying in reality would be refreshing , don't ya think??

 

 

Where do you come up with these analogies?  Doomerville?  flea flicker?  lmao!  

 

And just so you know, for me scum bag brady is the egg and the patsies are the chicken.

[redrum52]

They can go, they just then have to get destroyed.

I don't think any team beats the Seahawks, but the Patriots are far to close to the SB, for my liking.

[Bryden88]

I'm gonna point out that the last time the Patriots went to the SB after beating us, we followed it up by going to the SB ourselves. So. I'm clinging to that!

[Tank 92]

I think the Colts have a good chance.

I know how people feel about Isray, but they have people on that team I like, so the lesser of the evils to me, would be them. I don't even want the Pats making the SB to risk it. I think Pagano will have something for Belichick next week, though I'm not going predict who wins.

 

 

My wounds were healed years ago when Peyton came to town when playing for the colts and spoke about how wrong it was that Irsay moved the team the way he did. closure for me.

 

I luv Pags but never have really rooted for the Colts.  Until now!

[ravensdfan]

I think Luck should stash an extra RB in his beard, pull him out to declare and snap the ball one second later.

[Tank 92]

 

Considering the NFL has already said they weren't required to do anything more than what they did, you're essentially just asking for generosity on the refs part at this point.

 

Did they say this?  Link?

[Tank 92]

I think Luck should stash an extra RB in his beard, pull him out to declare and snap the ball one second later.

 

 

[Bmoreazfan]

My wounds were healed years ago when Peyton came to town when playing for the colts and spoke about how wrong it was that Irsay moved the team the way he did. closure for me.

 

I luv Pags but never have really rooted for the Colts.  Until now!

I always had respect for Manning (never liked him when he was with the Colts). But I was finally able to root for him in Denver after he showed everyone what he thought of the Irsay situation you mentioned. As far as I'm concerned regardless of Pagano being there I personally could never cheer for the Colts as long as any Irsay remains an owner since a SB win benefits the family. I can't think of a single positive thing to say about the Patriots players or organization either? I think I now despise them over Pittsburgh so all I can hope for is for these two teams to wear eachother down

[Grapple Raven]

The link provided by a Patriots fan stated:

 

"Patriots offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels pulled out the trickery when his team was down by 14 points and the offense had gone three-and-out on the opening drive of the third quarter. The drive resulted in a 5-yard touchdown pass to tight end Rob Gronkowski ..." 

 

I think that speaks to the motive of the Patriots with no further explanation needed. As ravensdfan pointed out as well, once it was pointed out to the referees it didn't occur again, speaking to its underhandedness because you better believe Belicheck stopped it at that point to prevent the drawing any further attention into his chicanery.

[balfan23]

I always had respect for Manning (never liked him when he was with the Colts). But I was finally able to root for him in Denver after he showed everyone what he thought of the Irsay situation you mentioned. As far as I'm concerned regardless of Pagano being there I personally could never cheer for the Colts as long as any Irsay remains an owner since a SB win benefits the family. I can't think of a single positive thing to say about the Patriots players or organization either? I think I now despise them over Pittsburgh so all I can hope for is for these two teams to wear eachother down

My sentiments exactly and forever. 

[shn23]

. Plus, the rules DO state that a sub must check in with the ref immediately, and the ref MUST NOTIFY THE DEFENSE OF THEIR STATUS. So no, the NFL is lying because the refs were not notifying us of their status. They are required, by the rule book, to do more than they did.

 

At the game the refs were announcing who was reporting ineligible, identifying them by number. (the same as when a extra tackle reports eligible) I don't know if that came across on the TV.

 

I think Brady had a hissy fit because he was poked in the eye. I wouldn't be happy either.

http://nesn.com/2015/01/tom-brady-will-be-fine-after-getting-poked-in-the-eye-in-patriots-win/

 

I don't know if it was an accident or what (we all know what goes on at the bottom of the pile) but it looks a bit rough. Whatever, it's football, we're not playing soccer here. At least he doesn't need an eyepatch.

 

i don't really feel too bad about winning. I've had tickets to the Patriots since '91. When we were 1-15, nobody felt bad, they just laughed at you. between the laughing and the hate, I'll take the hate and ride it for as long as i can.

[Ravenseconbeast]

and then some, he just rubs it in. during the presser afterwards he stated 'the ravens need to study the rules", then went on saying " obviously we know what we're doing and we made important plays" and "we'll have something else in store next week" just proves his complete delusional narcissistic, diva mentality. how can anyone be a fan of this guy outside of new england?

 

if he was a wide receiver, he'd be a white incarnate of Terrell Owens.

[benhamean]

Yup ... he found a loophole and exploited it.  Not how the rules were meant to be used, but not outside of them.  I'd bet a paycheck that the competition committee will close the loophole for next season and Belichick will comb through the rulebook looking for something else he can pull in the gray areas.  We still had this game and let it get away regardless of their gimmicks.  The loss is on the Ravens ... the win was there for the taking.

 

 

I just always love how the "greatest QB who ever lived" has to resort to this kind of stuff time and time again.  I still wish the conference they were in actually provided some competition.  Tired of them skating to their division championship every year.  I've had a dream for years that the NFL would seek some parity in that division.  Move the Cleveland Browns to the AFC East with NY, Buffalo and Miami.  Then move NE to the AFC North.  Let him deal with AFC North defenses 6 times a year and show me he's Tom Terrific. 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BradTo00/splits/

 

Brady is 19-5 against the AFCN...

[bpytnjr58]

Not a big fan of Richard Sherman but if it comes down to Brady and Sherman in the SB I want Sherman to just blow him up.

[i82much]

I think the Patriots were within the letter of the law and their victory is, as a technical matter, the correct outcome.  But please - spare me the BS about the greatness of their dynasty, their quarterback, their coach.  When one looks back on the great 49ers, Steelers, Packers teams through history, the first thing that comes to mind is how they won by imposing their will on their opponents - by the most precise passing attack in history, by the best defense in history, by the old Green Bay sweep, plowing defenders out of the way on the road to victory.  

 

What is the first thing that comes to ANYONE'S mind when you mention the Patriots?  Spygate.  When you look through their history at their big games, what do you see?  The tuck rule.  The league changing the rules after Brady got hurt.  Spygate - which was, by the way, GOING ON FOR YEARS.  And now this, a cheap ploy to take advantage of a hole in the NFL's rules on substitutions.

 

So by all means, go to the next round, pat yourselves on the back, take another step forward in the record books.  But don't for a second kid yourselves that Belichick's name belongs up there with Walsh or Lombardi, or that Brady's name belongs up there with Montana or Unitas, or that the Pats franchise has achieved any level of immortal greatness.  Because at the end of the day, you may have won legally sometimes, but you connived your way to success by nibbling at the corners of the rulebook and using every last dirty trick you could think of.  Nothing to be proud of. 

[The Raven]

Let's face it

you Ravens fanatics...Harbs was out smarted and out coached by Bilichick...why that game was lost...The team looked prepared...great job...too much focus on that and not his own coaching...

 

We didn't lose because we were outsmarted or outcoached. We lost because we had a secondary that can't tackle and because Torrey Smith didn't break up a pick.

[bMore Heathen]

I really hate Tom Brady