2014 Playoff game - Patriots Ineligible Receiver Shenanigans

[RavensFanMania]

I just can't view it as cheating because it didn't actually break a rule. Was it very ticky tack and unfair to the Ravens because it was brand new? Yes, very much so, but that doesn't make it illegal or cheating. I'm glad it's getting resolved so that the games will be more fair, but hey, again, I can't fault the Patriots for being very innovative

Exactly, but deflating of the footballs, if they did it was cheating though and that's pretty much what I was referring to.

Edited March 21, 2015 by RavensFanMania

[January J]

My only issue is with the refs not giving ample time for the d to make substitutions and the signal for eligible / ineligible being the same. Also them not taking the time to explain to harbaugh. Ofcourse he didn't wanna burn a timeout just for a referee to give him an explanation? That timeout could have been crucial. Also not clear if they reported before or after the huddle, or if they were even really huddling at all. I do know that they missed a penalty when one of the pats players( can't remember the name ) was supposed to come out for a play. That would have stalled that entire drive and changed everything . So yeah , I expect the pats to pull [profanity deleted] like that bc they can't win playing blue collar football, but my issue is with the referees.

[Tank 92]

smh Deceiving the refs was all part of the scheme. If they had handled it per the rule the scheme wouldn't have worked.

The patsies are and always have been cheaters. It's not a secret.

[BmoreBird22]

Exactly, but deflating of the footballs, if they did it was cheating though and that's pretty much what I was referring to.

And deflating footballs is something clearly defined in the rules, so yes, it is cheating and apparently the Patriots did do that and that's cheating, but I don't know why they didn't get punishment for that

[RavensFanMania]

And deflating footballs is something clearly defined in the rules, so yes, it is cheating and apparently the Patriots did do that and that's cheating, but I don't know why they didn't get punishment for that

It's clear favoritism.  Did we actually think that the Pats would be fined.  I certainly did not.

[BmoreBird22]

It's clear favoritism.  Did we actually think that the Pats would be fined.  I certainly did not.

I thought they would. I wasn't expecting anything huge because the Colts just played poorly, but yes, I expected some fine

[ratedr]

Steelers owner agrees with Harbs.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/03/21/rooney-thinks-ravens-had-legitimate-gripe-about-ineligible-receiver-maneuver/

[ravensnick]

While the substitution itself didn't violate the letter of the rule, it was deception and violated the spirit of the rule. Deceiving the refs and opponent alone is cheating and no matter how you rationalize it, they are cheaters.

By this logic, the wildcat when it came out was cheating.

Edited March 21, 2015 by ravensnick

[Tank 92]

By this logic, the wildcat when it came out was cheating.

WTH? Yeah, no. Not quite the type of deception we're talking about here. lol

[gooftroop]

The predictable whining of Beantown boneheads, who can be counted on to freak out whenever the Pat's tactics are questioned. You know, I'd wager that Belichick& Co aren't the only ones who thought of this bit of trickery- just the only team to use it.

[JoeyFlex5]

The predictable whining of Beantown boneheads, who can be counted on to freak out whenever the Pat's tactics are questioned. You know, I'd wager that Belichick& Co aren't the only ones who thought of this bit of trickery- just the only team to use it.

yes because theyre the only ones low down dirty, and desperate enough to do something like that. dont kid yourself, it is deception and trickery, there is no specific rule defining it because it is a ridiculous scenario that the rulemakers couldnt have thought of on their own.

[Tank 92]

yes because theyre the only ones low down dirty, and desperate enough to do something like that. dont kid yourself, it is deception and trickery, there is no specific rule defining it because it is a ridiculous scenario that the rulemakers couldnt have thought of on their own.

Goof nailed it. All teams/coaches know there are deceitful and unethical ways to skirt the rules. The krafties just don't care about fair play and sportsmanship and will do anything to gain a competitive advantage. cheaters

[hawkprey]

I've never seen a rule about urinating on the field, so next year I propose a team has 5 of its players start urinating after the snap to confuse and annoy the other team. Then, a bunch of people will have to waste time instating an actual rule against it while I'm busy thinking up another loophole.

[FlocksGottaFeed]

Has anyone noticed deflate-gate is pretty much swept under the rug?

..... shocker ......

:-/

It will be left under the rug until new rules addressing it will be reported and this year's draft is not affected by it. After which an irrelvant 2016 draft pick or something less relevant will be taken from the Pats and the league will wipe it's hands clean of it forever.

 

In the meantime, the Pat's have been pre-warned of the upcoming penalties and have been given alternatives to nullify any damage from these irrelevant actions (i.e. - They make moves now to compensate for any penalty that may come down after this draft). Great PR. The dark-side wins again.

[BmoreBird22]

I've never seen a rule about urinating on the field, so next year I propose a team has 5 of its players start urinating after the snap to confuse and annoy the other team. Then, a bunch of people will have to waste time instating an actual rule against it while I'm busy thinking up another loophole.

I'm pretty sure that'd fall under public indecency or nudity laws, so....

[Tank 92]

I'm pretty sure that'd fall under public indecency or nudity laws, so....

What if they had tubes running down their pant legs that released the urine precisely where their right foot was planted? Now that's innovation!

[BmoreBird22]

What if they had tubes running down their pant legs that released the urine precisely where their right foot was planted? Now that's innovation!

We're talking about something that's clearly against the law versus a game where a team found a way to test the limits of a rule. I know we're Ravens fans and we're supposed to hate everything that the Patriots do to win, but seriously, let's try to act reasonable

But in any case, I'm sure that'd be legal and actually work out fine if the players really could not hold it in during a game or sweat it out

Edited March 22, 2015 by BmoreBird22

[ludy51]

We're talking about something that's clearly against the law versus a game where a team found a way to test the limits of a rule. I know we're Ravens fans and we're supposed to hate everything that the Patriots do to win, but seriously, let's try to act reasonable

We ARE being reasonable. There is a difference between testing the limits and SQUEEZING by the rules and STRETCHING them to the limit to wear it is technically legal but very immoral and disrespectful to the integrity of the game 

[ellicottraven]

Eventually teams like the Patriots will drown in their own vomit for all the illegalities they have utilized for unfair advantages to win games. I truly believe that, but unfortunately Kraft doesn't.

[Tank 92]

We're talking about something that's clearly against the law versus a game where a team found a way to test the limits of a rule. I know we're Ravens fans and we're supposed to hate everything that the Patriots do to win, but seriously, let's try to act reasonable

But in any case, I'm sure that'd be legal and actually work out fine if the players really could not hold it in during a game or sweat it out

I'm not going to bang on you anymore about this, but understand the premise behind what hawk proposed. Just because you can do it and there's no rule to prohibit it, that doesn't it make it right.

[ravensdfan]

yes because theyre the only ones low down dirty, and desperate enough to do something like that. dont kid yourself, it is deception and trickery, there is no specific rule defining it because it is a ridiculous scenario that the rulemakers couldnt have thought of on their own.

Actually, in the section of the NFL rulebook covering the rules governing substitutions, it says this:

"These rules are in place to prevent teams from using substitutions in such a manner as to decieve their opponent"

 

So while technically not against stated rules, the substitutions were directly in violation of the stated intention of the rules.

[JoeyFlex5]

Actually, in the section of the NFL rulebook covering the rules governing substitutions, it says this:

"These rules are in place to prevent teams from using substitutions in such a manner as to decieve their opponent"

 

So while technically not against stated rules, the substitutions were directly in violation of the stated intention of the rules.

i know but the patriots view on this is: "nowhere in the rule book does it specifically say that we can declare our rb ineligible and let our tight end up line up at left tackle and run a route as long as he declares eligible, so therefore it isnt against the rules" 

 

and that legitimately is their attitude on the situation, it is pathetic and borderline childish how they respond to the criticism about it, they were wrong and they know it, if they dig deep enough into the rulebook to find this, then they know its illegal but 1 of 2 things will happen: they outsmart the refs and get away with it, or they get a 5yard penalty and dont try it anymore. 

[The Mom Gene]

Nice to see this one for sure...  You know it's an issue when the owner of the Steelers agrees with the Ravens...

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/03/21/rooney-thinks-ravens-had-legitimate-gripe-about-ineligible-receiver-maneuver/

[The Mom Gene]

Eliminate it...  end of story...  "A player with an eligible number cannot report as ineligible;  or they must line up INSIDE the tackle box.

[RavensFanMania]

Eliminate it...  end of story...  "A player with an eligible number cannot report as ineligible;  or they must line up INSIDE the tackle box.

Lets hope this is what the new rule is and that Tom Brady & BB read the rule book.

[gooftroop]

Those plays only work is if there's not enough time for the defense to identify, with certainty, who's eligible and who's not, and the Pats knew that, of course. That's the intent behind the play, the way the play is executed, the timing of the substitutions, and the timing of the declaration to the refs, and the timing of the PA announcement. Doesn't that constitute the kind of deception spelled out as a violation of the rules?

[Tank 92]

Those plays only work is if there's not enough time for the defense to identify, with certainty, who's eligible and who's not, and the Pats knew that, of course. That's the intent behind the play, the way the play is executed, the timing of the substitutions, and the timing of the declaration to the refs, and the timing of the PA announcement. Doesn't that constitute the kind of deception spelled out as a violation of the rules?

This seems to be so obvious and I continually find it amazing that these scum bags continue to get away with pretty much anything.

[ravensnick]

 I really don't think it was cheating. Sure, it may have not been "fair play" but if the Pats have studied the rule book to the Nth degree and found a loophole, power to them. I think the league should close the loophole, but it's not against the rules, yet. It part of coaching to do everything you can within the legal limits. 

Edited March 22, 2015 by ravensnick

[Guest]

In the field of Tax Law as it applies to Fraud, there is a concept applied by the Courts called "Substance over Form". 

 

When a taxpayer has manipulated transactions in such a way that the clear purpose is to avoid taxes the IRS and the Courts will look past the Form of the  shame transactions and apply the law/code (rules) in regard to the Substance of what transpired.

 

Fraud is the charge here as well. And though the Patriots will certainly argue that the Form of their actions didn't violate the rules, most everyone else except for Baltimore Bird will have to conclude that the Substance of their actions most certainly did.

 

 

This seems to be so obvious and I continually find it amazing that these scum bags continue to get away with pretty much anything.

 

 

Those plays only work is if there's not enough time for the defense to identify, with certainty, who's eligible and who's not, and the Pats knew that, of course. That's the intent behind the play, the way the play is executed, the timing of the substitutions, and the timing of the declaration to the refs, and the timing of the PA announcement. Doesn't that constitute the kind of deception spelled out as a violation of the rules?

Edited March 22, 2015 by Danny D

[gooftroop]

He does innovate all right. And he is a master of the game and the rules. The thing is the rules are not meant to be twisted in such a way. The game is supposed to be a competition that pits two teams of elite athletes against each other skill vs skill. Not between a couple of old men pouring over ancient books of rules trying to figure out a way to "innovate".

Oh, I don't know if he's a "master of the rules"- I just think he just has the stones to bend them almost to the breaking point (and perhaps beyond) fair play, sportsmanship, and his own reputation be damned.