[News] Late For Work 11/8: Justin Tucker Livid About Obvious Missed Call On MNF

[gammaman]

  2 hours ago, Tdot.to.Bmore said:

Isnt it funny, that the NFL confirms it was a missed call but then you have ppl argue otherwise lol. That is just foolish. There's no point in arguing with those types.

Isn't irrelevant hindsight analysis fun?

I always enjoy when ex-NFL officials who used to work for the NFL and were taught the same rules as the current NFL officials and rules interpreters completely disagree with the NFL's hilarious "confirmations" of missed calls. Because, you know, the NFL is just a model of consistency and never botch things. All those very clear, concise rules like what a catch is... yeah we should just treat those like they're objective too. LOL.

Somebody put another quarter in the merry-go-round...

Do you guys really not understand the entire rule book in any sporting environment is 100% about interpretation and subjectivity?

WOW!

[billiejean]

That was a good non-call by the officials. Look at Sherman's left hand. He touched the ball before his left shoulder made contact with the kicker's knee. If anything, the ref should've blew the whistle for being lined up offside before the snap.

after the play is dead touching the ball doesn't mean anything

[billiejean]

Here we go again hyping up Jimmy Smith but it is funny how PFF does not see it that way. His weekly ratings including last week are not top of the list at all ....

what is is grade for the season

[Rav'n Maniac]

Objective/Subjective...I'm objective to your subjectiveness yet subjective to any objective view.

[araveninwaconc]

I like the way Tavon Young is playing and think it should be his job to lose now.

True that! He has been out standing. If you noticed Brown started catching when powers came in. He sucks. Should stay on special teams that's his strength!

[araveninwaconc]

  20 hours ago, TheConquerorWorm said:

Which is why the rule states if there is any doubt or controversy, call the penalty. It's specifically written that way to cover "subjective" plays like this that happen in "real time". When in doubt, call the penalty. It's a note at the end of almost all rules in the NFL rule book.

It doesn't matter when the officials blow the play dead - you can't hit the kicker, just like you can't hit a guy out of bounds - whether before, after or during the whistle - the whistle has zero bearing on the penalty. On top of that, Sherman is the one committing the initial foul - he knew he was offsides, whistle or not and proceeded to dive at the kicker. No one is suggesting he try to change his trajectory or "pull up" but that's still no excuse. Regardless of the reasons why, it still happened, and its a penalty. Period. The NFL confirmed it.

1. Actually, you can hit a kicker. There are many, many instances where its perfectly legal to make contact with a kicker or a punter. Anytime you make contact with a football in an attempt to block a kick you are legally allowed to make contact with a kicker. You saw a textbook example of this in Sunday's Ravens game. Assuming you've watched games, you've also seen countless examples of players making contact with kickers, having a flag thrown, and then having that flag be picked up because the contact is deemed incidental or a player is blocked into a kicker by his own teammates. All perfectly legal plays.

2. The comparison to hitting a guy out of bounds is vastly different, because there's a boundary for out of bound... there is no imaginary boundary surrounding a kicker. 

3. The notion that Sherman shouldn't have hit the guy because he "knew he was offsides" is horrific logic, mostly because that implies that every player should give up on the play everytime they know they are committing a penalty. There's probably an instance in every single game where a player is offsides and the refs don't make the call... so should the player just give up on the play because he thinks he might have been offsides? Obviously not... he plays until somebody tells him to stop playing. That's how football is taught at every possible level.

4. No, actually, its not a penalty. Going back and saying it should have been afterwards doesn't actually make it a penalty. That's prototypical hindsight analysis... the ability to slow things down in replay for hours after hours once the play is over and then determine what the right action should have been with all the information you couldn't possibly have in real time.

Its simply hindsight, irrelevant analysis. It doesn't and won't change anything.

So from now until the end of time, there will NOT be a penalty for unnecessary roughness on that play. That's not a subjective statement... its an objective statement. Its fixed. It doesn't matter what somebody says happened afterwards or what should have happened. What happened is what actually happened. 

Man you no nothing about rules it should have been a flag plain and simple! Personal foul! same as a fight after the whistle? How can anybody who has watched football not say that should have been a penalty? How does the opposing team not benefit from this, especially on MNF? Crazy man! Makes me think the integrity of the NFL is beginning to be questioned?

[araveninwaconc]

exactly! If a play is blown dead and you continue to hit the QB Is that not a penalty? Com on People wake UP!

[araveninwaconc]

  20 hours ago, TheConquerorWorm said:

Which is why the rule states if there is any doubt or controversy, call the penalty. It's specifically written that way to cover "subjective" plays like this that happen in "real time". When in doubt, call the penalty. It's a note at the end of almost all rules in the NFL rule book.

It doesn't matter when the officials blow the play dead - you can't hit the kicker, just like you can't hit a guy out of bounds - whether before, after or during the whistle - the whistle has zero bearing on the penalty. On top of that, Sherman is the one committing the initial foul - he knew he was offsides, whistle or not and proceeded to dive at the kicker. No one is suggesting he try to change his trajectory or "pull up" but that's still no excuse. Regardless of the reasons why, it still happened, and its a penalty. Period. The NFL confirmed it.

1. Actually, you can hit a kicker. There are many, many instances where its perfectly legal to make contact with a kicker or a punter. Anytime you make contact with a football in an attempt to block a kick you are legally allowed to make contact with a kicker. You saw a textbook example of this in Sunday's Ravens game. Assuming you've watched games, you've also seen countless examples of players making contact with kickers, having a flag thrown, and then having that flag be picked up because the contact is deemed incidental or a player is blocked into a kicker by his own teammates. All perfectly legal plays.

2. The comparison to hitting a guy out of bounds is vastly different, because there's a boundary for out of bound... there is no imaginary boundary surrounding a kicker. 

3. The notion that Sherman shouldn't have hit the guy because he "knew he was offsides" is horrific logic, mostly because that implies that every player should give up on the play everytime they know they are committing a penalty. There's probably an instance in every single game where a player is offsides and the refs don't make the call... so should the player just give up on the play because he thinks he might have been offsides? Obviously not... he plays until somebody tells him to stop playing. That's how football is taught at every possible level.

4. No, actually, its not a penalty. Going back and saying it should have been afterwards doesn't actually make it a penalty. That's prototypical hindsight analysis... the ability to slow things down in replay for hours after hours once the play is over and then determine what the right action should have been with all the information you couldn't possibly have in real time.

Its simply hindsight, irrelevant analysis. It doesn't and won't change anything.

So from now until the end of time, there will NOT be a penalty for unnecessary roughness on that play. That's not a subjective statement... its an objective statement. Its fixed. It doesn't matter what somebody says happened afterwards or what should have happened. What happened is what actually happened. 

Yea there are instances but this is not ONE OF THEM!

[araveninwaconc]

It's a shame to say but the best thing for the Ravens to do Thurs. is to not HURT Kessler! Leave him in the game to learn while you guys eat him up and build up some confidence for the D! Look what happened when the hurt Geno? It is an in orthodox move but a safe one. then the Ravens will win and win convincingly? Just saying?

[araveninwaconc]

Objective/Subjective...I'm objective to your subjectiveness yet subjective to any objective view.

Cool! Learning new thangs?

[araveninwaconc]

  21 hours ago, objective view said:

Here we go again hyping up Jimmy Smith but it is funny how PFF does not see it that way. His weekly ratings including last week are not top of the list at all ....

what is is grade for the season

I think Jimmy is just lucky because Ive seen moments where he has gotten smoked! I for one still don't believe in him. Now Tavon is another story? He is the real deal! Reminds me of Chris Mc.

[araveninwaconc]

Defense is getting better, hope this is not a "fly by night" thang? Our young line backing core are doing great a few mistakes like not being deep enough, getting caught looking at QB eyes. But they can only get better I don't see them getting worse! I see no 100 yard rushing but 100 yard receiving will come first these next few weeks! Good job fellas up front(7).

[Grapple Raven]

On ‎11‎/‎8‎/‎2016 at 10:27 AM, Bat-mite said:

So thrilled to get a win Sunday, especially against Pittsburgh. My dad's funeral was Monday morning, so I felt like that one was for him.

Bat-mite, so sorry to hear about the loss of your Dad. It is never easy to lose a parent.  My thought and prayers are with you and your family.

[Jonah DeVito]

On 11/8/2016 at 11:26 AM, sami said:

Ive looked at that play where Sherman is off sides several times and its clear to me Sherman isn't going after the ball, hes going after the kickers legs. Maybe his coach read the rulebook and saw where its ok to slam into the kicker if your off sides.

Now I'm not saying I don't think there should've been a flag. There definitely needed to be a flag thrown on that play. However, After watching the play several times it's very obvious to me that Sherman was going after the ball. 

1. It looks pretty obvious to me that he's taking an angle at the ball, he ran into he kicker because the kicker just happened to be in the wrong spot at the wrong time. He jumps with his shoulder and back to the ball in an attempt to block the ball and avoid getting nailed in the face/chest/stomach. It's the way I'd jump at the ball lol. 

2. What in the world does he have to gain from going at a freaking kicker?? Not even Vontaze Burfict is stupid enough to intentionally hit a kicker. Maybe you can get away with a dirty play on any other player. But not a kicker. If you think this is a dirty play that's kinda sad. Still a penalty, just not intentional. 

Edited November 10, 2016 by Jonah DeVito
Added more