Tebow TD should have been called back!

[PromoTheRobot]

I guess they were so in awe of Tim Tebow they didn't notice Denver was in an illegal formation! Man, wouldn't you hate to be a Steelers fan right now?

 

PTR

[H2o]

It was only justice for what the refs, who should've been wearing black and yellow, were doing to them all day long. The fumble when the whistle blew, holding, blocks in the back. The Steelers were given every opportunity to screw the Broncos, I know I saw it.

[PromoTheRobot]

It was only justice for what the refs, who should've been wearing black and yellow, were doing to them all day long. The fumble when the whistle blew, holding, blocks in the back. The Steelers were given every opportunity to screw the Broncos, I know I saw it.

I'm sure Steelers fans would agree. Well they now have their very own "Home Run Throwback."

 

PTR

[San Jose Bills Fan]

On every play, you have the Head Linesman and the Line Judge standing on the line of scrimmage pre-snap.

 

I've seen Illegal Formation called in numerous critical situations and I don't like the suggestion (by Perreira) that the rule is arbitrarily enforced.

 

It shouldn't be a rule that is sometimes enforced… the rule is very simple… 7 guys on the line of scrimmage.

[DrDawkinstein]

Good God man, how many places are you going to post this?

 

My stock reply:

 

More officiating ambiguity. Although Ill say that the "men on the line" rule has always been pretty loose as long as you check with a ref. But that TE is as much on the Line as most OTs when they line up for a passing play. Very rarely do you ever see a perfectly straight line. Most are some sort of V formation.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

It eyeballs that Rosario's front hand/helmet are about 1.5 yards behind the line of scrimmage.

 

I'm gonna look up the rule.

 

Section 18 Line of Scrimmage

 

Article 1 The Line of Scrimmage is the yard line (plane) passing through the forward point of the ball after it has been made ready for play. The term scrimmage line, or line, implies a play from scrimmage.

 

Article 2 A Player of Team A is on his line:

 

(a) when his shoulders face Team B's goal line, and

 

(b) if he is the snapper, no part of his body is beyond the line at the snap,

 

© if he is a non-snapper, his helmet must break the vertical plane that passes through the beltline of the snapper.

 

Note: Interlocking legs are permissible.

 

10Rule 3, Section 18, Article 3

 

A.R. 3.8 Offensive A1 assumes a three-point stance with his shoulders facing defensive B's goal line. One hand is on the ground and it is on or not more than one foot behind his line. Neither of his feet nor the other hand is within one foot of his line. Ruling: A1 is legally on his line.

 

http://www.mediafire…8oc9b6wkn5etnpe

 

So Rosario is clearly not on the line of scrimmage and a penalty should have been called.

Edited January 11, 2012 by San Jose Bills Fan

[SouthernMan]

I guess they were so in awe of Tim Tebow they didn't notice Denver was in an illegal formation! Man, wouldn't you hate to be a Steelers fan right now?

 

PTR

 

This is nitpicking to the nth degree. The whole left side of center is lined up a little crooked. The left guard is probably the one responsible for getting it out of alignment.

OK, so they're not perfectly parallel with the line markers - big deal. The players aren't synchronized swimmers, the USC marching band or the Blue Angels. So they're formation was off by 8 inches....it wasn't really violating the spirit of the rule.

 

The Steelers blew coverage and deserved to lose. End of story.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

This is nitpicking to the nth degree. The whole left side of center is lined up a little crooked. The left guard is probably the one responsible for getting it out of alignment.

OK, so they're not perfectly parallel with the line markers - big deal. The players aren't synchronized swimmers, the USC marching band or the Blue Angels. So they're formation was off by 8 inches....it wasn't really violating the spirit of the rule.

 

The Steelers blew coverage and deserved to lose. End of story.

And what would you say if the rule was enforced against the Bills and it cost them a touchdown and led to a defeat?

 

My point is that you have to call it every time or just get rid of the rule.

 

 

[Max997]

and yet it had no impact on the play itself...not like it was an illegal lateral or anything

 

seriously, Denver got screwed on a fumble that wasnt earlier in the game

 

Pitt should be more concerned with how badly they were outcoached in that game

[section122]

 

I don't like the suggestion (by Perreira) that the rule is arbitrarily enforced.

 

It shouldn't be a rule that is sometimes enforced… the rule is very simple…

 

Somewhere in here is a Stevie Johnson joke I just can't find it

[BuffaloBillsForever]

I guess they were so in awe of Tim Tebow they didn't notice Denver was in an illegal formation! Man, wouldn't you hate to be a Steelers fan right now?

 

PTR

 

Not really concerning. This is nitpicking to the nth degree about the officiating. Sometimes you get these calls, other times you don't and they are missed. You must be one of those people that thought Denver didn't have a chance this game because of Tebow and now your bitter? The bigger issue with calls in this game was the backwards pass that can't be ruled a fumble after review. Now that's a travesty!

Edited January 11, 2012 by BuffaloBillsForever

[RyanC883]

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/steelers/s_775981.html

 

Steelers dont' seem to care about the non-call. They are rightly more upset at how they played the game. They were severely out-coached, and lost the game because once they got in FG range, Ben took a sack, a delay of game, and another sack. Fixes: throw the ball away and call time out!. The fact he held onto the ball so longs indicates poor coaching. Once in FG range to win the game, throw the ball away. OR EVEN BETTER.. Redman was having an awesome game, why not run some draw plays or run him in some other variant in that situation.

Edited January 11, 2012 by RyanC883

[DrDawkinstein]

And what would you say if the rule was enforced against the Bills and it cost them a touchdown and led to a defeat?

 

My point is that you have to call it every time or just get rid of the rule.

 

Or third option, we understand the rule as the players and refs do. And that is mostly concerning guys that line up in 2-point stances, or in the backfield as a RB.

 

Most of the time (99%?) you see this penalty called, it is because a WR or TE was not up on the line.

 

It's understood (by both Offesive and Defensive players) that if a guy lines up next to an OL, in a 3 point stance, he is "on the line". Especially in cases like the one pictured where we are talking a matter of inches. He is not lined up with his shoulders behind the OT. The entire line tapers.

 

Sure it's just more ambiguity and confusion, but this is something that has been going on for decades and no one has a problem with it. Sounds like Chris Chase at Yahoo was really reaching.

 

I passed a Trooper yesterday while going 70 in a 55, but he didnt even blink because that is standard speed on that highway in Atlanta, and I was being passed. Should we just throw away speed limits then? Or was he most likely waiting for the guy going 90 and weaving through traffic?

Edited January 11, 2012 by DrDareustein

[Maddog69]

1.) If you look hard enough, multiple penalties can be called on each and every play in the NFL

2.) Refs are human and make mistakes. They miss calls. Get over it

3.) The Steelers still blew coverage on the play and got beat. Not because of a blown call, but because they blew the coverage

4.) Roethlisberger is a serial rapist and should be in jail, therefore by the logic of this thread, the Steelers should forfeit every game he has been on the roster since the crimes occured.

5.) James Harrison's selfish penalty for the late hit on Tebow cost Pitt this game more than this missed penalty.

[Cookiemonster]

A little off topic here, but I am gonna go on record stating that Big Ben will never

win another championship. Same thing for Michael Vick. No way the NFL will let it happen,

and have either one of them be the poster boy for the NFL.

-a suspected/accused serial rapist, and a convicted felon, are not what the NFL wants to promote.

They have latched on to Tebow for the time being, and when he is finally exposed, Fitz will become

their poster boy again, as long as he is producing and winning. He was the man early in the season,

and as soon as his performance and wins dropped off, they dropped him like a a bad Tebow pass.

[tennesseeboy]

no big thing. On appropriate review in critical games of the season we would find innumberable holding penalties, pass interferences, unsportsmanlike conducts to call back all sorts of things on the day after. It is what it is, and if the ref didn't see it...that's the breaks.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Or third option, we understand the rule as the players and refs do. And that is mostly concerning guys that line up in 2-point stances, or in the backfield as a RB.

 

Most of the time (99%?) you see this penalty called, it is because a WR or TE was not up on the line.

 

It's understood (by both Offesive and Defensive players) that if a guy lines up next to an OL, in a 3 point stance, he is "on the line". Especially in cases like the one pictured where we are talking a matter of inches. He is not lined up with his shoulders behind the OT. The entire line tapers.

 

Sure it's just more ambiguity and confusion, but this is something that has been going on for decades and no one has a problem with it. Sounds like Chris Chase at Yahoo was really reaching.

 

I passed a Trooper yesterday while going 70 in a 55, but he didnt even blink because that is standard speed on that highway in Atlanta, and I was being passed. Should we just throw away speed limits then? Or was he most likely waiting for the guy going 90 and weaving through traffic?

I really reject this argument, Doc.

 

Hundreds of millions of dollars ride on the outcome of these games. And it's not only the financial aspect of things.

 

Think about The Music City Miracle… to me that was too close to call. I'm probably in the minority here but that's not my point.

 

Now imagine if it was a clear cut forward pass and that the refs missed the call.

 

Now imagine how an entire fan base, an entire city, the careers of players and coaches and everyone in the organization would be affected about being screwed by an extremely important non-call which decided a playoff game.

 

I think people are misunderstanding me.

 

It's not the reason Pittsburgh lost and I'm glad they lost.

 

But the casual approach to enforcement of this rule is very wrong.

 

 

 

no big thing. On appropriate review in critical games of the season we would find innumberable holding penalties, pass interferences, unsportsmanlike conducts to call back all sorts of things on the day after. It is what it is, and if the ref didn't see it...that's the breaks.

Again disagree.

 

This is not like holding.

 

This type of infraction is like Too Many Men on the Field.

 

 

[The AntiFin]

Somewhere in here is a Stevie Johnson joke I just can't find it

You are correct, sir -- But it was in the "What can we learn from Denver" thread:

 

We can learn how NOT to drop a game-winning pass against the Steelers in OT.

[DrDawkinstein]

I really reject this argument, Doc.

 

Hundreds of millions of dollars ride on the outcome of these games. And it's not only the financial aspect of things.

 

Think about The Music City Miracle… to me that was too close to call. I'm probably in the minority here but that's not my point.

 

Now imagine if it was a clear cut forward pass and that the refs missed the call.

 

Now imagine how an entire fan base, an entire city, the careers of players and coaches and everyone in the organization would be affected about being screwed by an extremely important non-call which decided a playoff game.

 

I think people are misunderstanding me.

 

It's not the reason Pittsburgh lost and I'm glad they lost.

 

But the casual approach to enforcement of this rule is very wrong.

 

 

 

 

Again disagree.

This is not like holding.

 

This type of infraction is like Too Many Men on the Field.

 

 

Im truly not following your logic there.

 

We're talking about one player being a few inches forward or back. I dont see how that would be used to an advantage more than an OL holding to spring a runner, or an extra guy on the field.

 

What is the stark advantage that the TE got for being about 4 inches farther back than he should have been? How was it a bigger advantage than a hold or an extra player on the field?

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Im truly not following your logic there.

 

We're talking about one player being a few inches forward or back. I dont see how that would be used to an advantage more than an OL holding to spring a runner, or an extra guy on the field.

 

What is the stark advantage that the TE got for being about 4 inches farther back than he should have been? How was it a bigger advantage than a hold or an extra player on the field?

Yep.

 

You're definitely missing my point.

 

The point is that you don't arbitrarily decide to enforce or not enforce a rule that could determine the outcome of a game.

 

Yes there is a grey area but if you look at the photo this is a black and white case.

 

This was clearly an illegal formation and it was not called.

 

Would you be so charitable if this happened to our Bills?

 

They need to enforce this rule or remove it from the rule book.

 

edit: It has NOTHING to do with advantage or no advantage.

 

That's yet another reason why it's a bad rule.

 

 

Edited January 11, 2012 by San Jose Bills Fan