Freddie's Dead Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 No. LaFell covered the LT. The formation was legal. Hmm. LaFell covers the LT even though there are 2 slot receivers between him and the LT? If so, then you're right, it's not an illegal formation. The LOS was the 5 yard line, not the 6 as others have posited. NE had 4 lined up in the backfield, so the only question is whether the LT was covered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hammersticks Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I don't think officiating determined outcome. Has this been stated anywhere in this thread? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 No, it's one of the most fundamental rules at every level of football. Only the outside guy on the LOS is eligible. Both side, every play. http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/forwardpass It's in the first paragraph of forward pass rules/ Given their eligible receiver games of late, I'm surprised it went unnoticed. I'll agree with weos sentiment that it didn't effect the outcome of the play but I am surprised it wasn't flagged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 2, 2015 Author Share Posted February 2, 2015 Hmm. LaFell covers the LT even though there are 2 slot receivers between him and the LT? If so, then you're right, it's not an illegal formation. The LOS was the 5 yard line, not the 6 as others have posited. NE had 4 lined up in the backfield, so the only question is whether the LT was covered. Both Edelman and LaFell were in the exact same spot on the line. Therefore Edelman is illegal. Amendola is a half yard or yard back. If they are all off the line it's still illegal because they would have four of them. Given their eligible receiver games of late, I'm surprised it went unnoticed. I'll agree with weos sentiment that it didn't effect the outcome of the play but I am surprised it wasn't flagged. It probably didn't. Watch the LB on the TD side of the field. he doesnt cover Edelman, the illegal guy, and he doesn't drop back to block the lane of the throw. But it probably didn't affect the play. It's still a blatant penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I watched the scoring play on nfl.com and amnot sure what you guys are talking about. The Patriots had a TE on the right side of the formation and LaFell lined up as the split end on the left. They had 2 flankers lined up inside LaFell also on the left. Are you saying Edelman reported as ineligible? Trips left is not unusual or illegal. That class of formation was used thousands of times this past season by every team in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 The only blown calls I could clearly distinguish was the roughing the kicker by Jeron Johnson and the blatant swipe at Ricardo Lockette's legs (which tripped him up on a would be third down conversion) by the Cheats DB who slipped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I think only a screen cap is going to solve this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freddie's Dead Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) Both Edelman and LaFell were in the exact same spot on the line. Therefore Edelman is illegal. Amendola is a half yard or yard back. If they are all off the line it's still illegal because they would have four of them. It probably didn't. Watch the LB on the TD side of the field. he doesnt cover Edelman, the illegal guy, and he doesn't drop back to block the lane of the throw. But it probably didn't affect the play. It's still a blatant penalty. OK, I froze the snap. I see LaFell's front foot at the 5yd, 1 foot line. I see Edelman and Amendola's front feet on the 6 yard line. What am I missing here? (I tried to cut and paste the screen shot, but the forum denied my paste). Edited February 2, 2015 by Fred Jackson Jockstrap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubba Gump Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I watched the scoring play on nfl.com and amnot sure what you guys are talking about. The Patriots had a TE on the right side of the formation and LaFell lined up as the split end on the left. They had 2 flankers lined up inside LaFell also on the left. Are you saying Edelman reported as ineligible? Trips left is not unusual or illegal. That class of formation was used thousands of times this past season by every team in the NFL. Is this the same play where the lineman on the left side lined up as eligible as well? Not sure if that matters at all. I don't get into the ins and outs of all the eligible/ineligible crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 OK, I froze the snap. I see LaFell's front foot at the 5yd, 1 foot line. I see Edelman and Amendola's front feet on the 6 yard line. What am I missing here? Beats me. That's what I see too. And the ball is sitting on the 5 yard line at the snap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 2, 2015 Author Share Posted February 2, 2015 OK, I froze the snap. I see LaFell's front foot at the 5yd, 1 foot line. I see Edelman and Amendola's front feet on the 6 yard line. What am I missing here? It's close. But they are all within less than a yard of each other. That's illegal. It didn't affect the play, and I am never going to say it affected the game. They would have scored I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Is this the same play where the lineman on the left side lined up as eligible as well? Not sure if that matters at all. I don't get into the ins and outs of all the eligible/ineligible crap. It's actually not complicated. The two guys on the end of the line are eligible, the rest are not. You must have 7 guys on the LOS. The Mickey Mouse stuff the Patriots pulled in the previous games involved the numbers being worn by the players lined up in eligible and ineligible positions. Edelman wears an eligible number, so it is totally fine for him to be eligible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobobonators Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Send us your number and when we need an expert opinion on whether a 10+ year poster has a right to create a thread discussing a football play we will be sure to give you a call. Lmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Actually if you look at the game thread I said it immediately. Look at the play. There is no question it was illegal. And to emphasize that I didn't think there was anything untoward about it, I started the thread with "NO CONSPIRACY" I also called for conspiracy threads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 i heard a rumor the pats were eavesdropping seattles playcalling.You can listen to conversations just by shining a laser on a window. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K8prisoner Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I wondered how long it would take a Bills fan to fire up replays to detect uncalled Pats penalty's. Good work, that was fast.. Did you say that to him after you watched the replay or did you say that to be self righteous? It feels good to look down from on high ..If you watched it first and then thought it was lame then more power to you ...That is also an honest question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Did you say that to him after you watched the replay or did you say that to be self righteous? It feels good to look down from on high ..If you watched it first and then thought it was lame then more power to you ...That is also an honest question. Doesn't matter if I saw it or not. I never said anything about the play it's self. I was commenting on the fact that after every NE game many posters on here can be counted on to run the film backward and forward to try to catch something NE got away with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hammersticks Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Doesn't matter if I saw it or not. I never said anything about the play it's self. I was commenting on the fact that after every NE game many posters on here can be counted on to run the film backward and forward to try to catch something NE got away with. ...and why does this surprise you, Yoda? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K8prisoner Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Pitiful .. It's weak to know a fact and not post than worry that someone like you will call him a whiner if he is certain about a play .. The cliche is your easy self righteousness to call him out without the respect of actually looking at the replay . He pointed it out and was passionate about it , get over yourself . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 ...and why does this surprise you, Yoda?I guess because I haven't lived in WNY for 19 years and missed the part where the Pats where responsible for all the Bills ineptitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts