FireChan Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 It obviously worked out for us but I feel for Suh. Tough to be a defender in the NFL nowadays.
Talley56 Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 Here's my take: if that's Russell Wilson, would the officials blow that dead? IMO, not a chance they would, because he makes plays spinning out of tackles like that. Yeah, agreed, I really thought that should have been a sack as well. If Suh had made any more of an effort to bring him down then he did he probably would have gotten penalized with today's rules. We got away with one there.
thebandit27 Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 As soon as TT was spun around and moving backwards. No more forward progress, Suh clearly had TT in his grasp and under control, and TT was in jeopardy because Suh could have body slammed TT like a rag doll on the spin and we would be stuck with EJ on Thursday. I mean no offense to you, but if the same play happened and Mario had hold of Tanney instead of Suh and TT, you and many many others would be crying foul and how much the refs hate the Bills. No, it was the refs for blowing the hold non call. But it was a great pass and even greater catch (just shouldn't have counted). I take no offense. I understand why you think I'd object if the play happened against Buffalo; I actually wouldn't. Reason being that I see that type of play happen every week, and it's simply not blown dead. I try to be impartial when it comes to officiating. For example, I was fully in favor of picking up the flag for OPI against Miami on the pass to Landry that was clearly a lateral.
Perry Turtle Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 I don't think Suh could have body slammed Taylor in that play even if he wanted to. He had no leverage due to his grip being too high and Taylor's momentum drove drove him through Suh's attempted tackle. Taylor's progress was altered, but it wasn't stopped. Usually in the grasp occur while the QB is going down and tries to throw the ball away. Taylor is not going down in this circumstance, so the refs gave him the opportunity to make a play.
DC Tom Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 It wasn't a bad call (or non-call). It is a bad standard of officiating and rules, where a player has to choose between getting the sack and a personal foul penalty, or not getting the sack. (And Suh chose correctly - loss of down was a better result than 15 yards and a first down.)
TheFunPolice Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 (edited) If I'm a QB I writhe around on the ground after any big hit because you know there will be a flag if it looks like a QB injury on a big shot Edited November 9, 2015 by TheFunPolice
Doc Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 It was the right call not to blow the play dead. Suh didn't have control of him, or at least legal control (it would have been a horse collar tackle), as Taylor was able to spin away and throwaway the football.
thebandit27 Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 It wasn't a bad call (or non-call). It is a bad standard of officiating and rules, where a player has to choose between getting the sack and a personal foul penalty, or not getting the sack. (And Suh chose correctly - loss of down was a better result than 15 yards and a first down.) Similarly, Suh used profanity in the direction of an official...the 2015 rulebook prohibits such language and labels it an unsportsmanlike conduct. He's lucky he wasn't flagged.
NOVABillsFan Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 It was the right call not to blow the play dead. Suh didn't have control of him, or at least legal control (it would have been a horse collar tackle), as Taylor was able to spin away and throwaway the football. I beg to differ. In my opinion Suh had complete control of Taylor on that play. I was surprised Suh wasn't his normal cheap shot artist. I don't think Suh could have body slammed Taylor in that play even if he wanted to. He had no leverage due to his grip being too high and Taylor's momentum drove drove him through Suh's attempted tackle. Taylor's progress was altered, but it wasn't stopped. Usually in the grasp occur while the QB is going down and tries to throw the ball away. Taylor is not going down in this circumstance, so the refs gave him the opportunity to make a play. a fraction of an inch higher and a take down would have been called a horse collar tackle.
KD in CA Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 I beg to differ. In my opinion Suh had complete control of Taylor on that play. I was surprised Suh wasn't his normal cheap shot artist. a fraction of an inch higher and a take down would have been called a horse collar tackle. And the dirtiest player in a generation just decided to be a gentleman on that particular play and not tackle a guy he had "complete control" over? Yeah, ok.
The Adam Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 When I first read the thread title, I thought it said Suh = sack. As in Suh is a giant nutsack.
CodeMonkey Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 (edited) Similarly, Suh used profanity in the direction of an official...the 2015 rulebook prohibits such language and labels it an unsportsmanlike conduct. He's lucky he wasn't flagged. Between the non-sack and the non-hold on back to back plays (the latter resulting in a long TD) most players and coaches would have had choice words for the officials. For damn sure Rex would have lost his ****! Particularly Suh given his past I would expect more than just bad words. It worked out big time for the Bills which is good of course, but they were very lucky on both plays. Edited November 9, 2015 by CodeMonkey
BaaadThingsMan Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/11/8/9693006/ndamukong-suh-should-have-had-a-sack-the-bills-scored-a-touchdown Do people really think Taylor should have been called down here? Progress was not stopped. Suh couldn't have tackled him or "slammed him to the ground" because he had him around the "horse collar" So why are people thinking this should have been a sack? Also, why the Dolphins didn't decline the holding penalty and go to 4th down - thats the reason the Bills had another 3rd down to throw a TD on. QBs throw the ball away all the time in those types of situations and the DLs with respect let go and don't "slam the !@#$ out of em" Suh was in a tough spot tho because his only play was to slam him and that would have been unnecessary roughness lol. Suh was sour because Miller moved him all around the field in the run game.
thebandit27 Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 Between the non-sack and the non-hold on back to back plays (the latter resulting in a long TD) most players and coaches would have had choice words for the officials. For damn sure Rex would have lost his ****! Particularly Suh given his past I would expect more than just bad words. It worked out big time for the Bills which is good of course, but they were very lucky on both plays. I'm not saying that I don't empathize with him; I'm saying that asking for that call is asking for a LOT. That's simply not how the officials call the game, whether we like it or not. I am also saying that what he said is, technically, punishable with a 15-yard penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct--I guess I'm pointing that out to say that it's also one of those things that doesn't get called. Players drop F-bombs during games; the officials very, very rarely call it...just like "in the grasp" on a play like that.
CodeMonkey Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 I'm not saying that I don't empathize with him; I'm saying that asking for that call is asking for a LOT. That's simply not how the officials call the game, whether we like it or not. I am also saying that what he said is, technically, punishable with a 15-yard penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct--I guess I'm pointing that out to say that it's also one of those things that doesn't get called. Players drop F-bombs during games; the officials very, very rarely call it...just like "in the grasp" on a play like that. Yeah sports are very different. F-bombs are just part of the vocabulary for hockey players and coaches, whereas dropping one (often referred to as "the magic word") to a basketball official will get you a tech every time.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 (edited) It was the right call not to blow the play dead. Suh didn't have control of him, or at least legal control (it would have been a horse collar tackle), as Taylor was able to spin away and throwaway the football. So he chose to not commit a penalty by taking him down nnd that momentary lapse of unreason cost him a sack. FWIW Doc - I was curious so I took a look at the stats for the dirty fish N. Suh. It appears he is trying to clean up his act. http://www.nflpenalties.com/team/miami-dolphins?year=2015&view=players Neutral Zone Infraction (3), Defensive Offside (2) - http://www.nflpenalties.com/team/detroit-lions?year=2014&view=players Defensive Offside (4), Roughing the Passer (1), Face Mask (15 Yards) (1), Encroachment (1) http://www.nflpenalties.com/team/detroit-lions?year=2013&view=players Neutral Zone Infraction (2), Defensive Holding (1), Encroachment (1), Defensive Offside (1), Tripping (1), Low Block (1) Edited November 9, 2015 by BillsFan-4-Ever
Doc Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 I beg to differ. In my opinion Suh had complete control of Taylor on that play. I was surprised Suh wasn't his normal cheap shot artist. "Complete control" means Taylor wouldn't have been able to do anything. Suh merely had him by the jersey and as such, TT was able to get rid of the ball. If refs start whistling plays like that dead, the QB's would mutiny. QBs throw the ball away all the time in those types of situations and the DLs with respect let go and don't "slam the !@#$ out of em" Suh was in a tough spot tho because his only play was to slam him and that would have been unnecessary roughness lol. Suh was sour because Miller moved him all around the field in the run game. I'm not sure why anyone thinks Suh needed to "slam him down"? He had him by the jersey. He could have spun TT to the ground or pulled him down, unless he was grasping the collar area. There would have been no foul in those situations. So he chose to not commit a penalty by taking him down nnd that momentary lapse of unreason cost him a sack. FWIW Doc - I was curious so I took a look at the stats for the dirty fish N. Suh. It appears he is trying to clean up his act. http://www.nflpenalties.com/team/miami-dolphins?year=2015&view=players Neutral Zone Infraction (3), Defensive Offside (2) - http://www.nflpenalties.com/team/detroit-lions?year=2014&view=players Defensive Offside (4), Roughing the Passer (1), Face Mask (15 Yards) (1), Encroachment (1) http://www.nflpenalties.com/team/detroit-lions?year=2013&view=players Neutral Zone Infraction (2), Defensive Holding (1), Encroachment (1), Defensive Offside (1), Tripping (1), Low Block (1) If he took him down with a horse collar tackle, which is what he would have had to do, he'd have gotten a penalty and the sack would have been negated.
Dragonborn10 Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 It was a sack. If that was Hughes and Brady we would be screaming for a sack. I love how no one is complaining about the officiating in this game. The Bills were gifted a TD there with the missed sack and the missed hold on the next play.
peterpan Posted November 9, 2015 Author Posted November 9, 2015 Turning point of the game. Should have been a sack and punt. Instead, no call and touchdown on next play. Can't stand the Dolphins, but it Suh had tossed him to the ground, he would have been penalized and probably fined based on his past. The NFL doesn't like defense anymore. Suh coulda killed him and obviously eased up to avoid a penalty. I think the only reason he didnt throw him down is because it would have been a horse collar. It was a sack. If that was Hughes and Brady we would be screaming for a sack. I love how no one is complaining about the officiating in this game. The Bills were gifted a TD there with the missed sack and the missed hold on the next play. No I wouldn't be, because thats not even close to being a sack. And I am impartial. I was bitching during this game about the officiating to my friend, but you know what, I was complaining because the DOLPHINS were getting the shaft.
DC Tom Posted November 9, 2015 Posted November 9, 2015 It was a sack. If that was Hughes and Brady we would be screaming for a sack. I love how no one is complaining about the officiating in this game. The Bills were gifted a TD there with the missed sack and the missed hold on the next play. It wasn't a missed sack. Suh didn't have control, and Taylor could conceivably have gotten away (or at least avoided the sack, which is what happened.) But anything Suh did at that point to gain control and get the sack would have been a personal foul. Basically, the moment Suh grabbed him, he couldn't sack him. That's not even bad officiating - it's a bad set of rules.
Recommended Posts