Why did clock stop after Allen’s amazing 3rd and 13 run

[Process]

5 minutes ago, MJS said:

Why is it dumb? It makes sense to me.

How is it NOT dumb? If the dolphins didnt commit a penalty the clock would have ran. They committed a penalty and we declined. It should be like it never happened. Instead they get a huge benefit.

[MJS]

1 minute ago, Charles Romes said:

It’s dumb because the defense can gain for its team a massive time advantage - possibly preserving a chance to win - by committing a penalty.  

Only if the penalties are declined. This is a pretty rare thing that has happened. There is no way for the defense to win by committing penalties on purpose because the offense would get free yards down the field.

2 minutes ago, YattaOkasan said:

cause after you see someone make the first down you should commit a penalty to stop the clock.  its weird but the dolphins benefited from this rule despite being the team that committed the penalty.  if we decline the penalty and got the first down on our own we should be able to burn the clock.  if we accept the penalty to get the first down then yeah it should stop.  

Most of those penalties you can commit after a first down would tack on yards at the end of the run, though.

1 minute ago, Process said:

How is it NOT dumb? If the dolphins didnt commit a penalty the clock would have ran. They committed a penalty and we declined. It should be like it never happened. Instead they get a huge benefit.

We're talking about something that probably happens pretty rarely.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

4 minutes ago, YattaOkasan said:

cause after you see someone make the first down you should commit a penalty to stop the clock.  its weird but the dolphins benefited from this rule despite being the team that committed the penalty.  if we decline the penalty and got the first down on our own we should be able to burn the clock.  if we accept the penalty to get the first down then yeah it should stop.  

And I’m taking it further. If a ref wanted to influence the outcome they can by throwing a flag and stopping the clock. 
 

Now don’t get me wrong, it was a blatant hold on Miami but you’re telling me Miami didn’t hold another time during the game?

[GunnerBill]

9 minutes ago, QB Bills said:

This isn't technically true or the defender on a losing team would jump offside pre-snap all the time late in games (like during a qb kneel-down). I believe it has to be a post-snap penalty for this to be enforced.

 

Yea pre-snap penalties the clock will stop but the ref can start the play clock on ready for play rather than on the snap.

[Jukester]

10 minutes ago, Process said:

How is it NOT dumb? If the dolphins didnt commit a penalty the clock would have ran. They committed a penalty and we declined. It should be like it never happened. Instead they get a huge benefit.

But we didn’t decline it. We accepted the penalty and the extra 5 yards was added to the end of the run as someone else explained above.

[UKBillFan]

1 minute ago, Jukester said:

But we didn’t decline it. We accepted the penalty and the extra 5 yards was added to the end of the run as someone else explained above.

 

But it wouldn't have made a difference whether the Bills declined or accepted the penalty. The clock would have still stopped and not restarted until the next snap.

[Jukester]

Just now, UKBillFan said:

 

But it wouldn't have made a difference whether the Bills declined or accepted the penalty. The clock would have still stopped and not restarted until the next snap.

Correct, either way the clock stops.

 

[Ta111]

1 hour ago, MJS said:

Why is it dumb? It makes sense to me.

Because it allows the D to get a “free” timeout by causing a penalty.

1 hour ago, Jukester said:

But we didn’t decline it. We accepted the penalty and the extra 5 yards was added to the end of the run as someone else explained above.

Yes, and the reason it was accepted is because the clock stops regardless. The rule allows the D to get what is essentially a timeout by causing a penalty.

[SoCal Deek]

That definitely needs to be changed next year. It makes zero sense to stop the clock which by declining it, essentially means it never happened. 

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

It’s another dumb NFL rule. One of the dumbest. I learn of a new dumb rule every year.

I agree.  Someone throws a flag, and at the end of the play the clock stops.  I get that. Officials need time to sort out and enforce the penalty.   But once that's done, why shouldn't the game resume in the same posture it was.  If the clock was running when it was stopped for the penalty, it should restart with a 25-second play clock.  Why should a team get the benefit of a clock stoppage when EITHER team is flagged?

[JaCrispy]

2 hours ago, Airseven said:

The run was so amazing time stood still.

Yeah that was up there with the KC leap 👍

[Jukester]

43 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I agree.  Someone throws a flag, and at the end of the play the clock stops.  I get that. Officials need time to sort out and enforce the penalty.   But once that's done, why shouldn't the game resume in the same posture it was.  If the clock was running when it was stopped for the penalty, it should restart with a 25-second play clock.  Why should a team get the benefit of a clock stoppage when EITHER team is flagged?

I like this

[Meatloaf63]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Nope. By rule the clock stops whether declined or accepted under 5 minutes.

 

It actually shocks me so many regular NFL fans don't know this.

ok, but why doesn’t it restart after the ball is placed? Another dumb rule that can give an unnecessary advantage.

[SoCal Deek]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

I agree.  Someone throws a flag, and at the end of the play the clock stops.  I get that. Officials need time to sort out and enforce the penalty.   But once that's done, why shouldn't the game resume in the same posture it was.  If the clock was running when it was stopped for the penalty, it should restart with a 25-second play clock.  Why should a team get the benefit of a clock stoppage when EITHER team is flagged?

Well said Shaw, and I’d ad the core problem is that as the rule apparently stands the trailing team is incentivized to purposefully commit a foul in order to stop the clock. That’s obviously a problem for player safety. 

[Shaw66]

3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

Because inside the final 5 minutes a penalty stops the clock whether enforced or declined.

Why is that the rule?  What's the rationale.   Once the penalty is enforced, why shouldn't the game be put back in the same position it would have been if no penalty had been called?

 

If you're winning and on offense, the rule denies you an opportunity let the clock.  If you're losing, while the penalty is being enforced you're calling the next play and getting up to the LOS.  

 

Only thing I can think is that they want to advantage the losing team, so they can have a more exciting finish.  

[GunnerBill]

5 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Why is that the rule?  What's the rationale.   Once the penalty is enforced, why shouldn't the game be put back in the same position it would have been if no penalty had been called?

 

If you're winning and on offense, the rule denies you an opportunity let the clock.  If you're losing, while the penalty is being enforced you're calling the next play and getting up to the LOS.  

 

Only thing I can think is that they want to advantage the losing team, so they can have a more exciting finish.  

 

I don't know why it is the rule but the overall rationale of the 5 minute timing rules (out of bounds is the same the only time the clock stops on out of bounds is inside 2 minutes 1st half and inside 5 second) is to preserve time in the game to encourage close finishes. 

[TrentEdwardsCheckDownOn4th]

It's a completely ridiculous rule where the clock stops regardless of whether the penalty is accepted or not. Here it is the full rule:

 

 

"The change approved Thursday adds a new line that simply says that the clock will now stop if the offense commits any accepted dead-ball foul at any point during the fourth quarter or overtime:

If the game clock is stopped after a down in which there was a foul by either team, following enforcement or declination of a penalty, the game clock will start as if the foul had not occurred, except that the clock will start on the snap if:

(1) the foul occurs after the two-minute warning of the first half;
(2) the foul occurs inside the last five minutes of the second half; or
(3) the offense commits a dead-ball foul during the fourth quarter or overtime that is accepted;
or
(4) a specific rule prescribes otherwise."

I posted this in another thread after the game:

 

"Seems like a silly rule that could be exploited. 

 

For example,  if a team picks up a first down with 1:50 seconds left and the defense has 1 timeout left the game would be over as the offense could run the clock out. Instead , if after the player gets the first down the defense commits a personal foul the clock would stop ? And now the offense could theoretically get the ball back with about 25 seconds. Mind Blown"

[Doc Brown]

10 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Nope. By rule the clock stops whether declined or accepted under 5 minutes.

 

It actually shocks me so many regular NFL fans don't know this.

 

Edited January 11 by Doc Brown

[Doc Brown]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't know why it is the rule but the overall rationale of the 5 minute timing rules (out of bounds is the same the only time the clock stops on out of bounds is inside 2 minutes 1st half and inside 5 second) is to preserve time in the game to encourage close finishes. 

That was my first thought with the two and five minute exceptions.  I don't recall ever seeing this situation rarely ever happens.  If the Bills were down in the game it would've helped them as the clock stopped.  However, it's a rule that needs to be tweaked because we just saw it screw a team over by rewarding bad behavior by the Dolphins.  The coach (McDermott in this case) should be allowed to decline it and keep the clock running.

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

 

 

Yea I am not surprised Nick Wrong doesn't know the rule. He barely knows his own name.