Barfarn
  • Barfarn
  • Senior Member Topic Starter
6 years ago

Note how the Forward Progress rule that is among "NON-REVIEWABLE PLAYS" is about "Whether a runner’s forward progress was stopped before he went out of bounds or lost possession of the ball", which is NOT what happened on the Elliott play!

While "Plays governed by the line to gain" which was the case of what happened, is among the "REVIEWABLE PLAYS".

Originally Posted by: beast 



I'm saying slavery is wrong. You say, look, there's slavery all around...You say, look! the rule book says slavery is okay.

You're trying to be right; instead of engaging in a discussion, instead of opening your mind.

The NFL rules weren't handed down to Moses and no rule book can encompass EVERY situation. The 2017 NFL Rules have Chapter 15, its a page and half. You can read it online, you should instead of partially getting and old copy from a Falcons website. Can one master replay this just by knowing 1.5 pages? You'll note if you read the rule book; there is a thing called the "Instant Replay Casebook." Haven;t found access to that on line [for free] only have oral accounts of it contents .

The Casebook establishes the principles behind behind the rules and various situations. Based on what I know of this book, and which i have argued here; the replay did not offer these refs "indisputable visual evidence" that the spot o the field was incorrect. Because we dont know where the ball was when play was blown dead.

And we dont know the placement of the camera v. how far off the ground the ball was! If the ball was 4 feet off the ground and camera 1 yards behind LTG, the ball could look like its at 19 when its at the 20.
beast
6 years ago

I'm saying slavery is wrong. You say, look, there's slavery all around...You say, look! the rule book says slavery is okay.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU!

Just because you're failing to prove the refs screwed us on a play?
YOUR STUPID ASS IS SUGGESTING THAT I SUPPORT SLAVEY!
THAT THE FUCKING LOWEST THING I'VE SEEN ON ANY PACKERS SITE!!!!!!!!!!


You said the refs screwed us... all I'm saying is that the refs followed the NFL rule book. Unless you're like Adrian Peterson and think the NFL is ‘Modern Day Slavery’  then this has nothing to fucking do with slavery!


NFL rules

Article 4. NON-REVIEWABLE PLAYS
The following play situations are not reviewable:
(a) Fouls, except for Article 5 (g) below.
(b) Spot of the ball and runner:
(1) Runner ruled down by defensive contact or out of bounds (not involving fumbles or the line to gain).
(2) The position of the ball not relating to first down or goal line.
(3) Whether a runner’s forward progress was stopped before he went out of bounds or lost possession of the ball.
(4) Whether a runner gave himself up.
(c) Miscellaneous:
(1) Field Goal or Try attempts that cross above either upright without touching anything.
(2) Erroneous whistle.
(3) Spot where an airborne ball crosses the sideline.
(4) Whether a player was blocked into a loose ball.
(5) Advance by a player after a valid or invalid fair catch signal.
(6) Whether a player created the impetus that put the ball into an end zone.

Article 5. REVIEWABLE PLAYS
The Replay System will cover the following play situations:
(a) Plays involving possession.
(b) Plays involving touching of either the ball or the ground.
(c) Plays governed by the goal line.
(d) Plays governed by the boundary lines.
(e) Plays governed by the line of scrimmage.
(f) Plays governed by the line to gain.
(g) Number of players on the field at the snap, even when a foul is not called.
(h) Game administration:
(1) Penalty enforcement.
(2) Proper down.
(3) Spot of a foul.
(4) Status of the game clock.

atlantafalcons.com  wrote:


UserPostedImage
beast
6 years ago
The refs followed the NFL rule book (as seen below), if the refs following the rule book is screwing you, then get in line behind the Cowboys and Dez Bryant's non-catch in the playoff game which seemed to help the Packers.

Article 4. NON-REVIEWABLE PLAYS
The following play situations are not reviewable:
(a) Fouls, except for Article 5 (g) below.
(b) Spot of the ball and runner:
(1) Runner ruled down by defensive contact or out of bounds (not involving fumbles or the line to gain).
(2) The position of the ball not relating to first down or goal line.
(3) Whether a runner’s forward progress was stopped before he went out of bounds or lost possession of the ball.
(4) Whether a runner gave himself up.
(c) Miscellaneous:
(1) Field Goal or Try attempts that cross above either upright without touching anything.
(2) Erroneous whistle.
(3) Spot where an airborne ball crosses the sideline.
(4) Whether a player was blocked into a loose ball.
(5) Advance by a player after a valid or invalid fair catch signal.
(6) Whether a player created the impetus that put the ball into an end zone.

Article 5. REVIEWABLE PLAYS
The Replay System will cover the following play situations:
(a) Plays involving possession.
(b) Plays involving touching of either the ball or the ground.
(c) Plays governed by the goal line.
(d) Plays governed by the boundary lines.
(e) Plays governed by the line of scrimmage.
(f) Plays governed by the line to gain.
(g) Number of players on the field at the snap, even when a foul is not called.
(h) Game administration:
(1) Penalty enforcement.
(2) Proper down.
(3) Spot of a foul.
(4) Status of the game clock.


UserPostedImage
Barfarn
  • Barfarn
  • Senior Member Topic Starter
6 years ago


Edit, I think Elliott's reach was the peak of his forward progress. No issue with that play at all.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I'm sure you know; but I think you may be forgetting an aspect of "forward progress."

Sec. 13 Art 1. FORWARD PROGRESS. "The Forward Progress of a runner or airborne receiver is the point at which his advance toward his opponent’s goal ends and is the spot at which the ball is declared dead by rule, irrespective of the runner or receiver being pushed or carried backward by an opponent [Emphasis added]."

Obviously, if Elliot ran to the 19 and intentionally circled back and got tackled at the 25, his "forward progress" is not the 19.

The spot under the rule of FP can only be utilized if the ball carrier was "pushed or carried backward by the opponent" if Elliot reached the ball to the 19 and pulled in back to the 20 on his own accord, his forward progress by rule CANNOT be spotted at the 19.

And I dont see any Packer pushing or carrying the ball or Elliot backward! Elliot pulled the ball back on his own accord.
beast
6 years ago

And I dont see any Packer pushing or carrying the ball or Elliot backward! Elliot pulled the ball back on his own accord.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 


Clearly there is a big mass of Packers pushing there, for those that can see.




UserPostedImage
Barfarn
  • Barfarn
  • Senior Member Topic Starter
6 years ago

Clearly there is a big mass of Packers pushing there, for those that can see.

Originally Posted by: beast 



Com'mon man, first ya say I gotta follow the rules, which I've been doing all along; then you keep rewriting them. Man, what is up with you today...😂. You see what's comming dont ya...😂.

Pushing in the rule refers to pushing the ball carrier backward. Not Clark pushing Fredrick or Lowry pushing Martin or Moe pushing Larry or Shemp. The ball is extended, then the next thing that happens is the ball is pulled back by Elliot into his chest [The ball went from 19 to the 20 an no packer pushed or carried it from the 19 to the 20, right?].

what's the point of being right if you have to rewrite the NFL rules and misrepresent the video evidence before us? When you cant sensibly support your argument, abandon it! 😂
beast
6 years ago

what's the point of being right if you have to rewrite the NFL rules and misrepresent the video evidence before us? When you cant sensibly support your argument, abandon it! 😂

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 


You're the one that abandon it and went to that race baiting slave crap!

You're clearly making a claim you can't or won't back-up. Show us the rules that says the refs were wrong...

I've already posted the rules that said the coaches could challenge the spot of the ball for the purpose of 1st down and that you can't challenge forward progress for the purpose of out of bounds or lost possession of the ball. You haven't proven nothing...
UserPostedImage
PackFanWithTwins
6 years ago

Yes, refs spot the ball after very tackle. But, when the official determines the spot by forward progress, IT CANT BE CHALLENGED.

Let's try example:

First down marker is at 29.5:

Example A: RB makes contact with a scrum of defenders at the 30, they hold him up at the 30 with his feet churning, then 2 OLmen plow in and push RB down at 29, the ball is spotted at 30, no first down, he's ruled down by contact. The review shows that the players knee didn't hit until 291/2 and at that moment the ball was at 29. The spot of the ball is challenged ball is moved forward to the 29, 1st down.

Example B: RB makes contact with a scrum of defenders at the 30, they hold him up at 30 with his feet churning, then 2 OLmen plow in and push RB down at 29, the ball is spotted at 30, no first down, he's ruled down by forward progress. Coach sees replay of the knee hit at the 291/2, when ball was at 29 and challenges the spot.

It dont matter where the knee hit and it dont matter what the ball's most forward progress was as shown by the video.

THE SPOT OF THE BALL PRODUCED BY THE DOWNING OF A BALL CARRIER VIA A FORWARD PROGRESS DETERMINATION CANNOT BE REVIEWED! [The reason is listed in my previous post!-the replay doesn't tell us exactly when the play was blown dead, so we dont know were to put the ball].

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



Sorry you are simply wrong. The spot of the ball can always be challenged. It has nothing to do with down by contact, out of bounds or stopped forward progress.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
Barfarn
  • Barfarn
  • Senior Member Topic Starter
6 years ago

Sorry you are simply wrong. The spot of the ball can always be challenged. It has nothing to do with down by contact, out of bounds or stopped forward progress.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 




You say the spot "can always be challenged." Ignoring those challenges expressly disallowed by rule, this is simply not true. To prove this argument false, one example has to be provided.

You have one example, here's another:

3rd and 1 at the 5. RB gets stood up at 5, the whistle blows. The RB, with legs churning, at the very instant the D relax their grip, runs forward past 1st down. The coach throws challenge flag and he has video evidence to prove that his RB’s most advanced progress was in EZ.

Anyone, tell me what the refs will do? If you conclude they'll proceed with the challenge; then tell me what video evidence they can look at under the hood that can change or confirm the call on the field.

Your so close to the forest you cant see the trees. The purpose of "replay" is to search for video evidence that might cause the change of a ruling on the field. If the video evidence can do nothing to affect the decision on the field: the challenge will not be allowed, the coach wont lose a TO, they'll hand the flag back to him, saying that we blew whistle on Forward progress at 5, play stopped, this was a judgement decisions that cant be reviewed. This happens a few dozen times per year.
Zero2Cool
6 years ago
I don't even know why this is still continuing. Have not the parties all each vehemently expressed their opinions? If yes, move on. You can educate/inform as much as you want, if people do not want to absorb it, move on.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
dhazer (11m) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (2h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (4h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (14h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (21h) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (22h) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (22h) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
beast (25-Mar) : Simply fined in the week to follow
beast (25-Mar) : I agree with one NFL official, it'll probably be like some of the helmets hits, not really called by the refs on the field but simply fined
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Hip drop is not. Super confusing. Referees job is harder
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Swivel hip drop is banned
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Around The NFL / dhazer

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.