|
|
#81
10-09-2007, 03:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 1) How does taking away the coach's ability to call a timeout fix this problem? Yes, the coaches are the ones who are calling the TO's in question, but that's just because it's easier for them. There's no reason a player couldn't basically do the same thing: alert the official that he's going to signal for a TO right before the snap, then make a quick signal at the appropriate time. [/ QUOTE ]It was never a problem when this was the rule. Players calling timeout from field is no issue at all. Other side sees it coming. The coach calling it I don't even think his team has a any idea a timeout is coming most of the time. Otherwise they wouldn't try to block it. [/ QUOTE ] Huh? You mean the defense wouldn't try to block it? Of course they would, the whole point is to deceive the kicking team into thinking this is the real thing. Besides, they can't be certain that they'll successfully get the TO called. And yes, as far as I can recall, this wasn't an issue when players had to call timeouts. But lots of things have changed about the way the game is played since then. This is an NFL culture change (albeit, perhaps, one that got a nudge from a rules change). Again, there is nothing stopping a defensive player from doing exactly what the coaches are doing now. 
|
|
#82
10-09-2007, 04:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
When the coach does it, he signals to the linesman. The linesman then runs onto the field to tell the other officials, but not before the ball is snapped and the kick is taken. Neither the teams, nor the fans, nor the TV commentators have any clue until after the ball goes through the uprights.
When the player does it, he signals to the umpire in the middle of the field. The umpire then waves his hands and signals the play dead. Everyone sees this. So even if the defensive player times it perfectly and calls timeout right before the ball is snapped, everyone will still know the play won't count.
|
|
#84
10-09-2007, 04:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
Hmm, that does make sense. I suppose the player could just flash a signal to the linesman (after notifying him that it was coming), but I can see how it's a lot tougher to get them to kick the ball after the whistle if a player has to call TO.
I still prefer my solution, though, because a coach should be able to call the TO (players are sometimes too caught up in the moment to signal for the TO in a timely manner or to see the coach giving them the signal). Aside from this scenario, is there any reaon for the coach not to have that ability? Also, a sick fake-out: Say that the NFL does change the rules back so only players can call for time. On a last second FG try, the defense has 10 men line up to block the kick, with one standing all the way over by the sideline talking to the line-judge. The kicking team sees this, assumes the last second TO is coming and sleep-walks through the FG attempt (missing it, of course), only the defense never actually calls timeout. Genius, huh? I should be a general manager somewhere.
|
|
#85
10-09-2007, 05:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
[ QUOTE ]
Also, a sick fake-out: Say that the NFL does change the rules back so only players can call for time. On a last second FG try, the defense has 10 men line up to block the kick, with one standing all the way over by the sideline talking to the line-judge. The kicking team sees this, assumes the last second TO is coming and sleep-walks through the FG attempt (missing it, of course), only the defense never actually calls timeout. [/ QUOTE ]This would never happen.
|
|
#87
10-09-2007, 05:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
Seriously though, if the other team did actually see the 11th defended talking to the line judge, and if they did actually draw the conclusion that a last-second TO was coming, I bet they would be distracted by the thought, and hence less likely to hit the FG.
|
|
#88
10-09-2007, 05:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
[ QUOTE ]
Seriously though, if the other team did actually see the 11th defended talking to the line judge, and if they did actually draw the conclusion that a last-second TO was coming, I bet they would be distracted by the thought, and hence less likely to hit the FG. [/ QUOTE ] I don't know why teams don't just have one guy eat vanilla pudding out of a bag marked "Liposuction Waste" just across the line of scrimmage ya know?
|
|
#89
10-09-2007, 05:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
It's the anticipation that I would expect to distract them. The kicker starts his motion towards the ball and kicks it, but in the back of his mind he's expecting to hear a whistle.
Imagine you were playing golf (or bowling, or whatever you do). For whatever reason you think your playing partners are about to play a prank on you by blowing an air-horn during your backswing. They in fact do not, and you go through with your swing. Don't you think you'd tend to perform worse in that situation than if you knew nothing unusual was coming up?
|
|
#90
10-09-2007, 07:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Should icing the kicker be banned?
[ QUOTE ]
Are you actually a retard, or do you just play one on the internet? ... Jesus H. Christ, you're dense. [/ QUOTE ] What the hell? Your posts in this thread have been consistently unclear and irrational. Your arguments here make almost no sense to anyone, and you inexplicably believe it's more likely that that everyone else is dense and you're the only smart one. Then you have the nerve to attack the one guy who was able to find anything logical that the rest of us may have missed.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
