Rules question from Pack/Bears game re: replay challenge

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This game was rigged with a half dozen bad calls against the Packers, so you can just throw out whatever the rules were supposed to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean "illegally playing DL on a FG attempt" isn't a standard penalty?

[/ QUOTE ]

god this put me on such tilt

[/ QUOTE ]
When I saw this penalty my thought was, "man, glad Ibet on the Bears."

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would love to see his columns


[/ QUOTE ]

Link

Scroll down the page and you can see the entire archive back to the 2003-2004 season. He answeres questions every week during the season concerning the previous Sunday, along with various hypotheticals posed by fans.

[/ QUOTE ]

read quite a bit of it

mainly goes over arcane rules

Markbreit sucked as an official
the following shows how unaccountable and out of touch with reality officiating is
[ QUOTE ]
I understand that all officials are graded on their performance on a week-to-week basis. Naturally, 100 percent accuracy should be the standard, but what are considered acceptable standards? How many below standard games is an official allowed before disciplinary action is taken? --Stephen, Michigan City, Ind.

The percentage of accuracy for a complete NFL season, which is 256 regular season games, is in the 98 percentile. I would say that this is an astoundingly high figure, and shows how good the NFL officials truly are. I doubt if any business where decisions are made has as high a percentage as NFL officials. The officials are graded on their performances and certain standards must be met. If performance falls below these standards, then a possible probationary period is established. If the official does not perform up to standard in this probationary period, he is subject to dismissal.

[/ QUOTE ]
they aren't close to 98 percent accurate
even if they were, that is over 2 blown calls per game...LOL


My favorite answer
[ QUOTE ]

Can the ground cause a fumble if a defensive player does not touch the runner? --Mike, Madison, Wis.

The ground cannot cause a fumble if a runner in possession goes to the ground untouched by a defender. In the Atlanta-St. Louis playoff game, Michael Vick fell without being touched, and upon hitting the ground, fumbled the ball. A defender recovered it and the play was perfectly legal. Vick was not down by contact.

[/ QUOTE ]

[dlk9s]

[ QUOTE ]
There was some wacky ass [censored] going on in this game involving reviews. First, how the hell do they do a booth review for 12 men on the field and reverse it when even Madden can circle all the guys and see its legit?? Also, how did they not review the final play? Seems like that should be a standard booth review, unless they don't allow the booth to review plays if a team doesn't have a challenge left, but I don't think that's the case.

[/ QUOTE ]

The ruling that there were 11 men on the field was absolutely mind boggling. A 4 year-old could have counted 12 men.

And I agree about reviewing the final play. I actually thought Driver caught the ball at first glance. Turned out after seeing a different angle that the Bears player did intercept the pass, but I really couldn't believe that it wasn't reviewed.

Someone should also review the Packers play calling and clock management in the 2nd half. Even with all the penalties and turnovers, they still should have been able to win. The Bears played like [censored]. But I digress. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[SossMan]

My favorite answer

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Can the ground cause a fumble if a defensive player does not touch the runner? --Mike, Madison, Wis.

The ground cannot cause a fumble if a runner in possession goes to the ground untouched by a defender. In the Atlanta-St. Louis playoff game, Michael Vick fell without being touched, and upon hitting the ground, fumbled the ball. A defender recovered it and the play was perfectly legal. Vick was not down by contact.


hahaha

[Needle77]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This game was rigged with a half dozen bad calls against the Packers, so you can just throw out whatever the rules were supposed to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean "illegally playing DL on a FG attempt" isn't a standard penalty?

[/ QUOTE ]

god this put me on such tilt

[/ QUOTE ]

Guys just so you know this a rule that is put in football in peewee football. Each NG knows the rule from when they are 6 years old. It is standard, stradle the damn LS and rush through A gap. Don't blame the Refs, the NG is the idiot here.

[rjoefish]

Meh, when they were showing the replay of the FG attempt his helmet was like an inch or two over the centers pads. It was such a nitty call.

[legend42]

Does Mike Pereira (sp?) still have that segment on the NFL Network where he discusses the controversial calls of the week? If so, he usually does a good job clarifying things, though occasionally he'll leave you scratching your head.

[bernie]

Love that avatar!

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[gusmahler]

[ QUOTE ]
Does Mike Pereira (sp?) still have that segment on the NFL Network where he discusses the controversial calls of the week? If so, he usually does a good job clarifying things, though occasionally he'll leave you scratching your head.

[/ QUOTE ]Yes. Wednesday Nights on their daily news show.

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
Can the ground cause a fumble if a defensive player does not touch the runner? --Mike, Madison, Wis.

The ground cannot cause a fumble if a runner in possession goes to the ground untouched by a defender. In the Atlanta-St. Louis playoff game, Michael Vick fell without being touched, and upon hitting the ground, fumbled the ball. A defender recovered it and the play was perfectly legal. Vick was not down by contact.

[/ QUOTE ]


Doesn't this mean the ground CAN cause a fumble?