Bad Call on Safety?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from yakv. Show yakv's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    i think brady played pretty well had to slide and move a lot 
    because of the pass rush , 
    i wathced the game again - the gaints just rushed 9% -4 man rush
    al the rest 3 man rushes
    and still beat the offensive line preaty badly on the 2 half.
    mankins had a bad game .
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    Idiotic call. But you have to expect some of those.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    In Response to Re: Bad Call on Safety?:
    What was amazing on that play was the way Mankins got pushed like a ragdoll by Tuck. Looking like a rookie.
    Posted by bobbysu


    I was against giving Mankins the big contract.
     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from kevin13130. Show kevin13130's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    In Response to Re: Bad Call on Safety?:
    In Response to Bad Call on Safety? : Though I was surprised they called it-thought it was nothing at first-it is the correct call. First off, Brady knew Tuck was coming and Tuck leveled himsoon as he threw the ball. So it was obvious he was throwing it to avoid the sack in the end zone safety. second, it's not the refs job to know the routes the Pats receivers are running-how could they?-it's their job to see iit's intentional grounding or not. Since there wasn't a Patriot within 20 yards of the throw-I dont even think a Giant was any closer-it has to be called intentional grounding in the end zone ie: safety.
    Posted by JintsFan

    You know, I think Brady's intent may have been to just throw it away. He even said as much on the sidelines. I just don't think the refs were in a position to make that call.

    Like you said, the refs don't know what the Patriots receivers' routes are, so how do they know that there wasn't a miscommunication between QB and receiver? If they don't know, then they shouldn't have made the call.

    What really bothered me though was not that it wasn't intentional grounding. I will admit that it looked very much like Brady was throwing it away to avoid pressure. It's just that kind of play is NEVER called. More than that, the refs took forever to make the call, which means they got together, discussed it, and made the decision to call the never-before-called penalty during the Super Bowl.

    Maybe if it were in a regular season game, I wouldn't have too much of a problem with the call, but I am very annoyed when a Super Bowl game is decided by a questionable call. I'll give you that the holding call on Wilfork was questionable too, I wasn't a fan of that either. It's the biggest game, refs, and fans came to see the players, not you. Put your flags away and let them play.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from kevin13130. Show kevin13130's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    An example of what I'm talking about:

    This is from the Colts game last season. You can't see the details in the video, so I'll explain the play. Basically, what happened was the Patriots were playing Cover 3 and McCourty dropped into a deep zone. The Colts receiver, I believe it was Wayne or Garcon, might have read the coverage and decided to do a hitch route to take advantage of McCourty going deep. I guess Peyton didn't read it that way, so he just lobs one down the sideline expecting his guy to be there. As you saw, there were no Colts receiver within 20 yards of the play, and McCourty makes a nice interception.

    So, we have some pressure off the edge, maybe rushing the throw. We saw Peyton in the pocket. We saw no Colts receivers around the ball. We saw no intentional grounding call.

    Was it because the ball never hit the ground? Well what if the ball bounced off of McCourty's hands? Do we still get the call? Looking at the sideline judge rushing over, I saw no intention of throwing a flag.

    So, other than the fact McCourty caught Peyton's throw, what was the difference between Brady's throw and Peyton's?

    If that wasn't called in the regular season, I don't know how you make that call in the Super Bowl.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    SPeaking of bad calls, how about Wilfork saying to the refs that the huge holding call against the Giants was a bad call?  That was truly a game changing call, if the Pats had won the game that sound bite of Wilfork saying it was not a hold would live in infamy with NYG.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    In Response to Re: Bad Call on Safety?:
    I just don't think the refs were in a position to make that call. Like you said, the refs don't know what the Patriots receivers' routes are, so how do they know that there wasn't a miscommunication between QB and receiver? If they don't know, then they shouldn't have made the call. 
    Posted by kevin13130

    Kevin, it doesn't matter what the receivers routes were supposed to be and it's not the responsibility of the refs to know.  The refs have to consider just two things: (1) was the QB about to lose yardage because of pressure from the defense and (2) did the ball land in the direction and vicinty of an eligible receiver.  

    Here's the rule:

    It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. A realistic chance of completion is defined as a pass that lands in the direction and vicinity of an originally eligible receiver.

    If the receiver runs the wrong route, that's sad, but it makes no difference the way the rule is written. 


     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    NO. TB should have at least rolled out of the tackle box then threw it, therefore no grounding.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from FenwayChuck. Show FenwayChuck's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    In Response to Re: Bad Call on Safety?:
    In Response to Re: Bad Call on Safety? : Brady was under pressure, about to be sacked if he didn't get rid of the ball. He was in the pocket. He threw the ball where no one was. He was standing in the endzone. Put those four together and you get a safety.  You don't see it much because it doesn't happen much.  But the call was a good one.  It is what it is. 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid


    Thge GREAT thing is though..... although some of this may be true, and although his two outside WR's were not that deep.... the Refs never figured it out until the GIANTS made the call for them.  That is absolutely right, so go back and look at it on tape....  there were NO flags until about 10 seconds or so after the play.... then the ref dropped his at his feet after watching TUCK stroll around like the purple Teletubby, and called it intentional grounding.  During that play Brady had slid left, and then back right....  DID he ever leave the tackle box?  I don't really know....  but I do know that there were plenty of things that this crew of referrees did that assisted in the decision of this game.

    The PATS lost.... had they just scored 3 TD's the game would have continued.... but alas.... the players on the other side did not allow that.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    In Response to Re: Bad Call on Safety?:
    Yeah.  Again, they never call that unless the QB is in the grasp. He threw the ball before being hit. Again, that's never called.
    Posted by RustyGriswold


    i saw it called another time this year. it may have been in the playoffs actually.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    In Response to Re: Bad Call on Safety?:
    In Response to Re: Bad Call on Safety? : But you don't throw to bracketed short routes. The Giants game plan was simple ... we've seen it before. Gronk has helped over come it.  Teams basically play their safeties 10-13 yards off the LOS and dare NE to go deep.  Rewatch the play, there were two players within five yards of the ball, Brady was trying to go up top and take advantage of that, but his WRs are old, slow, or midgets.  It was completely against the spirit of the rule because it was nakedly obvious the intent was to complete a pass and not avoid a sack. If he were trying to avoid a sack he would simply throw it in the dirt or to the sidelines, which would have been much safer, easier throws to just avoid the sack.  Intending to complete a pass ... categorically ... is not the same as intentionally grounding a ball. 
    Posted by zbellino


    So my question is WHY do we call a play inside of our own 5 yard line for guys to run 15-20 yard deep routes? Especially knowing they are "old, slow, or midgets"??

    The only bad call there was the play call to begin with. I can see trying to go deep starting from our 20,and I'm sure we had the play scripted before the game, but after that great punt we should have adjusted.


     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    i thought he threw it 10 ft over a Pat head near the line
    Was He in the act of throwing when Tuck came at him
    or before??

    i thought it a ticky tack foul
    they throw it away to avoid a sack all the time


    more importantly it reminded me of the Jet INT on the screen
    and that we screwed up the whole first part of the
    game

    At the beginning of the seaso i didn't think we'd make the SB
    Thought wiht all the Turnover that we needed another
    year to get talent

    this off season is the most important
    we need at least one new stud on both sides of the ball

    we are in luck tho
    We still should own the AFC East
    the rest of the AFC is on the decline
    save Houston and Balt and Pitt get older
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Bad Call on Safety?

    In Response to Re: Bad Call on Safety?:
    In Response to Re: Bad Call on Safety? : So my question is WHY do we call a play inside of our own 5 yard line for guys to run 15-20 yard deep routes? Especially knowing they are "old, slow, or midgets"?? The only bad call there was the play call to begin with. I can see trying to go deep starting from our 20,and I'm sure we had the play scripted before the game, but after that great punt we should have adjusted.
    Posted by TrueChamp



    I just rewatched the play--we had six guys blocking, seven if you count BJGE who chipped and was tangled up with a lineman until just before the sack.  Hernandez ran a ten-yard route, and Welker and Branch were both crossing at 15 yards.  The problem is that the Giants dropped seven into coverage and rushed just four.  None of the receivers was close to being open.  Sadly, the Giants were able to beat seven blockers with a four man rush.  Vollmer was the real problem on that play.  He lost control of Tuck, who then was able to blast through the line and get to Brady.  Connolly tried to slide over to hit Tuck when Vollmer lost control, but Connolly wiffed. Tuck clipped Mankins (who was engaged with another lineman).  Superficially, it looked like Mankins got beat, but really Vollmer was the primary guy getting beat and, if anyone could have helped Vollmer, it was Conolly.  On that play it would have been nice if either Solder (who was eligible) or BJGE could have provided Brady with an outlet.  But the real problem was that the Giants played well, dropping seven into coverage against our three receivers and still getting good pressure with four rushers against seven blockers. I suspect what we were hoping for was for the Giants to rush more men when only three receivers went out and for Brady to hit Hernandez in single coverage short. 



     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share