Peter King in MMQB today

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from sml1210. Show sml1210's posts

    Peter King in MMQB today

    King is usually pretty wired in. Yes, the league put out somewhat misleading videos about the rule earlier this year. But, the rule was enforced as is was documented. BB might have thought differently based on the league's videos, but he was wrong, as difficult as that might be for "some" to believe.

     

    Patriots at Jets, overtime, Jets kicker Nick Folk misses a 56-yard field goal. Patriots prepare to start a drive at the New England 38-yard line. I find this amazing: “The 2013 Official Playing Rules of the National Football League” is 159 pages long. There is even a half-page for “Guidelines for Captains,” including options on the coin toss.

    For the infraction called for the first time in NFL history Sunday, on the decisive play in a game that could have major playoff implications, there is one sentence. Twenty-five words.

    The sentence is on page 51: “When Team A presents a field-goal or Try Kick formation … Team B players cannot push teammates on the line of scrimmage into the offensive formation.”

    On the play in the Meadowlands, as the ball was snapped for the field goal, New England free-agent defensive lineman Chris Jones tried to shove another Patriots lineman, Will Svitek, through the gap between the center and right guard. Svitek almost squeezed through, but he was blocked by the Jets’ punt-team guard, Damon Harrison (actually a defensive tackle). The blocking didn’t matter. Once Jones shoved his teammate into the gap, the umpire standing behind the Patriots’ line, Tony Michalek, threw the flag. Correctly. “That’s a rules change for 2013 that a teammate cannot push a teammate into the opponent’s formation,’’ said referee Jerome Boger to a pool reporter after the game. “It’s any type of pushing action.”

    There was some confusion—partially of the league’s doing—when Bill Belichick said after the game that the call was wrong because it didn’t originate from the “second level,” or area behind the line of scrimmage. And there are videos from earlier this season in which vice president of officiating Dean Blandino refers to “the second level’’ when he interprets the rule. As Mike Florio explained Sunday night on Pro Football Talk: “The problem is that the NFL previously has explained the new rule on its official website by suggesting that the rule applies only to pushes from the second level.’’

    At NBC, a digest of rules is kept handy for the particularly prickly ones. And there’s no reference to a “second level” when discussing this rule. It is just as I have written it. The rule was included at the request of several offensive lineman and approved by the Competition Committee. The linemen, particularly the centers, felt the injury risk would go down if defensive players couldn’t cave in the centers by lining up right over them or having players be pushed into a huge scrum at them.

    Without the call, New England would have had to go 30 yards to be in position for a field goal. If the game is tied after the first possession of overtime, the next team to score wins. With the penalty—which was absolutely the right call—Folk had another chance and nailed it.

    Said Rex Ryan: “I was fairly happy about it. I was thinking, ‘It’s about time we got a break.’ ”

    Said Jones: “The mistake was mine. I take it. Put it on my shoulders.’’

    We will. And now, with the Jets and Bills winning Sunday, the AFC East is more of a horse race, with two games separating top and bottom.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeadowlandMike. Show MeadowlandMike's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today


    No no no no no no no no no! They changed the rule midseason.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from NoMorePensionLooting. Show NoMorePensionLooting's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    Peter King is a snot bag....

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeadowlandMike. Show MeadowlandMike's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The second level refers to the players "not on the line of scrimmage".  Go read the original rule. I've posted it all over this board via Curran's great journalism, which is what journalists should be doing.

    The adjusted rule now refers to the players as "teammates" which covers all positions, off or on the line of scrimmage. If this was what the rule was meant to be, why was it changed from Sept 3rd's version to what happened last week?

    THey NFL crapped their pants seeing it called in the game and they scrambled to edit their own press release, but Tom Curran caught them red handed.

    I don't care what King lies about or ignores, or what Bill Polian lies about on the topic. I go by facts.

    Yes. THe original rule, posted by the NFL on NFL.com for the fans to read, said "players not on the line of scrimmage" which is what "second level" means.  Putting BB's word choice on the witness stand as if it counters the fact the NFL changed who would be included in violation of this rule, is meaningless. 

    BB never said the rule says "second level" as a direct quote from the rule.   He just chose those words instead of quoting the same thing, which is "not on the line of scrimmage" and those players.  

    King's piece does not cover why this rule was altered last week by the NFL office where only the refs were notified.

    Tom Curran is the only one I've seen so far put it together with a timeline of events and show why the NFL messed up here.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    What does team B refer to?

    Tom Curran?  This guy?

     

    Tom E. Curran @tomecurran 3h

    @Nick_Underhill I just wanted my friend Nick to know that I think onus is on Pats coaches but more clarity could have been afforded. Woot!

     

    I think I understand now.  You cannot tell the difference between the letter of the law - how the rule is written and the talking points. I see.  It all makes sense now. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeadowlandMike. Show MeadowlandMike's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from WeDerrWEDAT. Show WeDerrWEDAT's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today


    I am going to make it real simple for you rusty since you are being civil if not irrational:

    Quote:

    The sentence is on page 51: “When Team A presents a field-goal or Try Kick formation … Team B players cannot push teammates on the line of scrimmage into the offensive formation.”

    On the play in the Meadowlands, as the ball was snapped for the field goal, New England free-agent defensive lineman Chris Jones tried to shove another Patriots lineman, Will Svitek, through the gap between the center and right guard. Svitek almost squeezed through, but he was blocked by the Jets’ punt-team guard, Damon Harrison (actually a defensive tackle). The blocking didn’t matter. Once Jones shoved his teammate into the gap, the umpire standing behind the Patriots’ line, Tony Michalek, threw the flag. Correctly. “That’s a rules change for 2013 that a teammate cannot push a teammate into the opponent’s formation,’’ said referee Jerome Boger to a pool reporter after the game. “It’s any type of pushing action.”

    There was some confusion—partially of the league’s doing—when Bill Belichick said after the game that the call was wrong because it didn’t originate from the “second level,” or area behind the line of scrimmage. And there are videos from earlier this season in which vice president of officiating Dean Blandino refers to “the second level’’ when he interprets the rule. As Mike Florio explained Sunday night on Pro Football Talk: “The problem is that the NFL previously has explained the new rule on its official website by suggesting that the rule applies only to pushes from the second level.’’

    At NBC, a digest of rules is kept handy for the particularly prickly ones. And there’s no reference to a “second level” when discussing this rule. It is just as I have written it.

    I bolded the information from the actual rulebook and italicized the unofficial or interpretted items.  I hope this helps you move past this.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    I'm still curious, why is Harvey ballbanger refered to as Rusty?

    Is it because his brain is rusty?  His football knowledge rusty?

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

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WeDerrWEDAT's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    I am going to make it real simple for you rusty since you are being civil if not irrational:

    Quote:

    The sentence is on page 51: “When Team A presents a field-goal or Try Kick formation … Team B players cannot push teammates on the line of scrimmage into the offensive formation.”

    On the play in the Meadowlands, as the ball was snapped for the field goal, New England free-agent defensive lineman Chris Jones tried to shove another Patriots lineman, Will Svitek, through the gap between the center and right guard. Svitek almost squeezed through, but he was blocked by the Jets’ punt-team guard, Damon Harrison (actually a defensive tackle). The blocking didn’t matter. Once Jones shoved his teammate into the gap, the umpire standing behind the Patriots’ line, Tony Michalek, threw the flag. Correctly. “That’s a rules change for 2013 that a teammate cannot push a teammate into the opponent’s formation,’’ said referee Jerome Boger to a pool reporter after the game. “It’s any type of pushing action.”

    There was some confusion—partially of the league’s doing—when Bill Belichick said after the game that the call was wrong because it didn’t originate from the “second level,” or area behind the line of scrimmage. And there are videos from earlier this season in which vice president of officiating Dean Blandino refers to “the second level’’ when he interprets the rule. As Mike Florio explained Sunday night on Pro Football Talk: “The problem is that the NFL previously has explained the new rule on its official website by suggesting that the rule applies only to pushes from the second level.’’

    At NBC, a digest of rules is kept handy for the particularly prickly ones. And there’s no reference to a “second level” when discussing this rule. It is just as I have written it.

    I bolded the information from the actual rulebook and italicized the unofficial or interpretted items.  I hope this helps you move past this.

    [/QUOTE]

    You are bolding the UPDATED rule which was done last week when the memo was sent out to the refs to also look for it with D Linemen as well as LBs.   The original rule, which has been posted here many times, only talks about players "not on the line of scrimmage", which would include the rule ONLY applying to LBs and DBs BEHIND the D Line.

    No NFL team got this memo, at least it has not been reported as such, which would explain the Patriots surprise.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    They changed the rule, they changed the rule!

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from NoMorePensionLooting. Show NoMorePensionLooting's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm still curious, why is Harvey ballbanger refered to as Rusty?

    Is it because his brain is rusty?  His football knowledge rusty?

    [/QUOTE]


    Uncle Dinko...you had me fooled at first....but Rusty pegged you dead on from the get go....

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from WeDerrWEDAT. Show WeDerrWEDAT's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WeDerrWEDAT's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     

    [/QUOTE]

    You are bolding the UPDATED rule which was done last week when the memo was sent out to the refs to also look for it with D Linemen as well as LBs.   The original rule, which has been posted here many times, only talks about players "not on the line of scrimmage", which would include the rule ONLY applying to LBs and DBs BEHIND the D Line.

    No NFL team got this memo, at least it has not been reported as such, which would explain the Patriots surprise.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I dont think so.  This was from the rule book on hand at NBC so I doubt they received an "updated" rulebook or I would think that Peter King would have said this is from the updated rulebook. I think another source could have been updated but the official rulebook, one that needs approval of NFLPA and Ownership to change(or "update") has stayed teh same for the 2013 season. 

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeadowlandMike. Show MeadowlandMike's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WeDerrWEDAT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WeDerrWEDAT's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     

    [/QUOTE]

    You are bolding the UPDATED rule which was done last week when the memo was sent out to the refs to also look for it with D Linemen as well as LBs.   The original rule, which has been posted here many times, only talks about players "not on the line of scrimmage", which would include the rule ONLY applying to LBs and DBs BEHIND the D Line.

    No NFL team got this memo, at least it has not been reported as such, which would explain the Patriots surprise.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I dont think so.  This was from the rule book on hand at NBC so I doubt they received an "updated" rulebook or I would think that Peter King would have said this is from the updated rulebook. I think another source could have been updated but the official rulebook, one that needs approval of NFLPA and Ownership to change(or "update") has stayed teh same for the 2013 season. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Why the two rules?  I don't believe Peter King.  King has been caught in lies before. The NFL's own authorized site posted the wrong rule on September 3rd?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    What did you say yesterday that team B meant ?

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

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WeDerrWEDAT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WeDerrWEDAT's comment:
    [QUOTE]


     

    [/QUOTE]

    You are bolding the UPDATED rule which was done last week when the memo was sent out to the refs to also look for it with D Linemen as well as LBs.   The original rule, which has been posted here many times, only talks about players "not on the line of scrimmage", which would include the rule ONLY applying to LBs and DBs BEHIND the D Line.

    No NFL team got this memo, at least it has not been reported as such, which would explain the Patriots surprise.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I dont think so.  This was from the rule book on hand at NBC so I doubt they received an "updated" rulebook or I would think that Peter King would have said this is from the updated rulebook. I think another source could have been updated but the official rulebook, one that needs approval of NFLPA and Ownership to change(or "update") has stayed teh same for the 2013 season. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Why the two rules?  I don't believe Peter King.  King has been caught in lies before. The NFL's own authorized site posted the wrong rule on September 3rd?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    cmon man, quit deflecting.  as you have said 50k times, GO TO THE SOURCE!  the rulebook says nothing about the second level.  As I said in what was my first post on this subject, they broke the spirit of the rule.  1st level, 2nd level, who cares?  He pushed his own player into the opponent.  Also, he WAS lined up off the line, did he have his hand in the dirt? yes. Was he up on the line like the guy he pushed? nope.  Def planned as BB admitted to and an attempt to skirt the rule that he was breaking.  He got caught trying to skirt the rule.  accept it and move on.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    Any reason to continue the pi**ing contest about a rule and its effects considering it won't change the outcome of the game?  NY'ers LOVE it!  Pats fans wonder why it took all season, and the time it was called to the benefit of a NY team, given all the PATs and FG attempts that have occurred this season.  Just saying and I flushed!

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from WeDerrWEDAT. Show WeDerrWEDAT's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today


    The sentence is on page 51: “When Team A presents a field-goal or Try Kick formation … Team B players cannot push teammates on the line of scrimmage into the offensive formation.”

     

    nothing about players not on the line of scrimmage.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeadowlandMike. Show MeadowlandMike's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WeDerrWEDAT's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The sentence is on page 51: “When Team A presents a field-goal or Try Kick formation … Team B players cannot push teammates on the line of scrimmage into the offensive formation.”

     

    nothing about players not on the line of scrimmage.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep. Go read the original rule.  Yep. You refusing to read the original rule does not mean it does not exist.

    [/QUOTE]

    The orginal text?  Do you mean the website or the actual book printed months ago?

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

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    Meadow u still here on an other teams website Have u no home ' have u no job have u no where else to go must be sad in that basement with not even other jests fans to talk to , so u hang here cause at least  pats fans r nice enough to talk to you

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm still curious, why is Harvey ballbanger refered to as Rusty?

    Is it because his brain is rusty?  His football knowledge rusty?

    [/QUOTE]


    Uncle Dinko...you had me fooled at first....but Rusty pegged you dead on from the get go....

    [/QUOTE]

    Apparently you don't know why he is called rusty either.

    Pegged?  Looks like 'rusty' has you fooled then.  With all the deception he does here you are going on record and say you believe him now?  Boy, I thought you were smarter then that.  I will put any amount of money down that I am not Bustchise and that I am not a jets fan.  So take that.  And if anyone ever can prove I am bustchise or a jets fan then I will pay pal you any amount of money and leave the forum.  Take that too! 

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from AFNAV130. Show AFNAV130's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:

     

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    In response to WeDerrWEDAT's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The sentence is on page 51: “When Team A presents a field-goal or Try Kick formation … Team B players cannot push teammates on the line of scrimmage into the offensive formation.”

     

    nothing about players not on the line of scrimmage.

     



    Yep. Go read the original rule.  Yep. You refusing to read the original rule does not mean it does not exist.

     



    The orginal text?  Do you mean the website or the actual book printed months ago?

    [/QUOTE]

    Actually, if you want to split hairs here, which you are doing, by the time Jones "pushed" Svitek, Svitek was already IN the offensive formation. I would agree that anything on the internet should be trusted but verified. Even from an organizations' official websites. It does, however, look really, really bad when you change things on your website after the fact. That is not good. Even if you have a paper rule book sitting in your lap.  So there is massive disconnect there. The best part is the tuck rule comparison. Yes both are big plays. Both, and apparently in this case, was called right. However, this call gifted the Jets the game.

    The tuck rule still required the Patriots to get into field goal position to TIE the game. They still had to score in overtime. Apples to oranges. And now we find out that the Jetsies "alerted" the officials. What a bush league tactic. I can see alerting about dirty players, or obvious penalties but not this. Think the NFL didn't know about this? Sure they did, they've admitted as much. They knew they would use it at some time. I'm sure the Jets did to. Why else did they attempt to kick an unmakeable field goal, setting up the Pats with good field position unless they KNEW they were getting the penalty? Sad you have to win a game like that, especially after they played as well as they did. Or maybe that's they only way they could have won. Either way it's utter garbage and never should have been called, especially since it was used to alter the outcome of the game.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    What the rule says now is moot. Obviously the NFL has a history of being anal when it comes to making their rules clear. That is irrefutable.

    The point is that the call was made on a minimal example of the violation when the outcome of the game was imminent and affected.

    I have no doubt, and neither should you (if you've been a fan for any serious length of time), that perhaps two to three other penalties could have been called on that play, because two or three penalties can be called on every play, if you want to.

    The real problem is, they wanted to.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm still curious, why is Harvey ballbanger refered to as Rusty?

    Is it because his brain is rusty?  His football knowledge rusty?

    [/QUOTE]


    Originally, some 30 bannings ago he was "Russ" or so they say. It is purported to be his real name. Rusty is a variation on Russ. That's what they say anyway.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from MeadowlandMike. Show MeadowlandMike's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm still curious, why is Harvey ballbanger refered to as Rusty?

    Is it because his brain is rusty?  His football knowledge rusty?

    [/QUOTE]


    Originally, some 30 bannings ago he was "Russ" or so they say. It is purported to be his real name. Rusty is a variation on Russ. That's what they say anyway.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Seems like you are the same guy. 

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm still curious, why is Harvey ballbanger refered to as Rusty?

    Is it because his brain is rusty?  His football knowledge rusty?

    [/QUOTE]


    Originally, some 30 bannings ago he was "Russ" or so they say. It is purported to be his real name. Rusty is a variation on Russ. That's what they say anyway.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Seems like you are the same guy. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Are you completely insane? Me and Rusty are mortal enemies here. LMAO@U

    Troll, go away. I really can't stand to see you constantly making a fool of yourself like this. It's embarrassing.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to MeadowlandMike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm still curious, why is Harvey ballbanger refered to as Rusty?

    Is it because his brain is rusty?  His football knowledge rusty?

    [/QUOTE]


    Originally, some 30 bannings ago he was "Russ" or so they say. It is purported to be his real name. Rusty is a variation on Russ. That's what they say anyway.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Seems like you are the same guy. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Are you saying Babe is Rusty or Rico?  I would pretty much guarantee that Babe is neither one of those guys.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Uncle Rico. Show Uncle Rico's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Uncle Rico's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm still curious, why is Harvey ballbanger refered to as Rusty?

    Is it because his brain is rusty?  His football knowledge rusty?

    [/QUOTE]


    Originally, some 30 bannings ago he was "Russ" or so they say. It is purported to be his real name. Rusty is a variation on Russ. That's what they say anyway.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Okay, that makes sense.  Thanks for the info.  Has he really been banned 30 times? What a loser!   I like the thought of his brain being nothing but rust.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tomhab. Show Tomhab's posts

    Re: Peter King in MMQB today

    This morning or afternoon Boston time Mutt and Marlony played the audio from a video on NFL.com that stated the Players from Team B (Defense) not on the line of Scrimmage could not push players on their own team into the offenive line.   I heard it and that is what is said.  It has been replaced by this link.  I also saw the article that they changed as well.  So if they have nothing to hide why are they hiding it?

    http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0ap2000000227096/2013-NFL-rule-changes

    Oh and FYI, I went through the rule book it does not say "Not on the LOS" but is every reference I read using Team B they were refering to the Defense...

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share