1. Are you a gamer? Come join us at GameNotOver.com
    If you are a gamer, then GameNotOver is your new home! Whether you are a PC, PlayStation, Xbox, Nintendo, mobile or web gamer, you will find other gamers to talk with on GameNotOver where you can get help, share reviews of the latest games and gaming technology or even wax nostalgic over the gaming days of old. Come join us and help us grow GameNotOver into a wonderful community for gamers!
    Dismiss Notice

Opinion: Proposed rule change

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by Snauty, Jan 12, 2014.

  1. GloryDaysRBack

    GloryDaysRBack Well-Known Member

    11,808 Messages
    3,839 Likes Received
    what kind of advantage did the 9ers get for their penalty? none...there wasnt even a play run...it cost them some inches and the series moved on...not sure why the OP is so upset over almost nothing...
     
  2. Super_Kazuya

    Super_Kazuya Well-Known Member

    3,701 Messages
    3,148 Likes Received
    If there's no advantage, then why is encroachment even a penalty?
     
  3. Gadfly22

    Gadfly22 Active Member

    661 Messages
    175 Likes Received
    The rules they have to change are; (1) the helmet-to-helmet rule, which can get called when there is completely accidental contact that occurs because 2 (or more) players are moving very very fast in a small space; and (2) the helpless receiver rule, which makes it virtually impossible to tackle a receiver in the open field since the defender has to make a sure tackle AND not make that tackle too violent.

    I'm all for protecting players, especially their vulnerable brains, but the helmet-to-helmet rule can't be a zero-tolerance rule (the refs have to have more discretion NOT to call the penalty when completely accidental) and the helpless receiver rule -- well, I don't know what to do with that, since it's called so inconsistently.
     
  4. vlad

    vlad Well-Known Member

    1,394 Messages
    342 Likes Received
    I understand what you are saying - its an interesting case. Those laughing at you - well I just assume they pick fights with people online.

    When Bowman (I think it was) jumped over the line I and it was just a "half-the-distance" I immediately thought - "well I'd just do that again and again and again until they score or I actually time it right". There is really no reason not to in a bottom-line way. It just would annoy people and potentially question the "integrity of the game" which I don't think anyone will care about if you win.

    Similar is seeing a time FINALLY take advantage of the rule where if a defender jumps into neutral zone you can just pop up out of your stance and its an encroachment. Denver did that so many times - its a no brainer 5 yards - I get so annoyed when our guys just stand there.
     
  5. jazzcat22

    jazzcat22 Well-Known Member

    18,325 Messages
    9,472 Likes Received
    So if the offense is backed up inside their own 5 yard line, and they have a false start, should a down also be taken away.
    Goes both ways.
     
  6. Snauty

    Snauty Well-Known Member

    606 Messages
    597 Likes Received
    actually yes, if no more yards can be taken away, i say give them a saftey. If you intentional ground it in the endzone its a saftey so whats the difference.
     
  7. jazzcat22

    jazzcat22 Well-Known Member

    18,325 Messages
    9,472 Likes Received
    Interesting thought.
    If at 2 yard line, either backed upped, or about to score.
    Say a false start moves it to the 1. A unsportsmanlike conduct penalty, say a chop block. puts it at the 1.
    An offsides at the other end, moves from 2 to the 1, a roughing the passer does the same. Free shot on the QB in a way. But that carries a 1st down, as offsides doesn't.
    actually most defensive penalties gives offense a 1st down.
     

Share This Page