PFT: Gregory was not lined up in the neutral zone

[SuspectCorner]

I'm sorry, but Gregory's helmet appears to inch into the blue line.

 

[aikemirv]

Guess it's when the ball was snapped cause this one proves again he wasn't lined up in the neutral zone

NIce

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Funny I don't see 7 guys on the LOS for NO here either and that's a penalty. But it wasn't called. Hmm..

Maybe it's just one of those things that hapoens alot and doesn't get called..

Kind of like minor neutral zone infractions. Just like the former refs, coaches and players all said in the first place.

Either way this thread has reached ridiculous area. A bunch of fomer people involved in the game and the league their whole life think it was a bad call. A couple losers on a fan site that like to argue think it was a good call.

We won. Who cares? /Thread

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Funny I don't see 7 guys on the LOS for NO here either and that's a penalty. But it wasn't called. Hmm..

Maybe it's just one of those things that hapoens alot and doesn't get called..

Kind of like minor neutral zone infractions. Just like the former refs, coaches and players all said in the first place.

Either way this thread has reached ridiculous area. A bunch of fomer people involved in the game and the league their whole life think it was a bad call. A couple losers on a fan site that like to argue think it was a good call.

We won. Who cares? /Thread

Shutup twit.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Guess it's when the ball was snapped cause this one proves again he wasn't lined up in the neutral zone

Precisely genius .

If you're in the neutral zone prior to the snap you're allowed to move out of it (per NFL Rule Book). He was in the neutral zone when it was snapped as the TV replay shows.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Shutup twit.

Lol..umad bro?

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Lol..umad bro?

Lol, you dumb dude?

 

[Nightman]

Awwww, are you confused with the difference between offside and a neutral zone infraction?

Once again, (and it keeps getting proven with every post from them) the conspiracy crowd are so sincerely ignorant.

You said it yourself chief.... there is no neutral zone infraction until the snap ... at the snap it becomes an offsides call and would be immediately flagged......not 3 seconds later

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

You said it yourself chief.... there is no neutral zone infraction until the snap ... at the snap it becomes an offsides call and would be immediately flagged......not 3 seconds later

1. 
   (b) a defender enters the neutral zone prior to the snap, causing the offensive player(s) in close proximity (including a quarterback who is under center) to react (move) immediately to protect himself (themselves) against impending contact; officials are to blow their whistles immediately. If there is no immediate reaction by the offensive player(s) in close proximity, and the defensive player returns to a legal position prior to the snap without contacting an opponent, there is no foul."

What are you trying to get at anyways? If you watch football you see all the time the refs will allow an offsides play to continue as long as the defender doesn't have an unimpeded path to the QB. It's a free play for the offense.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Lol, you dumb dude?

Coming from you..that's cute. Lol

 

[Nightman]

Lol, you dumb dude?

Neutral Zone Infraction is when a defender flinches into the Neutral Zone and causes the offense to move prior to the snap

Lining up in the Neutral is Offsides at the snap since they can always get back if the Offense doesn't flinch

 

[Nightman]

"If there is no immediate reaction by the offensive player(s) in close proximity, and the defensive player returns to a legal position prior to the snap without contacting an opponent, there is no foul."

What are you trying to get at anyways. If you watch football you see all the time the refs will allow an offsides play to continue as long as the defender doesn't have an unimpeded path to the QB. It's a free play for the offense.

Neutral Zone Infraction is pre-snap
Offsides is at the snap

This was called as an Offsides

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Coming from you..that's cute. Lol

Yep, you’re dumb.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Neutral Zone Infraction is pre-snap
Offsides is at the snap

This was called as an Offsides

It's a moot point. Are you saying they were supposed to blow the play dead at the snap? As long as the defensive player doesn't have an unimpeded path to the QB, or contacts an offensive player prior to the snap, or cause an offensive player to react prior to the snap, the refs are going to allow that play to continue (i.e. free play).

SECTION 20 - OFFSIDE
A player is Offside when any part of his body or his person is in the Neutral Zone, or is beyond his free kick line, or fair catch kick line when the ball is put in play, unless he is a holder of a placekick for a free kick (6-1-3-b-1) or fair catch kick (11-4-3), or a kicker (6-1-3-b-2). The snapper is offside if any part of his body is beyond the neutral zone. The kicker is not offside unless his kicking foot is beyond his Restraining Line when the ball is kicked.

 

[Nightman]

What are you trying to get at anyways? If you watch football you see all the time the refs will allow an offsides play to continue as long as the defender doesn't have an unimpeded path to the QB. It's a free play for the offense.

You attacked me chachi and I responded to show that you were wrong again ....that is what I am getting at...this is what YOU said

"Awwww, are you confused with the difference between offside and a neutral zone infraction?

Once again, (and it keeps getting proven with every post from them) the conspiracy crowd are so sincerely ignorant."


You call people ignorant when you are 100% wrong......classic

 

[Kaiser]

Unlike the passive aggressive conspiracy theorist that snipe ambiguously, get corrected and then say "I never said that!"

You need to stick with your new words like "tantamount" because you don't know what Passive Agressive means. I've said repeatedly you are a clown and your arguments are silly strawmen. That isn't passive agressive, winning an argument with someone trying to justify an irrational personal hatred of Dak Prescott.

 

[Kaiser]

No, in absence of any actual evidence proving personal bias (which you admit you can't) it's not worthy of discussion.

You and Markus aren't worthy of discussion but here we are. Do you think the NFL really lost the Ray Rice tape of him coldcocking his wife? Do you think it was just an incredibly fortunate coincidence favoring the PR position of the NFL?

 

[Kaiser]

But the blue line shows you where the ball was and where Gregory's helmet was in relation to the ball (i.e., beyond the ball).

I'll stipulate it was an infraction but I'm still waiting for you to admit the blue line doesn't actually appear on the field.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

How the yellow line (and blue line) came to be.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

You and Markus aren't worthy of discussion but here we are. Do you think the NFL really lost the Ray Rice tape of him coldcocking his wife? Do you think it was just an incredibly fortunate coincidence favoring the PR position of the NFL?

Oh noez, the board’s chief resident conspirator is telling me I’m not worthy of discussion about his pet conspiracy.

Great.

Go start a conspiracy thread on one of the other forums.