Video: Mike Pereira sheds light on (Romo) intentional grounding, free kick... more

[theogt]

When a guy is being dragged down it is clear he intends to avoid the sack. The point we were arguing was whether the QB didn't intend to ground it b/c of a miscommunication. Perhaps I should have said you can't judge intent in THAT situation.

Great, so let's call intentional grounding only when intent is clear and not call it when it's not clear.

 

[AbeBeta]

OK, then cops, prosecutors and judicial officers have to look at someone's intent everyday, in deciding whether or not to charge someone with manslaughter vs. murder, etc. Anyway, like other posters have said the entire rule is based on the QB's intent........

And as I noted - I was reacting to the idea of intent based on miscommunication -- that is - you can't judge if a QB threw the ball to an empty spot b/c his receiver went the wrong way. There is simply no way to accurately judge intent in that situation.

 

[AbeBeta]

Great, so let's call intentional grounding only when intent is clear and not call it when it's not clear.

again - the point was on the issue of miscommunication between QB and WR. How can a ref ever be expected to make that judgment without knowledge of the route? All you can do is ask if the QB was about to get sacked and if the WR was in the area -- not if the WR should have been in the area but wasn't.

 

[theogt]

again - the point was on the issue of miscommunication between QB and WR. How can a ref ever be expected to make that judgment without knowledge of the route? All you can do is ask if the QB was about to get sacked and if the WR was in the area -- not if the WR should have been in the area but wasn't.

So don't make the judgment -- i.e., don't throw the flag. You're either making a judgment that there was no miscommunication or you're making the judgment that there was a miscommunication. The only way to not make a judgment is to not make it a penalty.

 

[AbeBeta]

So don't make the judgment -- i.e., don't throw the flag.

Disagree. The intent refers to the QB throwing the ball. The rule doesn't deal with a receiver's intention to be in a specific location (or more accurately, the intention of the design of the play).

 

[cowboyrock]

The intent is to avoid getting their *** kicked.

That is about as obvious as all hell.

However, no one will ever be able to judge the intent of where the QB threw the ball.

Over here, over there, receiver ran wrong route, yadda yadda.

Everyone knows why the ball is being thrown. Nobody knows why the hell the QB threw it where he did so to make things easy, if there isn't a WR in the area, its a flag.

As a result, you get flagged if you a throw a ball in the face of pressure and it happens to land 20 yards from your nearest receiver.

Pretty simple. Sucked that it was called but it was the right call.

Then where are the calls when Cambell and Eli do it? tell me big guy.

 

[theogt]

Disagree. The intent refers to the QB throwing the ball. The rule doesn't deal with a receiver's intention to be in a specific location (or more accurately, the intention of the design of the play).

The determination of the QBs intent is dependent upon the design of the play.

Let's say a RB is to run a wheel route. As he's running the route, he trips in the flats. The QB, under pressure, throws the ball 10 yards beyond the LOS, where there's no receiver in the vicinity.

Flag?

 

[Hoofbite]

This thread has taken a curve towards the absolute ridiculous.

 

[BaybeeJay]

Go re-watch our playoff game against the Giants last year. Romo was called for grounding and he wasn't even under pressure. I think the throw was similiar to this one, but I may not be remembering it correctly.

I was thinking the same thing. Mike said that a prerequisite for intentional grounding is pressure, and in that situation I don't remember any pressure.

 

[theogt]

The intent is to avoid getting their *** kicked.

That is about as obvious as all hell.

However, no one will ever be able to judge the intent of where the QB threw the ball.

Over here, over there, receiver ran wrong route, yadda yadda.

Everyone knows why the ball is being thrown. Nobody knows why the hell the QB threw it where he did so to make things easy, if there isn't a WR in the area, its a flag.

As a result, you get flagged if you a throw a ball in the face of pressure and it happens to land 20 yards from your nearest receiver.

Pretty simple. Sucked that it was called but it was the right call.

Actually, the entire rule is premised on judging the QBs intent based on where he threw the ball.

 

[bbgun]

I was thinking the same thing. Mike said that a prerequisite for intentional grounding is pressure, and in that situation I don't remember any pressure.

He had a man in his face when the threw the ball. He did something similar earlier in the game, but Grant dropped the ball in the endzone.

 

[Hoofbite]

Actually, the entire rule is premised on judging the QBs intent based on where he threw the ball.

The "why" intent is far more important than the "where" intent because you cannot determine the where.

**** it. I give up on this thread.

I'm stepping out this mess. The rule is pretty damn clear to anyone that doesn't want to make an argument out of it.

Who's on 1st? Balls thrown where? No, hes on third.

 

[theogt]

The "why" intent is far more important than the "where" intent because you cannot determine the where.

**** it. I give up on this thread.

I'm stepping out this mess. The rule is pretty damn clear to anyone that doesn't want to make an argument out of it.

Who's on 1st? Balls thrown where? No, hes on third.

The mechanics of the rule are clear, yes, only after they've been interpreted to reach a certain result.

 

[bbgun]

How could they flag a guy who wants to high-five them?

http://img243.*************/img243/7136/33657442bz2.jpg

 

[PullMyFinger]

And the league might as well 'fess up and call it that too.

1. Marion Barber rule - face mask
2. Michael Irvin rule - pushing off
3. Emmitt Smith rule - taking off helmet
4. Roy Williams rule - horse collar
5. Eric Williams rule - hands to the face
6. Tony Romo rule - intentional grounding that isn't intentional grounding unless you are Tony Romo

6. Tony Romo rule - intentional grounding that isn't intentional grounding unless you are Tony Romo

OMG I cracked up at that one.

 

[Don Corleone]

How could they flag a guy who wants to high-five them?

http://img243.*************/img243/7136/33657442bz2.jpg

Hi 5? I think he tried to chest thump one of them later in the game...lol!!

 

[links18]

The "why" intent is far more important than the "where" intent because you cannot determine the where.

**** it. I give up on this thread.

I'm stepping out this mess. The rule is pretty damn clear to anyone that doesn't want to make an argument out of it.

Who's on 1st? Balls thrown where? No, hes on third.

The rule is pretty clear, but how it is being interpreted and enforced in the games by the zebras sure isn't. I have seen multiple QBs, in the pocket, when under pressure, just chuck the ball to the LOS or out of bounds, no receiver in sight and no flag. Did Perieira address the total lack of consistency in how IG is being called?

 

[RoadRunner]

And the league might as well 'fess up and call it that too.

1. Marion Barber rule - face mask
2. Michael Irvin rule - pushing off
3. Emmitt Smith rule - taking off helmet
4. Roy Williams rule - horse collar
5. Eric Williams rule - hands to the face
6. Tony Romo rule - intentional grounding that isn't intentional grounding unless you are Tony Romo

7. Jason Witten rule - toe inbounds, then heel out of bounds

 

[RoadRunner]

How could they flag a guy who wants to high-five them?

http://img243.*************/img243/7136/33657442bz2.jpg

Too funny! Romo got left hanging.

 

[bbgun]

Too funny! Romo got left hanging.

True, but they helped him off the ground in the 3rd Q.

http://img291.*************/img291/6125/28931628op1.jpg