Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 106
  1. #37

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!



    Quote Originally Posted by alienrace View Post
    That would only really apply if there was a receiver in the vicinity, and there wasn't. He wasn't attempting to get the ball to a receiver, that was pretty clear. It should have either been called intentional grounding, or a sack.
    McCoy is out in the flat by the sideline. No, the ball doesn't get close to McCoy, but that's because Vick was being hit when he throws the ball. There is a reverse angle from behind Vick where you can see McCoy's feet at the top of the screen and that Vick's arm is clearly moving in that direction.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn
    When a guy is being hit, the force of the hit can COMPLETELY change the trajectory of the throw. You can't call that intentional grounding.
    Agreed. I didn't think it was anything close to Grounding. There have been plenty of instances where a QB has been hit while releasing the ball, the ball ends up landing nowhere near any receivers and it's not called grounding. And, shouldn't be.
    “Talk's cheap - let’s go play.” - #19, Johnny Unitas

    Follow me on Twitter @ravenssalarycap




  2. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ellicott City
    Posts
    182

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    There are numerous ones in this thread and on this board T.

    And again, if Flacco for instance takes a 7 step drop that takes him 10 yards past the LOS, and gets hit while throwing the ball and the ball only goes3 or 4 yards forward, they don't call that intentional grounding because the hit impacted where the ball went.
    Yes, but the majority of the time that happens, a quarterback is hit in the back from his blindside, or doesn't see it coming, and he's not throwing the ball "to avoid a sack".

    In yesterday's instance, that was CLEARLY the ONLY thing Vick was trying to do was AVOID A SACK! That pass wasn't going near anyone. Like i said, usually a quarterback is getting blinded, and the ball may flutter out sideways- and that is NOT grounding- Vick's was completely differenent as he was just throwing the ball before his ass touched the ground. That *is* why the intentional grounding rule was created.




  3. #39

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by cbaywolf View Post
    Yes, but the majority of the time that happens, a quarterback is hit in the back from his blindside, or doesn't see it coming, and he's not throwing the ball "to avoid a sack".

    In yesterday's instance, that was CLEARLY the ONLY thing Vick was trying to do was AVOID A SACK! That pass wasn't going near anyone. Like i said, usually a quarterback is getting blinded, and the ball may flutter out sideways- and that is NOT grounding- Vick's was completely differenent as he was just throwing the ball before his ass touched the ground. That *is* why the intentional grounding rule was created.
    Post #37 by BMore pretty much refutes you arguement. It was an incomplete pass, nothing more, nothing less. You cannot penalize on what was intended but only on what took place. McCoy was in the vicinity but ended up no where near Vick's pass because the hit by Ngata change the trajectory of the ball.




  4. #40

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by cbaywolf View Post
    Yes, but the majority of the time that happens, a quarterback is hit in the back from his blindside, or doesn't see it coming, and he's not throwing the ball "to avoid a sack".

    In yesterday's instance, that was CLEARLY the ONLY thing Vick was trying to do was AVOID A SACK! That pass wasn't going near anyone. Like i said, usually a quarterback is getting blinded, and the ball may flutter out sideways- and that is NOT grounding- Vick's was completely differenent as he was just throwing the ball before his ass touched the ground. That *is* why the intentional grounding rule was created.
    What do you think of the Tuck Rule and do you think it was applied properly in the infamous tuck rule game.




  5. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    21,527

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by RavenusMaximus View Post
    You all must have been doing a lot of drinking in that bar then, because I and everyone I talked to said they could see it was intentional grounding the first time. I was surprised when they said it was a fumble.
    None at all actually. Training for a half marathon. Ravor put it best ....

    Quote Originally Posted by B-more Ravor View Post
    McCoy is out in the flat by the sideline. No, the ball doesn't get close to McCoy, but that's because Vick was being hit when he throws the ball. There is a reverse angle from behind Vick where you can see McCoy's feet at the top of the screen and that Vick's arm is clearly moving in that direction ... I didn't think it was anything close to Grounding. There have been plenty of instances where a QB has been hit while releasing the ball, the ball ends up landing nowhere near any receivers and it's not called grounding. And, shouldn't be.
    This.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  6. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    shrewsbury, pa
    Posts
    333

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by GOTA View Post
    If he was outside the tackle box he didn't need to have an eligible receiver. In that case it just needs to get to the line of scrimmage, which it did. I don't think Vick was outside the tackle box which it why he had to throw it to a receiver
    It bounced the the line of scrimmage. It hit on the 5 and bounced to the 2. The line was the one.




  7. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Westminster (FORMER Training Camp)
    Posts
    787

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    I saw the same thing B-more Ravor saw - feet at the top of the screen and could have been the target. The fact that it did not make it to the LOS does not apply to an intended target. If so, then every throw at the feet of a back behind the line when the pocket collapses would be IG; and I do not think it is a penalty.
    Captain Offense




  8. #44
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ellicott City
    Posts
    182

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    What do you think of the Tuck Rule and do you think it was applied properly in the infamous tuck rule game.
    I think the Tuck Rule is a fucking joke. Also in that case, it was clear that Brady was no longer passing the ball, and he fumbled the fucking ball! I have no idea why they made this rule except to try to turn the refs into clones- but the fact is there are still a lot of calls that are open to the judgement of the referees, so I don't see why that one should be any different (just as confirming that a receiver is in the area is always open to judgement- is 10 yards away in the area?). Once the QB's arm starts coming down, and it's clear it's not a passing motion, it should be a fumble. This rule is a freaking joke that infers that refs are incompetent.




  9. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    shrewsbury, pa
    Posts
    333

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    If you are going down and try to throw the ball away its grounding. Vick was trying to avoid the sack and have 3rd and goal from the 10. He threw that ball away.




  10. #46

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by cbaywolf View Post
    I think the Tuck Rule is a fucking joke. Also in that case, it was clear that Brady was no longer passing the ball, and he fumbled the fucking ball! I have no idea why they made this rule except to try to turn the refs into clones- but the fact is there are still a lot of calls that are open to the judgement of the referees, so I don't see why that one should be any different (just as confirming that a receiver is in the area is always open to judgement- is 10 yards away in the area?). Once the QB's arm starts coming down, and it's clear it's not a passing motion, it should be a fumble. This rule is a freaking joke that infers that refs are incompetent.
    Well, there we have it.

    Maybe you should be arguing that the rules are stupid instead of arguing that the ruling itself was incorrect...




  11. #47

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    What do you think of the Tuck Rule and do you think it was applied properly in the infamous tuck rule game.
    I think the league knew about that rule and they never called it until the best opportunity came up. With the country still recovering from 9/11, the Patriots had to win that game.




  12. #48

    Re: Arm going Forwad, Hmmm Intentional Grounding!?!?!?!

    You know why I know it was intentional grounding. Because Vicks body was at a 20 degree angle with his ass two inches from the ground before his arm starts moving forward. That has nothing to do with McCoy and trajectory. It's all about him trying to avoid the sack.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland