Jump to content

2013-2014 NFL Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The illegal batting call is right, but why does the kicking team get the ball back?

 

A blocked kick that never advances beyond the line of scrimmage is still a live ball. Pittsburgh never possessed the ball after the block, so when they illegally batted the ball forward out of bounds, it was still Green Bay's ball.

 

EDIT: Just saw a replay that showed that Pittsburgh did in fact, have possession of the ball, so yeah the refs f***ed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So 1. Rule is written poorly. In this case, there's no reason GB would ever deserve the ball back. 2. They botch the fact that he did possess the ball, despite talking about it for over 10 minutes. and then 3. They miss the fact that he was f***ing DOWN BY CONTACT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Dec 22, 2013 -> 05:43 PM)
Couldn't Tomlin challenge that the play was already over? #25 of the Steelers had a knee down as he latereled.

No. As far as the refs were concerned, Pittsburg never had possession so nobody could be down by contact.

 

Something else weird about the ruling. It was technically still gb ball at that point, right? So how could Pittsburg have batted it forward? Unless they already had possession, that wouldn't have been advancing the ball. So that's yet another way their ruling made zero sense, this time contradicting itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. As far as the refs were concerned, Pittsburg never had possession so nobody could be down by contact.

 

Something else weird about the ruling. It was technically still gb ball at that point, right? So how could Pittsburg have batted it forward? Unless they already had possession, that wouldn't have been advancing the ball. So that's yet another way their ruling made zero sense, this time contradicting itself.

 

Because it was 4th down, it is a potential change of possession. If PIT bats the ball forward out of bounds, it improves their field position when they take over.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the ruling was that possession had yet to change.

 

Right, but it's 4th down, so possession doesn't actually have to change for PIT to get the ball. They are still improving their field position.

 

Think of it like this: The play is a 4th down play where the offense gets barely beyond the first down marker and then fumbles. The defense then bats the ball forward back past the first down marker out of bounds. You can't go and rule that it is now the defense's ball because they batted the ball back past the first down marker but never recovered it.

 

 

Edited by HickoryHuskers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...