Just to beat a dead horse on this non-clipping issue, but tell me, does Hightower end up falling on his face (as he might were he pushed “square in his back”) or does he end up on his left side, as he would if he were pushed on his right shoulder?
Gah, try this. NFL Football Highlights, Clips & Analysis | NFL.com
That’s mostly the way I feel. I thought the Dansby roughing-the-passer call was lame but the officiating was on par with most games I see. If all the regular season games were under the microscope like this they would all have as much controversy.
FWIW, I didn’t think Ben had a TD; I don’t care what the replay showed, the Steelers short-yardage game was a joke all season long and they don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt on those plays. Bruce Arians is very creative with draw plays and all kinds of passing plays, run plays were very poorly designed this year. And that scarcely mattered because the line couldn’t create a push in the center of the field anyway, only Max Starks was consistently good in the running game and they rarely run to his side.
Yup, there it is, clear as day. A nice clean block in the side. Sends Hightower sprawling on his left side/back. Sweet. Cleared the way nicely for Harrison’s TD.
ETA: Longest play in Super Bowl history!
Wanna argue that his knee was down before he made the end zone, too? That’s a popular whine also.
That’s just not the rule. If a QB gets hit from behind as the ball is being thrown and it hits a lineman, there is no penalty. That the way it’s always been. This is the same as that.
OK, you are simply trolling now. There is no rationale that dictates that that isn’t a push square in the back. You are blinded by your Gold and Black glasses.
The one I’ve been hearing was that Warner was held while trying to stop the int return, I haven’t seen it though.
you know, the cool thing about this replay is that it shows that there was about 2 seconds left on the clock when Harrison is hit at the goal line. I thought the clock ran out. The Steelers would have had a play if they ruled Harrison didn’t score after all.
That’s such a great play. Still gives me goose bumps. And I don’t see any block in the back. Man, I’m black and gold blind.
That’s a complete fabrication. Total and sheer nonsense. There is no such qualification of a forward pass, versus a forward pass when the quarterback is being hit.
I mean, come on. It’s one thing to fantasize about whether a particular play is a block in the back, but to fantasize about there being special types of forward passes. Sheesh.
As much as it pains me, Hentor is right. No way is Woodley’s block on Hightower clipping. His right hand and forearm are clearly on Hightower’s right shoulder, not the back. It’s not even that close.
And the last play is just as clearly a fumble. Warner loses control of the ball before his hand starts moving forward. Again, not even close. Bitch and moan all you want about it not being reviewed, even if they had spent a year on it, it was a fumble all the way.
Bingo. They had a joke for a short yardage offense. Willie Parker is not Jerome Bettis. No power runner, no power running game. That Willie Parker up the middle nonsense hasn’t really worked all year.
OK, I just watched the replay and there is NO way that was an illegal block by Woodley, I do see the hold on Warner (as if Warner was going to pull down Silverback, haha) but that block was definitely to his side. I can see the confusion about Ben’s knee and Warner’s arm motion but this is clear-cut.
Dude, you’re wrong. Move on and deal.
Hamlet, with his Green and Gold glasses.
“Hey, it’s second down, we are pinned in the end zone, they really want a safety so they have most of their team as close to the line as possible, so let’s RUN IT UP THE MIDDLE!”
…
“Oh, fuck, let’s not try that again.”
The result of the play was an incomplete pass, the ball hit the ground before anyone gained control of it, the clock stopped. There might have been illegal touching on the play, but that doesn’t make the pass incomplete. Had the lineman caught the ball, it would have been a catch and the clock would have kept running. After the play, the foul (if it occurred) would have been called. In the first case, the penalty is the same as the result of the play: loss of down. In the second case (with a catch), the result would have been loss of down and the clock run off because the clock would have been running if the penalty hadn’t been called. There’s no run off following a penalty after a play where the clock stopped.
Not this one you don’t.
Read the 4th paragraph here.
Also, in the Digest of Rules, it says:
Woodley touched the ball as Warner was making the pass. Ergo, anyone can catch it. The pass begins when the ball starts moving forward.
Yes, there is. I am 100% certain that a pass thrown while the Quarterback is being hit by a defender is immune from an intentional grounding penalty. Why is it so absurd that it would also be immune from an illegal touching penalty? I don’t recall ever seeing it called like that.
I was pretty surprised to see #1 in the OP, after seeinng the replays on TV it seemed pretty obvious that he was down to me.
However, I took the time to check out the blog with the picture and the video, and now I’m certain.
The picture shows 3 things:
-
A disembodied shadow a bit in front of the knee that means basically zero. If it was caused by a knee/leg that was above the ground by X inches it would extend to it and continue underneath, which it doesn’t do.
-
A knee that is straight. No curve. This is the most obvious evidence that it is touching the ground and pressure is being applied.
-
A shadow that extends exactly straight from the straight edge of the front of the knee and continues behind the knee/leg. This could be a shadow of the leg/knee, or it could be a shadow of a body from the pile, not sure, #2 is the important one.
What? The point of the intentional grounding penalty is that the quarterback can’t throw it away to avoid a sack. Why would it become not intentional grounding because the quarterback is being hit?
ETA: Why wouldn’t all quarterbacks just throw it into the ground - there would never be any more sacks if that was the rule, right?
Well, none of those things says anything whatsoever about illegal touching when the quarterback is being hit, like you said. However, it does say that it is no longer illegal touching if the lineman is not trying to make a catch. That’s a rule change that I didn’t know about, so the result of the play in question would not have been illegal touching.
Keep selling - nobody’s buying.