That play was just so… Jets. My Patriots are 2-8 and they suuuuuuuuuuck. But even with a worse record, they are still not as embarrassing as the Butt Fumblers.
Unintentionally getting a handful of the back of the neck of the jersey is not a penalty. The penalty (horse collar) is pulling them down by the back of the shoulder pads.
What constitutes a penalty changes depending on if the quarterback is running the ball or trying to pass it. But to your point, now that I think about it, if the quarterback pulls the ball down and just runs out of bounds, if he runs out of bounds behind the line of scrimmage I believe that is counted as a sack even though he has become a runner.
Which leads me to an unrelated question. Years ago I remember the rule was if the quarterback was out of the pocket, defenders could make contact with the receivers without it being pass interference. Similar to how it is when the pass is deflected. My question is, do I remember that correctly, and if so, is that still the rule? It’s not relevant to this discussion, really; just something I’m curious about.
You’re right, and I wasn’t precise in my wording. A hand on the facemask, with even the hint of a tug, will usually draw a flag, while that isn’t usually the case with just a hand on the back of the shoulder pads.
Agreed, they generally don’t flag a horse collar tackle unless it’s really obvious, and the tackler is hanging off the guy like a Christmas ornament.
Horsecollar doesn’t apply to QBs in the pocket. It also requires the hand to actually be grabbing the shoulder pads not just the jersey. I personally had to rescind a flag I threw on a high school tackler because of this distinction - runner came down awkwardly but the flag hadn’t landed before I knew I’d have to tell the head ref to waive it off.
And that’s why I’d have no issue with the penalty being called, like you quoted. The discussion was implying the player was trying to remove Smith’s helmet. Like “ripping his helmet off” and “gripped the helmet”. Both of those aren’t even subtle in the accusation made.
I never said he didn’t commit a penalty. I argued he wasn’t dirty.
Gotcha. I’m in full agreement with you. I think he was just trying to sack the QB and went about it the wrong way, and/or tried to grab one thing and grabbed another.
I’ve seen dirty plays, that didn’t look like one to me.
Nope.
Read the rule again which was quoted by @Atamasama:
Roughing the passer can occur before, during, or after a pass. But in all three cases, a pass has been, or will be, thrown. Until the pass has been thrown, there is no passer.
The video linked by @Atamasama shows the various fouls which warrant the flag for roughing the passer. In each and every case, a pass is thrown.
Yep. “Looks like he wants to pass” (what I said) = “is in a passing posture” (what the rule says.) Those are the same thing. I agree with the rule, the rule agrees with me.
Read this again, slowly. See if you can spot where you completely contradict yourself.
Those are not the same thing.
Find an example of a roughing-the-passer call when there is no pass thrown on the play.
Let’s say that there’s a play where the qb is in the pocket, arm cocked, ready to throw the ball. (Looks like he wants to pass.) He’s hit hard in the helmet and goes down without throwing the ball. That’s a personal foul for unnecessary roughness.
Now, consider that he manages to throw the ball after the hit while going down. That’s roughing the passer. The contact, in this case, occurred before he threw the ball.
I would speculate that this particular play and flag don’t happen very often, as roughing is almost always called because of a hit during the pass or after the ball is released.
So far Mac Jones is edging Tommy Devito in the Subpar Bowl. Though performances on both sides do not inspire much confidence at all.
I’m amazed that both touchdowns were scored by the offenses!
There are now more points scored in the Giants/Pats game than the Steelers/Bengals game.
Granted, that’s an extremely low bar.
I fully expected that the 31.5 over/under would be only threatened by a rash of pick sixes.
I am getting annoyed at Pats fans (I’m not one, but have lived here through most of the Golden Age of Brady+Belichick) who have now concluded that BB was an idiot all along, being carried by TB’s magical abilities.
Overrated, absolutely. Incompetent, absolutely not. He’s made some bad decisions recently, but you can’t win as much as the Patriots did for so long without some serious management ability.
Oops, I spoke too soon. Steelers now lead 10-7.
And Bailey Zappe is now quarterbacking the Pats.
I have a question. I notice that in the Boston market the CBS station is showing the Steelers-Bengals game, while the Patriots game is on the Fox station.
Is it normal to have another NFL game against the local team’s game? I seem to remember that there isn’t usually another game on, when the Patriots are playing.
I would rather have Billy Zabke.
I can’t speak to other markets. When I was a kid the Giants played at 1 and the Jets played at 4. They were never up against each other. There was never a competing game. Now they routinely play at the same time and there is offen a competing game at 1. TV contracts change over the years.
You jinxed him. Terrible, terrible, telegraphed interception.
It’s not typical to have another game on against the local team when the local team is playing at home…but the Patriots are playing in the Meadowlands today.
What it, in this case, means is that CBS has the “doubleheader” game today, and can, in most markets, show two games this afternoon – in this case, in the Boston area, the local CBS affiliate, will also be showing the Bills/Eagles game later this afternoon. Fox can only show a single game this week, and in this case, it’s the Patriots/Giants game.
(Edit: I got some details wrong initially; fixed now!)
Thanks.