Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NFL Playoffs


Jackie Lee
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

Oh they 100% can't call intentional grounding, from the back angle you can see it really wasn't all that far from Puka's feet, it was never going to be completed, but by definition, there clearly was a receiver in the area.

Refs bailed him out.  It’s that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PNW_PantherMan said:

Refs bailed him out.  It’s that simple.

did they?  or did the rule book?

It was a stupid play, absolutely should have just ate the sack, but if you're going by the definitions of rules in the book, he made a pass attempt in the area of a WR, no matter how ridiculous it looked.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tukafan21 said:

did they?  or did the rule book?

It was a stupid play, absolutely should have just ate the sack, but if you're going by the definitions of rules in the book, he made a pass attempt in the area of a WR, no matter how ridiculous it looked.

Yeah, it was a pass. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

IDK about "allowed" but it should have been intentional grounding for sure.

Also, the pay off for that is just 100% not worth the risk. That's a fuging moronic decision even if it paid off.

totally agree that it was beyond stupid, but the last thing it could have been was intentional grounding, it landed like a yard away from Puka's feet.

If it was going to be an incorrect call in the end, I'd have been fine with it being called a fumble or a sack as "in the grasp" before it being called intentional grounding, and by the rules, it was actually an incomplete pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

totally agree that it was beyond stupid, but the last thing it could have been was intentional grounding, it landed like a yard away from Puka's feet.

If it was going to be an incorrect call in the end, I'd have been fine with it being called a fumble or a sack as "in the grasp" before it being called intentional grounding, and by the rules, it was actually an incomplete pass.

I know the rule but the spirit of that rule is ridiculous in that instance. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...