NFL says "I'm Sorry" (2 Viewers)

[Davej626]

Gee, a Raiders' fan complaining about the Zebras. Go figure...

 

[jonessed]

Moss pushes off all the time. He did it in Minnesota and he'll do it in Oakland. I'm surprised they through the flag on this one, but perhaps it was karma catching up.Refs see a hold and they throw the flag. Who knows when someone will cut back or fumble. I've never seen a holding flag picked up after the refs decided it was away from the play.If the NFL apologized for every bad call they would have to create an entire department to handle the load. It happens, I wish it didn't, but it's the nature of the beast. I'm surprised they made an exception in this case.Raiders fans will just have to suck it up.

 

[Big Score]

2.  The hold on the LJ TD run should not have been called as he was already through the hole, and it was out of the play at that point.  (7 pt diff)

Why would they apologise for that and label it a blown call? It wasn't. The O'Lineman held the defender. It's a hold. The Refs see it, they call it. Whether or not the hold happened after Jordan was through the hole away from the hold itself is irrelevant. Happens that way in every game I've seen. Why is this particular game, with this particular hold any different?

Not true. Holding is called when the hold is at the point of attack, either the hole that the running play is coming through or when pass blocking.

No offense GoRaiders, but that's a bunch of . Holding is called when there's holding and the Ref sees it. The Refs don't pick and choose which holds they're gonna call and which ones they're not.

yes they do....they most certainly do....or you would see a flag on almost every play....if you don't agree with that you don't watch much football...

Now if you're saying a ticky tack hold, that could really go either way, doesn't get called, that's one thing. But if you're trying to tell me that when a Ref SEES an obvious hold occur right in front of him (as was the case here ~ the Raider O'Lineman had the KC Defender wrapped up in a bear hug 5' to 10' in front of the Ref who threw the flag and in his direct line of sight), he may or may not decide to call it?Sorry Stinkin Ref, I know you say you're a football official and all....but I'm just not buying what you're selling here

 

[Big Score]

It was a chicken s**t call just like the interference call on Moss.

The call on Moss was without a doubt wrong. There was no offensive pass interference. Complete bunk call by the Ref. However, the Holding call on the Raiders O'lineman was right. There was holding. The replays in slo mo clearly showed it. Guy had the KC Defender wrapped up in a Bear Hug. Even if the Defender had wanted to disengage and try to pursue Jordan from the backside, he couldn't because of the Hold.

Score you just have a h**d on because Jordan was involved.

Two Deep, you must be mistaking me for somebody else. I don't have an axe to grind with Jordan.

 

[Two Deep]

It was a chicken s**t call just like the interference call on Moss.

The call on Moss was without a doubt wrong. There was no offensive pass interference. Complete bunk call by the Ref. However, the Holding call on the Raiders O'lineman was right. There was holding. The replays in slo mo clearly showed it. Guy had the KC Defender wrapped up in a Bear Hug. Even if the Defender had wanted to disengage and try to pursue Jordan from the backside, he couldn't because of the Hold.

Score you just have a h**d on because Jordan was involved.

Two Deep, you must be mistaking me for somebody else. I don't have an axe to grind with Jordan.

I apologize score.

 

[GonzoHolmes]

Just heard on the local radio the NFL apoligized to the Raiders for 3 blown calls in last weeks game.

1. The PI on Moss' TD catch should not have been called as both players were pushing off each other. (4 pt diff)

2. The hold on the LJ TD run should not have been called as he was already through the hole, and it was out of the play at that point. (7 pt diff)

3. The defensive PI on the Raid allowing KC to get into FG range should not have been called as the ball was uncatchable. (3 pt diff)

I am still shocked the NFL actually came out and admitted they were wrong.

Raiders are sore LOSERS! Chiefs kicked them all over the field!

 

[GonzoHolmes]

Moss pushes off all the time. He did it in Minnesota and he'll do it in Oakland. I'm surprised they through the flag on this one, but perhaps it was karma catching up.

On Moss's td catch he pushed off on Sammy Knight before he caught the ball to give himself separation. Look at the replays!

 

[Big Score]

It was a chicken s**t call just like the interference call on Moss.

The call on Moss was without a doubt wrong. There was no offensive pass interference. Complete bunk call by the Ref. However, the Holding call on the Raiders O'lineman was right. There was holding. The replays in slo mo clearly showed it. Guy had the KC Defender wrapped up in a Bear Hug. Even if the Defender had wanted to disengage and try to pursue Jordan from the backside, he couldn't because of the Hold.

Score you just have a h**d on because Jordan was involved.

Two Deep, you must be mistaking me for somebody else. I don't have an axe to grind with Jordan.

I apologize score.

No Harm, No Foul Two Deep.

 

[ELI2TYREE]

2.  The hold on the LJ TD run should not have been called as he was already through the hole, and it was out of the play at that point.  (7 pt diff)

Why would they apologise for that and label it a blown call? It wasn't. The O'Lineman held the defender. It's a hold. The Refs see it, they call it. Whether or not the hold happened after Jordan was through the hole away from the hold itself is irrelevant. Happens that way in every game I've seen. Why is this particular game, with this particular hold any different?

Not true. Holding is called when the hold is at the point of attack, either the hole that the running play is coming through or when pass blocking.

This is crap.

 

[ELI2TYREE]

2.  The hold on the LJ TD run should not have been called as he was already through the hole, and it was out of the play at that point.  (7 pt diff)

Why would they apologise for that and label it a blown call? It wasn't. The O'Lineman held the defender. It's a hold. The Refs see it, they call it. Whether or not the hold happened after Jordan was through the hole away from the hold itself is irrelevant. Happens that way in every game I've seen. Why is this particular game, with this particular hold any different?

Not true. Holding is called when the hold is at the point of attack, either the hole that the running play is coming through or when pass blocking.

No offense GoRaiders, but that's a bunch of . Holding is called when there's holding and the Ref sees it. The Refs don't pick and choose which holds they're gonna call and which ones they're not.

yes they do....they most certainly do....or you would see a flag on almost every play....if you don't agree with that you don't watch much football...

again, you are making this up as you go along. The rule is the rule. Whether or not you feel it is called only in particular situations or not does not change the rule. As a Giants fan, I've seen holding calls on the opposite side of the field by a wr on a running play bring back huge running gains time and time again. So your assertion is not only dead wrong, but assinine.

 

[jurb26]

2. The hold on the LJ TD run should not have been called as he was already through the hole, and it was out of the play at that point. (7 pt diff)

Why would they apologise for that and label it a blown call? It wasn't. The O'Lineman held the defender. It's a hold. The Refs see it, they call it. Whether or not the hold happened after Jordan was through the hole away from the hold itself is irrelevant. Happens that way in every game I've seen. Why is this particular game, with this particular hold any different?

Not true. Holding is called when the hold is at the point of attack, either the hole that the running play is coming through or when pass blocking.

This is crap.

2. The hold on the LJ TD run should not have been called as he was already through the hole, and it was out of the play at that point. (7 pt diff)

Why would they apologise for that and label it a blown call? It wasn't. The O'Lineman held the defender. It's a hold. The Refs see it, they call it. Whether or not the hold happened after Jordan was through the hole away from the hold itself is irrelevant. Happens that way in every game I've seen. Why is this particular game, with this particular hold any different?

Not true. Holding is called when the hold is at the point of attack, either the hole that the running play is coming through or when pass blocking.

No offense GoRaiders, but that's a bunch of . Holding is called when there's holding and the Ref sees it. The Refs don't pick and choose which holds they're gonna call and which ones they're not.

yes they do....they most certainly do....or you would see a flag on almost every play....if you don't agree with that you don't watch much football...

again, you are making this up as you go along. The rule is the rule. Whether or not you feel it is called only in particular situations or not does not change the rule. As a Giants fan, I've seen holding calls on the opposite side of the field by a wr on a running play bring back huge running gains time and time again. So your assertion is not only dead wrong, but assinine.

Did you even read this thread at all? A poster cited the actual sections of the rules book where this is covered and stated clearly.

 

[ICON211]

Sometimes you can overcome a bad call. Very hard to overcome 3 bad calls that make a 14 point difference. Especially when the plays directly resulted in points. Its not like moss didn't catch the ball and got called. And its not like it was just a long run by jordan than might have resulted in points. These calls took points off the board.

 

[jurb26]

Sometimes you can overcome a bad call. Very hard to overcome 3 bad calls that make a 14 point difference. Especially when the plays directly resulted in points. Its not like moss didn't catch the ball and got called. And its not like it was just a long run by jordan than might have resulted in points. These calls took points off the board.

The PI on Moss was horrible, no excuse for a call that bad IMO. The holding I can somewhat understand as judgments need to be made as to what is towards or away from the play. Plus, I have seen plenty of other away from the play holds called before as well. Either way, the Raiders got the shaft in the game. It happens sometimes and they are best to move on. They are not getting any Ws out of it but can still get Ws in the remaining 14 games.

 

[ICON211]

I really don't know why I bother getting all worked up though. This coaching staff is so horrendous they probably would have figured out other ways to lose. Sadly I don't think the Raiders have a shot with this coaching staff and their lack of game management and preparation.

 

[The Ref]

It was a crank call by Walt Coleman.

Good ol' Walt "Tuck Rule" Coleman. Love that guy.

Walt "Tuck Rule" Coleman, who by the way called the play right, has nothing on Ben "Phantom Roughing the Passer" Dreith.It goes both ways, deal with it.

 

[Big Score]

Did you even read this thread at all? A poster cited the actual sections of the rules book where this is covered and stated clearly.

Come on jurb26, don't be so gullible. Are you telling me you're going to believe some guy who just posts some stuff and the says it's from the rule book.....without any verification?

Check this out;

Digest of Rules

Use of Hands, Arms, and Body

"2. A runner may ward off opponents with his hands and arms but no other player on offense may use hands or arms to obstruct an opponent by grasping with hands, pushing, or encircling any part of his body during a block. Hands (open or closed) can be thrust forward to initially contact an opponent on or outside the opponent’s frame, but the blocker immediately must work to bring his hands on or inside the frame."

"Blocker cannot use his hands or arms to push from behind, hang onto, or encircle an opponent in a manner that restricts his movement as the play develops. "

Below is the link to the rules. Nowhere do I see where there are exceptions to the rule as defined / described above.

www.nfl.com

 

[Stinkin Ref]

2.  The hold on the LJ TD run should not have been called as he was already through the hole, and it was out of the play at that point.  (7 pt diff)

Why would they apologise for that and label it a blown call? It wasn't. The O'Lineman held the defender. It's a hold. The Refs see it, they call it. Whether or not the hold happened after Jordan was through the hole away from the hold itself is irrelevant. Happens that way in every game I've seen. Why is this particular game, with this particular hold any different?

Not true. Holding is called when the hold is at the point of attack, either the hole that the running play is coming through or when pass blocking.

No offense GoRaiders, but that's a bunch of . Holding is called when there's holding and the Ref sees it. The Refs don't pick and choose which holds they're gonna call and which ones they're not.

yes they do....they most certainly do....or you would see a flag on almost every play....if you don't agree with that you don't watch much football...

Now if you're saying a ticky tack hold, that could really go either way, doesn't get called, that's one thing. But if you're trying to tell me that when a Ref SEES an obvious hold occur right in front of him (as was the case here ~ the Raider O'Lineman had the KC Defender wrapped up in a bear hug 5' to 10' in front of the Ref who threw the flag and in his direct line of sight), he may or may not decide to call it?Sorry Stinkin Ref, I know you say you're a football official and all....but I'm just not buying what you're selling here

an official will pass on many calls if it does not affect the play....and in fact the official may something after the play....like "64 keep your hands inside" to let the holder know that the official saw it....that he is watching and that he probably would have called it had it had an affect on the play....it is some of the unwritten and unheard kind of stuff that a football fan will never know about....but yes...officials will SOMETIMES pass on a call right in front of them if it does not directly affect the play.....and in those situations they will often be praised by their supervisors for doing so.....

you may not like it or agree with it....but it happens...

 

[Stinkin Ref]

2.  The hold on the LJ TD run should not have been called as he was already through the hole, and it was out of the play at that point.  (7 pt diff)

Why would they apologise for that and label it a blown call? It wasn't. The O'Lineman held the defender. It's a hold. The Refs see it, they call it. Whether or not the hold happened after Jordan was through the hole away from the hold itself is irrelevant. Happens that way in every game I've seen. Why is this particular game, with this particular hold any different?

Not true. Holding is called when the hold is at the point of attack, either the hole that the running play is coming through or when pass blocking.

No offense GoRaiders, but that's a bunch of . Holding is called when there's holding and the Ref sees it. The Refs don't pick and choose which holds they're gonna call and which ones they're not.

yes they do....they most certainly do....or you would see a flag on almost every play....if you don't agree with that you don't watch much football...

again, you are making this up as you go along. The rule is the rule. Whether or not you feel it is called only in particular situations or not does not change the rule. As a Giants fan, I've seen holding calls on the opposite side of the field by a wr on a running play bring back huge running gains time and time again. So your assertion is not only dead wrong, but assinine.

see post above....I never said holding calls away from the play are never called....they are....but more times than not they are "passed on".....meaning an official sees the foul but chooses not to flag it.......I guess you would actually have to be there to understand....

just like I will pass on being called assinine....it is not worth making a big deal of because it has absolutley no affect on this thread.....

 

[harrycarey]

I agree that holding is called everywhere they see it, not just "at the point of attack" As others have mentioned, I have seen many games where there was a holding penalty far away from the play and it was called. I will go look for my nfl rule book and read up to see if i can find anything.

 

[jurb26]

Did you even read this thread at all? A poster cited the actual sections of the rules book where this is covered and stated clearly.

Come on jurb26, don't be so gullible. Are you telling me you're going to believe some guy who just posts some stuff and the says it's from the rule book.....without any verification?

Check this out;

Digest of Rules

Use of Hands, Arms, and Body

"2. A runner may ward off opponents with his hands and arms but no other player on offense may use hands or arms to obstruct an opponent by grasping with hands, pushing, or encircling any part of his body during a block. Hands (open or closed) can be thrust forward to initially contact an opponent on or outside the opponent’s frame, but the blocker immediately must work to bring his hands on or inside the frame."

"Blocker cannot use his hands or arms to push from behind, hang onto, or encircle an opponent in a manner that restricts his movement as the play develops. "

Below is the link to the rules. Nowhere do I see where there are exceptions to the rule as defined / described above.

www.nfl.com

Your right, I just read the whole thing, no such mention.

 

[Big Score]

an official will pass on many calls if it does not affect the play....and in fact the official may something after the play....like "64 keep your hands inside" to let the holder know that the official saw it....that he is watching and that he probably would have called it had it had an affect on the play....it is some of the unwritten and unheard kind of stuff that a football fan will never know about....

but yes...officials will SOMETIMES pass on a call right in front of them if it does not directly affect the play.....and in those situations they will often be praised by their supervisors for doing so.....

you may not like it or agree with it....but it happens...

I wish the Refs at my son's High School games here in the South, were more like what you're describing above. They'll leave the ticky tack calls alone sometimes, but they never let a blatant foul go uncalled.Please feel free to come on down and officiate my son's games. We need officials like you.

 

[harrycarey]

2. The hold on the LJ TD run should not have been called as he was already through the hole, and it was out of the play at that point. (7 pt diff)

Why would they apologise for that and label it a blown call? It wasn't. The O'Lineman held the defender. It's a hold. The Refs see it, they call it. Whether or not the hold happened after Jordan was through the hole away from the hold itself is irrelevant. Happens that way in every game I've seen. Why is this particular game, with this particular hold any different?

Not true. Holding is called when the hold is at the point of attack, either the hole that the running play is coming through or when pass blocking.

I don't doubt what stinkin ref says about the officials have an unwritten rule on not enforcing something if it doesn't effect the play, but there's a big difference between an action happening at the "point of attack" and effecting a play. I read my rule book and there was no mention of the "point of attack" stuff, but like i said i believe stinkin ref although do not think that was the case in this instance

 

[ELI2TYREE]

2.  The hold on the LJ TD run should not have been called as he was already through the hole, and it was out of the play at that point.  (7 pt diff)

Why would they apologise for that and label it a blown call? It wasn't. The O'Lineman held the defender. It's a hold. The Refs see it, they call it. Whether or not the hold happened after Jordan was through the hole away from the hold itself is irrelevant. Happens that way in every game I've seen. Why is this particular game, with this particular hold any different?

Not true. Holding is called when the hold is at the point of attack, either the hole that the running play is coming through or when pass blocking.

No offense GoRaiders, but that's a bunch of . Holding is called when there's holding and the Ref sees it. The Refs don't pick and choose which holds they're gonna call and which ones they're not.

yes they do....they most certainly do....or you would see a flag on almost every play....if you don't agree with that you don't watch much football...

again, you are making this up as you go along. The rule is the rule. Whether or not you feel it is called only in particular situations or not does not change the rule. As a Giants fan, I've seen holding calls on the opposite side of the field by a wr on a running play bring back huge running gains time and time again. So your assertion is not only dead wrong, but assinine.

see post above....I never said holding calls away from the play are never called....they are....but more times than not they are "passed on".....meaning an official sees the foul but chooses not to flag it.......I guess you would actually have to be there to understand....

just like I will pass on being called assinine....it is not worth making a big deal of because it has absolutley no affect on this thread.....

sorry about the assinine thing - but the rule remains the rule. Whether it is called or not by the ref isn't the point. The fact that the NFL is apparently saying they screwed a team by calling a hold that did in fact happen even though it was 'away" from the play is assinine, in my estimation... :X I understand what you and the others are saying now, but you must accept the fact that there is no "rule" stating that holding should not be called if it is away from the play. if that were the case, then every team is getting screwed on almost every other play.

I'd like to hear from a Ref on this point, because if they do teach refs to refrain from throwing the flag on holds that have no impact on the play (and how can they ever really be sure it will have 'No impact'? - what if the player runs back against the grain?) I'd like to know more about it.

 

[Big Score]

you must accept the fact that there is no "rule" stating that holding should not be called if it is away from the play. if that were the case, then every team is getting screwed on almost every other play.

Yeah.....that has to got to be one of the all time Top 10 dumbest things I've ever seen someone try and pass off here. That there's a rule, that says to sometimes ignore the rule.

Gimme f'n a break.

 

[supa mann]

I own Moss in one of my leagues and was obviously whining during the game, although I don't care one way or another if the Raiders win/lose. However, I have watched Moss for years and years and he has gotten away with soooooo many more pushoffs than he has been called for, it isn't even funny. I can remember multiple times watching him just throw DB's to the ground and then run in for a TD. He did push the guy in the back a little on his other TD grab, but nothing worthy of being called, IMO. Beautiful catch and run. I try to curb my criticism when it comes to officials calling pushoffs, cuz I have seen Michael Irvin flat manhadle DB's for many years. He was the KING of offensive pass interference.

 

[CalBear]

you must accept the fact that there is no "rule" stating that holding should not be called if it is away from the play. if that were the case, then every team is getting screwed on almost every other play.

Yeah.....that has to got to be one of the all time Top 10 dumbest things I've ever seen someone try and pass off here. That there's a rule, that says to sometimes ignore the rule.

Gimme f'n a break.

How about this whole thread? Is there any corroborating evidence that the league actually apologized to the Raiders?

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

Exactly. After reading this earlier today I decided to check back/Google it for a link. IMO if this had happened the AP would have picked up on it. Typical Raiders fan.

 

[Big Score]

So can we now say that this guy GoRaiders and the premise for his entire thread is Jeez what a putz One good thing to come out of this farce of a thread was Stinkin Ref. I liked how he weighed in on how officials will sometimes use discretion / latitude when enforcing the rules. I, for one, appreciated his input. Good job Stinkin Ref

 

[Jules Winnfield]

Okay. This one goes out to Big Score and Tarznatz. I have tried to watch this one without saying to much but after reading Big Score and his comment about:

Yeah.....that has to got to be one of the all time Top 10 dumbest things I've ever seen someone try and pass off here.

and Tarznatz and his comment of:

I understand what you and the others are saying now, but you must accept the fact that there is no "rule" stating that holding should not be called if it is away from the play. if that were the case, then every team is getting screwed on almost every other play.

I have to chime in.

I have right here the NFL Rulebook and test given to me to study. An official from the NFL wanted me to see exactly what the officials have to know and learn. Guys, we don't know SQUAT about the NFL rules. These guys have a lot of information to learn. Anyway, I will paste what the Official NFL Rulebook says about Holding away from the point of attack

If there is potential for offensive holding but the action occurs away from the point of attack and has no effect on the play, offensive holding will not be called

Tarznatz...Big Score...You get that.

If you don't believe me then look up Rule 3, Section 3. It is the blocking section. Legal Blocks, Illegal Blocks, and Blocking Notes.



I should throw some of these test questions on here and see how we all do.

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

Okay. This one goes out to Big Score and Tarznatz. I have tried to watch this one without saying to much but after reading Big Score and his comment about:

Yeah.....that has to got to be one of the all time Top 10 dumbest things I've ever seen someone try and pass off here.

and Tarznatz and his comment of:

I understand what you and the others are saying now, but you must accept the fact that there is no "rule" stating that holding should not be called if it is away from the play. if that were the case, then every team is getting screwed on almost every other play.

I have to chime in.

I have right here the NFL Rulebook and test given to me to study. An official from the NFL wanted me to see exactly what the officials have to know and learn. Guys, we don't know SQUAT about the NFL rules. These guys have a lot of information to learn. Anyway, I will paste what the Official NFL Rulebook says about Holding away from the point of attack

If there is potential for offensive holding but the action occurs away from the point of attack and has no effect on the play, offensive holding will not be called

Tarznatz...Big Score...You get that.

If you don't believe me then look up Rule 3, Section 3. It is the blocking section. Legal Blocks, Illegal Blocks, and Blocking Notes.



I should throw some of these test questions on here and see how we all do.

i'm not doubting what you say here but there have been multiple "quotes" from the rulebook in this thread. All of them have been taken out of context. Why not post the entie rule as printed in the rulebook? Do we have an actual link to this rule?

 

[Jules Winnfield]

Okay. This one goes out to Big Score and Tarznatz. I have tried to watch this one without saying to much but after reading Big Score and his comment about:

Yeah.....that has to got to be one of the all time Top 10 dumbest things I've ever seen someone try and pass off here.

and Tarznatz and his comment of:

I understand what you and the others are saying now, but you must accept the fact that there is no "rule" stating that holding should not be called if it is away from the play. if that were the case, then every team is getting screwed on almost every other play.

I have to chime in.

I have right here the NFL Rulebook and test given to me to study. An official from the NFL wanted me to see exactly what the officials have to know and learn. Guys, we don't know SQUAT about the NFL rules. These guys have a lot of information to learn. Anyway, I will paste what the Official NFL Rulebook says about Holding away from the point of attack

If there is potential for offensive holding but the action occurs away from the point of attack and has no effect on the play, offensive holding will not be called

Tarznatz...Big Score...You get that.

If you don't believe me then look up Rule 3, Section 3. It is the blocking section. Legal Blocks, Illegal Blocks, and Blocking Notes.



I should throw some of these test questions on here and see how we all do.

i'm not doubting what you say here but there have been multiple "quotes" from the rulebook in this thread. All of them have been taken out of context. Why not post the entie rule as printed in the rulebook? Do we have an actual link to this rule?

I don't know if there is a link. I will post the entire rule as it is stated later tonight.ANybody want a test question?

 

[The Ref]

Okay. This one goes out to Big Score and Tarznatz. I have tried to watch this one without saying to much but after reading Big Score and his comment about:

Yeah.....that has to got to be one of the all time Top 10 dumbest things I've ever seen someone try and pass off here.

and Tarznatz and his comment of:

I understand what you and the others are saying now, but you must accept the fact that there is no "rule" stating that holding should not be called if it is away from the play. if that were the case, then every team is getting screwed on almost every other play.

I have to chime in.

I have right here the NFL Rulebook and test given to me to study. An official from the NFL wanted me to see exactly what the officials have to know and learn. Guys, we don't know SQUAT about the NFL rules. These guys have a lot of information to learn. Anyway, I will paste what the Official NFL Rulebook says about Holding away from the point of attack

If there is potential for offensive holding but the action occurs away from the point of attack and has no effect on the play, offensive holding will not be called

Tarznatz...Big Score...You get that.

If you don't believe me then look up Rule 3, Section 3. It is the blocking section. Legal Blocks, Illegal Blocks, and Blocking Notes.



I should throw some of these test questions on here and see how we all do.

i'm not doubting what you say here but there have been multiple "quotes" from the rulebook in this thread. All of them have been taken out of context. Why not post the entie rule as printed in the rulebook? Do we have an actual link to this rule?

I don't know if there is a link. I will post the entire rule as it is stated later tonight.ANybody want a test question?

Bring it.

 

[Big Score]

If there is potential for offensive holding but the action occurs away from the point of attack and has no effect on the play, offensive holding will not be called

Tarznatz...Big Score...You get that.

If you don't believe me then look up Rule 3, Section 3. It is the blocking section. Legal Blocks, Illegal Blocks, and Blocking Notes.

Heard you the first time Jules, but I couldn't find anything that backs up what you're saying.

Digest of Rules

Use of Hands, Arms, and Body

"2. A runner may ward off opponents with his hands and arms but no other player on offense may use hands or arms to obstruct an opponent by grasping with hands, pushing, or encircling any part of his body during a block. Hands (open or closed) can be thrust forward to initially contact an opponent on or outside the opponent’s frame, but the blocker immediately must work to bring his hands on or inside the frame."

"Blocker cannot use his hands or arms to push from behind, hang onto, or encircle an opponent in a manner that restricts his movement as the play develops. "

Below is the link to the rules. Nowhere do I see where there are exceptions to the rule as defined / described above.

www.nfl.com

The quotes above are taken from this subsection of the NFL Rules,Use Of Hands, Arms And Body

Rules and exceptions.

Sorry Jules, but there's absolutely nothing in there that corroberates what you're saying.

Perhaps what I'm looking at is incomplete?

Do happen to have a link that confirms Rule 3, Section 3?

 

[Big Score]

Something that makes me suspicious of this exception rule that overrules the holding rule, is this whole "point of attack" question.

I have read where the play in question was designed to go where the hold was called. The reality is, that where the hold occured, was the actual "point of attack" and Jordan simply cut it back the other way.

Considering all the misdirection, play action and the RB simply doing what Jordan and did and cutting away from the designed "point of attack", short of a Crystal Ball and a deck of Tarot cards, how in the heck is a Ref going to know what is, and what is not, the real "point of attack", for him to decide when he should, or shouldn't call the hold?

 

[Gamblor]

Perhaps what I'm looking at is incomplete?

I would think that the "NFL fans Digest of Rules" is not as complete as the NFL rule book...

 

[Big Score]

Perhaps what I'm looking at is incomplete?

I would think that the "NFL fans Digest of Rules" is not as complete as the NFL rule book...

Probably so....yet it does list exceptions.Right now all we have to go is that, from the Official Site of the NFL, or Jules word.

Not specifically calling Jules out, but I know which source I currently put more stock in. How about you?

 

[jurb26]

This thread =

 

[Gamblor]

Perhaps what I'm looking at is incomplete?

I would think that the "NFL fans Digest of Rules" is not as complete as the NFL rule book...

Probably so....yet it does list exceptions.Right now all we have to go is that, from the Official Site of the NFL, or Jules word.

Not specifically calling Jules out, but I know which source I currently put more stock in. How about you?

I agree the rule is odd. However, I put zero stock into believing a rule doesnt exist because of a webpage that is self titled "digest for fans". By its very definition it is a summarization or Coles Notes version of not even all rules, but just those rules that would interest fans and will clearly leave out the meat of actual NFL rules. You must be able to appreciate that your link is far from the definitive source on the issue.

 

[Urine_Idiot]

Perhaps what I'm looking at is incomplete?

I would think that the "NFL fans Digest of Rules" is not as complete as the NFL rule book...

Probably so....yet it does list exceptions.Right now all we have to go is that, from the Official Site of the NFL, or Jules word.

Not specifically calling Jules out, but I know which source I currently put more stock in. How about you?

Digest of Rules This Digest of Rules of the National Football League has been prepared to aid players, fans, and members of the press, radio, and television media in their understanding of the game.

It is not meant to be a substitute for the official rule book. In any case of conflict between these explanations and the official rules, the rules always have precedence.

In order to make it easier to coordinate the information in this digest, the topics discussed generally follow the order of the rule book.

 

[Big Score]

Perhaps what I'm looking at is incomplete?

I would think that the "NFL fans Digest of Rules" is not as complete as the NFL rule book...

Probably so....yet it does list exceptions.Right now all we have to go is that, from the Official Site of the NFL, or Jules word.

Not specifically calling Jules out, but I know which source I currently put more stock in. How about you?

I agree the rule is odd. However, I put zero stock into believing a rule doesn't exist because of a webpage that is self titled "digest for fans". By its very definition it is a summarization or Coles Notes version of not even all rules, but just those rules that would interest fans and will clearly leave out the meat of actual NFL rules. You must be able to appreciate that your link is far from the definitive source on the issue.

I understand what you're saying Gamblor. But short of actually coming up with a link to the complete and entire NFL rulebook, all we have to go on is the link posted to the rules (albeit an abbreviated version) as posted on the Official Site of the NFL - or - what some guy that we have never met says on a message board.

Again I ask you, given the resources currently available, which do you put more stock in?

What some guy(or gal?), who you've never met and don't know a darn thing about, says on a message board?

Or a link to the rules (even if a dumbed down & abbreviated version) as posted on the Official Site of the NFL?

I'm not speaking for you, but for me, I put less than zero stock in what some anonymous poster puts on a message board as fact, with absolutely nothing to back it up....especially when the only resource currently available, does not support what the unknown poster states.

Surely you must be able to appreciate that?

 

[Gamblor]

Perhaps what I'm looking at is incomplete?

I would think that the "NFL fans Digest of Rules" is not as complete as the NFL rule book...

Probably so....yet it does list exceptions.Right now all we have to go is that, from the Official Site of the NFL, or Jules word.

Not specifically calling Jules out, but I know which source I currently put more stock in. How about you?

I agree the rule is odd. However, I put zero stock into believing a rule doesn't exist because of a webpage that is self titled "digest for fans". By its very definition it is a summarization or Coles Notes version of not even all rules, but just those rules that would interest fans and will clearly leave out the meat of actual NFL rules. You must be able to appreciate that your link is far from the definitive source on the issue.

I understand what you're saying Gamblor. But short of actually coming up with a link to the complete and entire NFL rulebook, all we have to go on is the link posted to the rules (albeit an abbreviated version) as posted on the Official Site of the NFL - or - what some guy that we have never met says on a message board.

Again I ask you, given the resources currently available, which do you put more stock in?

What some guy(or gal?), who you've never met and don't know a darn thing about, says on a message board?

Or a link to the rules (even if a dumbed down & abbreviated version) as posted on the Official Site of the NFL?

I'm not speaking for you, but for me, I put less than zero stock in what some anonymous poster puts on a message board as fact, with absolutely nothing to back it up....especially when the only resource currently available, does not support what the unknown poster states.

Surely you must be able to appreciate that?

I do Not trying to defend Jules, but stating that I am not more likely to believe one of these sources over the other. Not that I dont trust the NFL site, but that I dont believe that because something is not mentioned - that it doesn't exist. (at least in the context of this issue)

 

[Big Score]

Digest of Rules

This Digest of Rules of the National Football League has been prepared to aid players, fans, and members of the press, radio, and television media in their understanding of the game.

It is not meant to be a substitute for the official rule book. In any case of conflict between these explanations and the official rules, the rules always have precedence.

In order to make it easier to coordinate the information in this digest, the topics discussed generally follow the order of the rule book.

I saw that too Urine_Idiot. But once again, if I have a choice of believing something an anonymous poster puts out as fact, without anything to substantiate the statement ~ or ~ a link to the rules (even if a dumbed down & abbreviated version) as posted on the Official Site of the NFL which does not support said statement from the anonymous poster......

......I'm going to have to go with the credibility of the Official Site of the NFL.

But hey, that's just me, you guys do what you want.

 

[Big Score]

Not that I dont trust the NFL site, but that I dont believe that because something is not mentioned - that it doesn't exist. (at least in the context of this issue)

What has me doubting this rule that overrules rules, is the following three things;#1) I've seen holding called away from the play, or "point of attack", in just about every game that I've watched, over the past 20+ years. Why aren't the the Refs aware of this rule that overrules rules?

#2) With all the cutbacks that we see RB's do in every game, unless the Refs are getting the play radioed into them by the offensive play caller, how do they realllly know, what the "point of attack" is? The answer is....they can't know!

#3) Even though the link to the rules in this thread is a dumbed down and abbreviated version, exceptions are listed. However the rule that overrules the rule, is not mentioned.

 

[Gamblor]

Interestingly enough a google search brings up the following link:http://home.cogeco.ca/~hfoa/NAFL%20Rule%20Book.pdfThe rule Jules mentioned is word for word in rule 3 section 3 as he mentioned. So either Jules is reading from the NAFL rules, or the NAFL rules have been copied from the NFL rules... Three interesting notes with regard to offensive holding - at least in the NAFL:

Note 4: If there is a potential for offensive holding but the action clearly occurs after the pass has been thrown to a downfield receiver, offensive holding will not be called as the holding had no effect on the play.Note 5: If there is potential for offensive holding but the action occurs away from the point of attack and had no effect on the play, offensive holding will not be called.Note 6: If there is potential for offensive holding as part of a double-team block, offensive holding will not be called unless the opponent is pulled to the ground by one of the blockers.

 

[Gamblor]

Not that I dont trust the NFL site, but that I dont believe that because something is not mentioned - that it doesn't exist. (at least in the context of this issue)

What has me doubting this rule that overrules rules, is the following three things;#1) I've seen holding called away from the play, or "point of attack", in just about every game that I've watched, over the past 20+ years. Why aren't the the Refs aware of this rule that overrules rules?

#2) With all the cutbacks that we see RB's do in every game, unless the Refs are getting the play radioed into them by the offensive play caller, how do they realllly know, what the "point of attack" is? The answer is....they can't know!

#3) Even though the link to the rules in this thread is a dumbed down and abbreviated version, exceptions are listed. However the rule that overrules the rule, is not mentioned.

Dont have answers as to how they can call it, does seem strange. But Im tending to believe the rule does exist...

 

[Urine_Idiot]

Interestingly enough a google search brings up the following link:

http://home.cogeco.ca/~hfoa/NAFL%20Rule%20Book.pdf

The rule Jules mentioned is word for word in rule 3 section 3 as he mentioned. So either Jules is reading from the NAFL rules, or the NAFL rules have been copied from the NFL rules...

Three interesting notes with regard to offensive holding - at least in the NAFL:

Note 4: If there is a potential for offensive holding but the action clearly occurs after the pass has been thrown to a downfield receiver, offensive holding will not be called as the holding had no effect on the play.

Note 5: If there is potential for offensive holding but the action occurs away from the point of attack and had no effect on the play, offensive holding will not be called.

Note 6: If there is potential for offensive holding as part of a double-team block, offensive holding will not be called unless the opponent is pulled to the ground by one of the blockers.

"......I'm going to have to go with the credibility of the Official Site of the NFL." by BIG SCORENo doubt... So are wires crossed here Arena football with NFL rules? This is actually getting kind of interesting after a couple days of posting.

 

[Gamblor]

Interestingly enough a google search brings up the following link:

http://home.cogeco.ca/~hfoa/NAFL%20Rule%20Book.pdf

The rule Jules mentioned is word for word in rule 3 section 3 as he mentioned. So either Jules is reading from the NAFL rules, or the NAFL rules have been copied from the NFL rules...

Three interesting notes with regard to offensive holding - at least in the NAFL:

Note 4: If there is a potential for offensive holding but the action clearly occurs after the pass has been thrown to a downfield receiver, offensive holding will not be called as the holding had no effect on the play.

Note 5: If there is potential for offensive holding but the action occurs away from the point of attack and had no effect on the play, offensive holding will not be called.

Note 6: If there is potential for offensive holding as part of a double-team block, offensive holding will not be called unless the opponent is pulled to the ground by one of the blockers.

I thought note 6 was especially interesting. In the NAFL, you can hold on a double team, as long as you dont put him on the ground?

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

How about this whole thread? Is there any corroborating evidence that the league actually apologized to the Raiders?

Link to the NFL apologizing to the Raiders?

 

[Big Score]

How about this whole thread?  Is there any corroborating evidence that the league actually apologized to the Raiders?

Link to the NFL apologizing to the Raiders?

GoRaiders, the originator of this thread is here;5 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)

5 Members: Big Score, Gamblor, GoRaiders, wdh76, Urine_Idiot.

Got a link there big fella?

 

[Noahs Troopers]

Raider fans are either:1. Thugs2. Crybabies (as evidenced by this thread)3. White trash4. All of the above.