emoney_33
Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2005
- Messages
- 5,218
- Reaction score
- 42
Re: Pereira on Polian and point of emphasis.
Umm no that wasn't my logic at all. Do you even read what I am quoting to respond to? You sarcastically talked about being forgiving of Colts DBs mauling Pats receivers. I never so much as insinuated that the Caldwell play warrants a rule change. That doesn't even make sense, and for you to jump to that assumption makes even less sense. The argument is about the yardage awarded on a PI call not on limiting missed calls.
I assumed everyone reading already knows that defensive holding is an automatic 1st down, just like I assume everyone reading can assume that a 15 yard PI penalty would be automatic first down. The POINT is that the automatic first down means that it makes NO sense for a DB to "maul" a receiver because it's only "15" yards which is what you and others were arguing.
So you agree that DBs would not start mauling receivers with a 15 yard (and automatic first down) PI penalty right? So your argument then that the rule is fine comes down to you believing that all pass interference as is should be a spot foul. So assuming the receiver would have made the play is OK and fair?
Apparently you aren't very good at comprehending points. The "fairness" being debated about the rule is not about fairness to each team. Obviously any rule that applies the same is fair to each team. The rule UNFAIRLY penalizes the defense, on all teams. As you said you could line up 13 men on defense, but that would not be fair to the offense.
Your logic was they made a bad call on the Reche Caldwell play, so the rule should be changed. That logic is ridiculously unsound because no matter what the rules are, there are always going to be bad calls.
Umm no that wasn't my logic at all. Do you even read what I am quoting to respond to? You sarcastically talked about being forgiving of Colts DBs mauling Pats receivers. I never so much as insinuated that the Caldwell play warrants a rule change. That doesn't even make sense, and for you to jump to that assumption makes even less sense. The argument is about the yardage awarded on a PI call not on limiting missed calls.
Point being you were wrong when you said "holding is -only- 5 yards". When you said holding was "only" 5 yards, you were leaving out the most important part (either deliberately or due to your lack of knowledge of NFL penalties).
I assumed everyone reading already knows that defensive holding is an automatic 1st down, just like I assume everyone reading can assume that a 15 yard PI penalty would be automatic first down. The POINT is that the automatic first down means that it makes NO sense for a DB to "maul" a receiver because it's only "15" yards which is what you and others were arguing.
Where did I claim that?
So you agree that DBs would not start mauling receivers with a 15 yard (and automatic first down) PI penalty right? So your argument then that the rule is fine comes down to you believing that all pass interference as is should be a spot foul. So assuming the receiver would have made the play is OK and fair?
There is nothing unfair about the rule as is. In fact, your logic is once again very poor. Rules are, by their very definition, neutral (assuming they apply to both teams equally). They could make a rule that said the offense could line up 13 men against 10 on the defense and there would be nothing "unfair" about it.
Apparently you aren't very good at comprehending points. The "fairness" being debated about the rule is not about fairness to each team. Obviously any rule that applies the same is fair to each team. The rule UNFAIRLY penalizes the defense, on all teams. As you said you could line up 13 men on defense, but that would not be fair to the offense.