Now, I hate the Jets as much as the next guy, but I think we all know that the media loves to play fast and loose with the rules.
There is no doubt that the knee was unsportsmanlike and a penalty. But is there any problem with the wall?
Looking at the pictures, there's no doubt that it was intentional. And I think you could make the argument that it's unsporting. But that's a far different thing from saying it violates a rule. Does it? It seems to me that's trying to get as close as possible to the line of the rule without breaking it. These guys are all within the 32 yard line and behind the six-foot white border.
If it doesn't violate the rules, what's the problem with it? I'd argue that the intent of the rule is that six foot white zone belongs to the player. Any further and he takes his chance that there will be a sideline person there. But I don't see a problem with taking full advantage of the rules to gain any advantage you can. Now, if there's a rule somewhere else in the rulebook that says it's improper for sideline personnel to deliberately position themselves, even within the 32 yard line and behind the white border, to gain an advantage, that's a different story. But so far, the only rule I've seen quoted is this one:
"Rule 13, Article 5 Coaches and other non-participating team personnel (including uniformed players not in the game at the time) are prohibited from moving laterally along the sidelines any further than the points that are 18 yards from the middle of the bench area (i.e., 32-yard lines to left and right of bench areas when benches are placed on opposite sides of the field). Lateral movement within the bench area must be behind the solid six-foot white border."
I would read that rule to say that if a coach wants to line up his entire team along the white border inside the 32 yard lines to keep a coverage player from gaining more than his permitted 6 foot safety zone, he has every right to do it, albeit he should be potentially be criticized for unsporting behavior.
But I don't see where it violates a rule, and if the commissioner's office is really looking into it, it's the same old crap in a different package that Patriots fans are all too used to. I'm not going to get excited just because it's our hated rivals. As for going all Zapruter on what Rex might have seen, have at it. It's entertaining. But again, I'm not really aware of any requirement that chubby has to tell the media the truth about his strategy decisions. If he lies to the league, that's a different story.
Edit: I should add, though, that I guess the fact that a wall was ordered makes the trip somewhat more in context and does become more of a team or head coach responsibility instead of the actions of one misguided guy, so I suppose it is interesting from that perspective. Still, I don't have a problem with the wall itself. Assuming, as I am, that it doesn't violate a rule, I actually kind of respect it.
Edit2: So it looks as though this is being discussed ad naseum in the other thread. And here I thought I had an original thought . . .
