Colts want NFL to Explain

[SVN]

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.d...=/0fayuVrTMtwsjDSVjIxeEpqVX+GLbJgO3ibEAodF2A=

this is quite funny considering how the pats game was called.

 

[cblesz]

Well, they can tune in to Pereirra's segment on NFL network. With his history, I am sure he will say that the officials got it wrong and issue an apology to the Colts.


BAWAHAAAAAA!!!!

 

[marty]

Does this mean that Dungy misinterpreted the rule on simulating snap? It seemed pretty clear to me. Just because he got away with this before(probably because someone jumped offsides) doesn't mean it isn't a penalty!

 

[psychoPat]

It is tempting to laugh such shenanigans off as amusing chutzpah.

But the purpose of this demand for further explanation is not really to find out
what did happen Sunday night.

It is revving up their snarling intimidation engine
... so that officials will get back on program and resume being
as docile and cooperative as they had been at home the week before.

 

[BrianPat]

Well, they can tune in to Pereirra's segment on NFL network. With his history, I am sure he will say that the officials got it wrong and issue an apology to the Colts.


BAWAHAAAAAA!!!!

Now that would be something !!!

 

[cblesz]

It is tempting to laugh such shenanigans off as amusing chutzpah.

But the purpose of this demand for further explanation is not really to find out
what did happen Sunday night.

It is revving up their snarling intimidation engine
... so that officials will get back on program and resume being
as docile and cooperative as they had been at home the week before.

That is so freaking true. Of course Polian is screetching now so they look the other way on something else in the future...

 

[DaBruinz]

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.d...=/0fayuVrTMtwsjDSVjIxeEpqVX+GLbJgO3ibEAodF2A=

this is quite funny considering how the pats game was called.

I always thought that you couldn't have more than one person in motion at any one time. On that play in particular, they had 3 people moving. Utecht moving away from the line. Moorehead (?) moving up. And Fletcher going in motion.

Also, Utecht never came UP out of his stance.. He hopped straight back. I believe that is also not a valid movement. I think if Utecht had come UP out of his stance and then reset, I believe he'd have been fine.

 

[He Ban Me]

I always thought that you couldn't have more than one person in motion at any one time. On that play in particular, they had 3 people moving. Utecht moving away from the line. Moorehead (?) moving up. And Fletcher going in motion.

Also, Utecht never came UP out of his stance.. He hopped straight back. I believe that is also not a valid movement. I think if Utecht had come UP out of his stance and then reset, I believe he'd have been fine.

I think you are right, it all centered on Utecht's movement. Too obvious, but Dungy was arguing that it was legal, they had run out of it before. In the end, all around stupid play. Although defenses have screwed that up before, I think they knew there was no way they were going to hike the ball. The problem with the entire thing is that eventually, they were going to have to call a T.O. They should have had enough forethought to realize AV could miss, and that 3 TO's would be crucial in trying to get ball back. Too bad Addai's run didn't come before the 2 minute warning, then no review

 

[Pujo]

I always thought that you couldn't have more than one person in motion at any one time. On that play in particular, they had 3 people moving. Utecht moving away from the line. Moorehead (?) moving up. And Fletcher going in motion.

You can have multiple players in motion as long as they they pause for at least one second prior to the snap (except one player, who may be in lateral motion at the snap).

Not sure about Utecht as I didn't see that play.

 

[wdkantro2]

Regardless of the team, I hate excuses. The reason they lost wasn't one potentially questionable call. It was their horrendous offensive performance and the failure of their kicker. They still had an EASY chance to win and that's all you can ask for.

 

[Grogan's neck roll]

Does this mean that Dungy misinterpreted the rule on simulating snap? It seemed pretty clear to me. Just because he got away with this before(probably because someone jumped offsides) doesn't mean it isn't a penalty!

If someone jumps that actually makes what the offense did MORE obviously illegal, since they then accomplished what they intended, which is to get the other team to jump by simulating the snap. Moving three guys at once in an abrupt fashion would constitute a false start in my book (college official here).

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Does this mean that Dungy misinterpreted the rule on simulating snap? It seemed pretty clear to me. Just because he got away with this before(probably because someone jumped offsides) doesn't mean it isn't a penalty!

The NFL should issue a point of emphasis on these types of penalties. As the Colts will attest to, how the rules are written is much more important than how they're commonly called.

 

[BradfordPatsFan]

Does this mean that Dungy misinterpreted the rule on simulating snap? It seemed pretty clear to me. Just because he got away with this before(probably because someone jumped offsides) doesn't mean it isn't a penalty!

Didn't Dungy misinterpret a rule back in the 04 playoff game? He had Manning under center, pull out, walk along the line shouting signals and had the ball snapped to the rb. That was illegal and the Colts, the radio guy in particular, were very upset over the call, which was, again, correct. The qb has to be stationary when the ball is snapped. The entire Colts team got that one wrong.

 

[Grogan's neck roll]

I always thought that you couldn't have more than one person in motion at any one time. On that play in particular, they had 3 people moving. Utecht moving away from the line. Moorehead (?) moving up. And Fletcher going in motion.

Also, Utecht never came UP out of his stance.. He hopped straight back. I believe that is also not a valid movement. I think if Utecht had come UP out of his stance and then reset, I believe he'd have been fine.

Only one player can be in motion AT THE SNAP, also, if more than one is in motion, all need to reset prior to the snap.

 

[pwes]

Didn't Dungy misinterpret a rule back in the 04 playoff game? He had Manning under center, pull out, walk along the line shouting signals and had the ball snapped to the rb. That was illegal and the Colts, the radio guy in particular, were very upset over the call, which was, again, correct. The qb has to be stationary when the ball is snapped. The entire Colts team got that one wrong.

Yeah someone posted it in another thread

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPP4iyNE0RQ&NR=1

 

[denverpatsfan]

They bleeping suck! They should have kicked the FG and won the game right there. No need for a classless "trying to draw them offside" play. The Colts and their fans should be questioning the play calling and not the officiating.

 

[Krugman]

I have to mention that ,much to my surprise,I read an article from Indystar after the Pats /Colts game that was very critical of the bad calls against the Pats(they mentioned the HOBBS PI and Faulk mauling ,and a few more).Sorry,dont remember the author.I realize there is no magic wand to rectify the ineptness of referees,but I would like the think that increased education/training would cut down on it.My two cents....

 

[Rob0729]

I hear the officials have already informed the Colts that the spot of the ball question was actually a case of them taking back the mysterious two yards they gave them during a commercial break where before the break Addai appeared to be a yard and half short of the first down marker and right after the break, he was about a half a yard beyond the first down marker.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

I imagine dungy is correct that it's often not called.

I think it's very hard for an official to pull the flag on that play -- how can you ever be sure that the player was trying to simulate a snap to draw a penalty. I've seen this called before, and most of the time it happens, it's because the simulating action actually works and draws the defender to cross the line and make contact or be unabated to the quarterback.

In those situations, the ref has no choice but to make a hard decision and decide whether it really was "simulating" the snap. If the same thing happens in the middle of the field in a non critical situation and no defender is drawn offsides, I would imagine most refs just keep the flag in their pockets on a no harm no foul analysis.

I have no problem with that. The problem here is that the ref knows exactly what the colts were trying to do. There's no guess work. The player made an abrupt motion to try to simulate the snap. While you might give the offensive player the benefit of the doubt on this play in most circumstances, when a team is facing 4th down with a chip shot field goal, down by 2, with under 2 minutes to go in the game, the ref is permitted to take that into account and reason that they have no desire to snap the ball and are lining up PRECISELY to simulate a snap.

The other thing that's absurd is that the colts were either going to take a 5-yard penalty anyway (for delay) OR they were going to use the very time out that Dungy apologized to his team for taking. They were NOT going to snap the ball, and they didn't have time to run the FG unit onto the field, so those were the only two options.

 

[Oswlek]

I imagine dungy is correct that it's often not called.

I think it's very hard for an official to pull the flag on that play -- how can you ever be sure that the player was trying to simulate a snap to draw a penalty. I've seen this called before, and most of the time it happens, it's because the simulating action actually works and draws the defender to cross the line and make contact or be unabated to the quarterback.

In those situations, the ref has no choice but to make a hard decision and decide whether it really was "simulating" the snap. If the same thing happens in the middle of the field in a non critical situation and no defender is drawn offsides, I would imagine most refs just keep the flag in their pockets on a no harm no foul analysis.

I have no problem with that. The problem here is that the ref knows exactly what the colts were trying to do. There's no guess work. The player made an abrupt motion to try to simulate the snap. While you might give the offensive player the benefit of the doubt on this play in most circumstances, when a team is facing 4th down with a chip shot field goal, down by 2, with under 2 minutes to go in the game, the ref is permitted to take that into account and reason that they have no desire to snap the ball and are lining up PRECISELY to simulate a snap.

The other thing that's absurd is that the colts were either going to take a 5-yard penalty anyway (for delay) OR they were going to use the very time out that Dungy apologized to his team for taking. They were NOT going to snap the ball, and they didn't have time to run the FG unit onto the field, so those were the only two options.

There was absolutely no guess work needed on this one. The action was clearly attempting to draw the defender offsides, ergo it is simulating the snap count. You will never see a WR or TE adjust their stance in the manner that he did. It was a violent jerk back into a blocking position and then reset. The motion had no purpose *but* simulating the snap.