OT: Did the officials make a boo-boo in the Bills/Skins game?

[DisgruntledTunaFan]

Last year in the NFCCG, when Grossman wanted to take a *second consecutive* TO on a drive, the officials just IGNORED him.

4 years ago, prior to the Eagles kicking the winning FG in OT in the NFCDG, GB wanted to take a *second consecutive* TO, but the officials IGNORED them.

Pt being that while it's ILLEGAL to take consecutive timeouts on any given play, in particular a FG attempt, there's nothing in the rulebook where the officials will award the TO AND throw the flag.(IOW-this is why the refs just merely ignore them on the second time)

Yes-yet another blunder by the officiating crew this year.

 

[Metaphors]

What is the rule when one team calls a time out and then try's to call a second time out? Is there a penalty? Can a team do that? --Rod Weal, Melrose Park, Ill.

Consecutive time outs called by the same team are not permitted under NFL rules. If this occurs, the officials do not allow the time out and no penalty is assessed. If the second time out is inadvertently allowed, the clock is immediately restarted with no penalty. The only situation that carries a penalty for a second consecutive time out is when a team is attempting a field goal and the opponents, after calling a time out to "freeze the kicker," then ask for a second time out. This is an unsportsmanlike conduct foul and the defense is penalized 15 yards from the line of scrimmage.

Link

 

[JoePats]

What is the rule when one team calls a time out and then try's to call a second time out? Is there a penalty? Can a team do that? --Rod Weal, Melrose Park, Ill.

Consecutive time outs called by the same team are not permitted under NFL rules. If this occurs, the officials do not allow the time out and no penalty is assessed. If the second time out is inadvertently allowed, the clock is immediately restarted with no penalty. The only situation that carries a penalty for a second consecutive time out is when a team is attempting a field goal and the opponents, after calling a time out to "freeze the kicker," then ask for a second time out. This is an unsportsmanlike conduct foul and the defense is penalized 15 yards from the line of scrimmage.

Link

Gotta say I didn't know that...I thought they just ignored them...But how does Gibbs not know that?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

To quote the rule book:

"Rule 4, Section 5, Article 2 (p. 20):
Item 4: Unsportsmanlike Conduct. An attempt to call an excess team timeout or to call a second timeout in the same dead-ball period by Team B in an attempt to “freeze” a kicker, will be considered unsportsmanlike conduct and will subject the offending team to a 15-yard penalty (See 12-3). This will apply to field goal or Try attempts.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

Gibbs should be fired immediately for not knowing such a basic NFL rule. Having said that it is a stupid rule. The league should not dictate when and how a team uses their TO's. A team should be able to use any and all of their TO's anytime and under any circumstance that they wish. If that means calling TO's on 3 consecutive plays then so be it.

 

[xmarkd400x]

I think the rule is iffy, but I think the spirit of the rule is correct. The league decided that attempting to take two timeouts back to back is most likely an error, and should be ignored. During a field goal, it is done on purpose to gain an advantage. The league decided that action is poor sportsmanship, and as such has a penalty.

 

[onegameatatime]

I think I agree with the rule (unless convinced otherwise). If the rule is to avoid delay and "freezing", then the mere act of attempting to call the TO is accomplishing the purpose.

The only thing I question is whether freezing the kicker does any good. I can't recall the Pats doing it, but then again, they are often not in a position to lose on the last play. SWo many teams do it, you'd think it helps something, but I would think that as a defender, I'd rather have the kicker running onto the field and having to make the kick right there.

 

[Ethan 55]

I could be wrong, but I think this rule was in response to something the Patriots did a couple of years ago. I seem to remember Vrabel either calling a 2nd timeout or calling a timeout they didn't have on a FG attempt in an attempt to distract the other team. I think they changed the rule midseason that year to not allow it anymore.

 

[brdmaverick]

in that 31-0 route that we suffered in Buffalo in 2003, I specifically recall on on a fourth day play for the Bills offense that the Pats tried to call a second consecutive time out and the audio clearly picked up the official saying "You can't, you can't". No timeout was granted, no penalty given, the play continued and Eugene Wilson got his first career interception on the play.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

I think the rule is iffy, but I think the spirit of the rule is correct. The league decided that attempting to take two timeouts back to back is most likely an error, and should be ignored. During a field goal, it is done on purpose to gain an advantage. The league decided that action is poor sportsmanship, and as such has a penalty.

As for the spirit of this particular TO rule ..... I could never understand it's purpose. In terms of sportsmanship, what the heck is the difference between taking consecutive TO's to "ice" a FG kicker during a critical drive versus say taking consecutive TO's to "ice" a QB prior to a 4th and 7 during a critical drive?

The league has created a mindset of "pansinesss" amongst not only it's fans (oh don't run up the score it's bad for our psyche) but also its players with all of their "righteous" rules. It's sickening.

 

[Ethan 55]

I could be wrong, but I think this rule was in response to something the Patriots did a couple of years ago. I seem to remember Vrabel either calling a 2nd timeout or calling a timeout they didn't have on a FG attempt in an attempt to distract the other team. I think they changed the rule midseason that year to not allow it anymore.

And here's the link that confirms my memory...

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2004/09/20/vrabel_knows_tricks_of_the_trade/

 

[godef]

Gibbs should be fired immediately for not knowing such a basic NFL rule. Having said that it is a stupid rule. The league should not dictate when and how a team uses their TO's. A team should be able to use any and all of their TO's anytime and under any circumstance that they wish. If that means calling TO's on 3 consecutive plays then so be it.

Well, then you get back to consecutive time outs not being allowed in general.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

Well, then you get back to consecutive time outs not being allowed in general.

A team should be allowed to decide when they wish to use their alloted TO's in a game. If they wish to use them all back to back to back then so be it.

 

[Pats_AZ]

Gibbs should be fired immediately for not knowing such a basic NFL rule. Having said that it is a stupid rule. The league should not dictate when and how a team uses their TO's. A team should be able to use any and all of their TO's anytime and under any circumstance that they wish. If that means calling TO's on 3 consecutive plays then so be it.

the problem is that apparently Gibbs asked a ref on the sidelines if he could call another timeout and the ref said that he could. Now i know people will be saying "but he should have known" but i feel that an officials job is to officiate and give correct rulings on the field and when a team seeks counsel in regards to a rule. it's like in golf, even the best players in the world don't know every rule, and quite frequently asks a rules official for help on a ruling and what can and can't be done. I feel that if Gibbs asked an official he should have either gotten the correct answer, or if given the wrong answer should not have been penalized for what he thought was in within the guidelines of the rules per the official. I feel that as many might still blame Gibbs, i blame the official.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

the problem is that apparently Gibbs asked a ref on the sidelines if he could call another timeout and the ref said that he could. Now i know people will be saying "but he should have known" but i feel that an officials job is to officiate and give correct rulings on the field and when a team seeks counsel in regards to a rule. it's like in golf, even the best players in the world don't know every rule, and quite frequently asks a rules official for help on a ruling and what can and can't be done. I feel that if Gibbs asked an official he should have either gotten the correct answer, or if given the wrong answer should not have been penalized for what he thought was in within the guidelines of the rules per the official. I feel that as many might still blame Gibbs, i blame the official.

I hadn't heard that side of the story. Gibbs wasn't overly animated on the sideline after being penalized for calling the back to back TO's. You'd think he would have been going hysterical if he proceeded with the consecutive TO calls on the incorrect advice of an official.

 

[Metaphors]

And here's the link that confirms my memory...

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2004/09/20/vrabel_knows_tricks_of_the_trade/

The rule was changed in 2005 to make consecutive timeouts during a FG attempt unsportsmanlike conduct. Call it the "Vrabel Timeout Rule". You can add it to the "Law Coverage Point of Emphasis", the "Seymour Injury Reporting Enhancements", the "Moss Pushoff Focus" and the "Belichick Operating Procedures Memo".

I'm not sayin, I'm just sayin...