Browner's penalty negating McCourty TD

Fencer said:

It's easy to argue, as follows:

The shoulder is a body part separate from the neck, and Browner hit the shoulder only. If he had hit something in the border area between the neck and shoulder that would have been in the neck area. I think he clearly hit the shoulder.

Click to expand...

Actually, thanks to Jokers GIF this isn't even necessary because the hit was to the neck, so we don't even need to define the 'area' part.

IllegalContact said:

I disagree....I think letting the coaches use their challenges to question flags thrown in order to get it right would be the right way.....

Click to expand...

What if there are numerous challengable plays? You only want to get 3 a game right, even if there are 30?

what you're proposing is to have the refs flag every other play and then go look at the replay? it'll work if you move the 1pm games to noon and 4pm games to 5pm

Click to expand...

there is not a potential helmet to helmet or illegal hit on a defenseless player on half of the plays.
The NCAA already does this, and it works just fine.

IllegalContact said:

because Andy says so

the first angle makes it pretty clear that Browner's intent was to go outside the head and neck area.....

Click to expand...

You do realize that the NFL says if a defender is aiming at the waist and the ball carrier ducks and he hits him in the head, its a penalty right?
What does intent have to do with anything? His intent was (correctly) to light up the receiver and separate him from the ball.

I agree that Andy is wrong.

Bad call, he had time to defend himself.

Receivers get jacked up all the time when a ball isn't catchable, or tipped at the line. Why would you need to wait for someone to stop juggling the ball?

With an evening to think about it and time to watch plenty of replays, a fairly prominent voice has offered his opinion that it was a bad call.

Belichick was pissed and with good reason, perfect hit,-horrible call.

AndyJohnson said:

The shoulder is connected to the neck. If the shoulder isnt in the 'neck area' what is?
Your argument implies only the neck is in the neck area. If so the word area would not be included.

Click to expand...

There's an area of the body between the shoulder and neck that I wouldn't regard as being part of either. I'd call that part of the neck area, however.

Joker said:

http://fat.gfycat.com/FlatNimbleBlowfish.webm

from both angles...I cannot see why this is a flagged offense

???????????????????????????????????????????

Click to expand...

It's not. Some people have the remarkable ability to be able to stare at these things over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again and still not know what the hell they're looking at. It was a big hit and hopefully Green is okay, but it's football.

Ivan said:

Belichick was poissed and with good reason, perfect hit,-horrible call.

Click to expand...

Yeah but PatsFans.com posters disagree.

Jangles said:

I agree that Andy is wrong.

Bad call, he had time to defend himself.

Receivers get jacked up all the time when a ball isn't catchable, or tipped at the line. Why would you need to wait for someone to stop juggling the ball?

Click to expand...

Have you actually read the thread, and the rules that were posted in it?

There is a specific rule in the NFL says, yes in fact you DO have to wait until he is not defenseless in order to hit with your shoulder in the head or neck area. I mean its written in plain English.
We can all agree its a bad rule, but its the rule.

If the hit were lower, there would be no justification for the penalty.

AndyJohnson said:

Have you actually read the thread, and the rules that were posted in it?

There is a specific rule in the NFL says, yes in fact you DO have to wait until he is not defenseless in order to hit with your shoulder in the head or neck area. I mean its written in plain English.
We can all agree its a bad rule, but its the rule.

If the hit were lower, there would be no justification for the penalty.

Click to expand...

So a player can just juggle the ball to the endzone and you cant hit them until they secure it?

AndyJohnson said:

Have you actually read the thread, and the rules that were posted in it?

There is a specific rule in the NFL says, yes in fact you DO have to wait until he is not defenseless in order to hit with your shoulder in the head or neck area. I mean its written in plain English.
We can all agree its a bad rule, but its the rule.

If the hit were lower, there would be no justification for the penalty.

Click to expand...

there was no justification for the penalty anyway.......he took 4 steps between the moment he first touched the ball and the Browner hit. between that and the fact the the hit was clean makes it a bad call.....case closed

Jangles said:

So a player can just juggle the ball to the endzone and you cant hit them until they secure it?

Click to expand...

What? Again, have you read anything? You can hit a defenseless receiver. You cannot hit a defenseless receiver in the head or neck area.

IllegalContact said:

there was no justification for the penalty anyway.......he took 4 steps between the moment he first touched the ball and the Browner hit. between that and the fact the the hit was clean makes it a bad call.....case closed

Click to expand...

He was still a defenseless receiver, simply BY DEFINITION.
You seem to want to argue that the definition in the actual rule book isn't accurate.

AndyJohnson said:

He was still a defenseless receiver, simply BY DEFINITION.
You seem to want to argue that the definition in the actual rule book isn't accurate.

Click to expand...

so when does a player become not defenseless?

IllegalContact said:

so when does a player become not defenseless?

Click to expand...

Already quoted it for you from the rule book.
Once he completes the catch and has had time to protect himself as a runner.



(2) A receiver attempting to catch a pass; or who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner. If the receiver/runner is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player;

AndyJohnson said:

Already quoted it for you from the rule book.
Once he completes the catch and has had time to protect himself as a runner.



(2) A receiver attempting to catch a pass; or who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner. If the receiver/runner is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player;

Click to expand...

he had 4 steps to protect himself..........he was capable of warding off impending contact....he was more interested in bobbling the ball......

bad call.....case closed

IllegalContact said:

he had 4 steps to protect himself..........he was capable of warding off impending contact....he was more interested in bobbling the ball......

bad call.....case closed

Click to expand...

The catch is not complete if you are bobbling the ball.
The rule is clear. But you know that and just refuse to admit you are wrong.
So lets play along. You think that they wrote the rule meaning that if the ball is in the air, the receiver should ignore it so he can protect himself, so then the defender can hit him in the head or neck area with his shoulder?
You sound dumber with every post.

IllegalContact said:

he had 4 steps to protect himself..........he was capable of warding off impending contact....he was more interested in bobbling the ball......

bad call.....case closed

Click to expand...

AndyJohnson said:

The catch is not complete if you are bobbling the ball.
The rule is clear. But you know that and just refuse to admit you are wrong.
So lets play along. You think that they wrote the rule meaning that if the ball is in the air, the receiver should ignore it so he can protect himself, so then the defender can hit him in the head or neck area with his shoulder?
You sound dumber with every post.

Click to expand...

Did you miss the "If the receiver/runner is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player;" Nowhere in that statement does it require completing a catch. He was certainly capable of defending himself, in fact the replay showed him look STRAIGHT AT Browner coming in. He decided to still try to haul in the pass rather than brace for impact/move. I admire that, but it means he WASNT a defenseless receiver. Otherwise, we'd see the flag come out on every screen pass...

AndyJohnson said:

The catch is not complete if you are bobbling the ball.
The rule is clear. But you know that and just refuse to admit you are wrong.
So lets play along. You think that they wrote the rule meaning that if the ball is in the air, the receiver should ignore it so he can protect himself, so then the defender can hit him in the head or neck area with his shoulder?
You sound dumber with every post.

Click to expand...

I'm not wrong and you're a complete jackass for challenging the intelligence of others

Like your interpretation is the only right one