Browner's penalty negating McCourty TD

AndyJohnson said:

So thats you, Mr "Case Closed" after every misinformed post, insisting on the last word?
Where exactly do you think the hit was if it wasn't in the NECK AREA. Have you actually looked at the images and clips posted in here?

Click to expand...

uhhhhh......yeah, I have

he was called for unnecessary roughness - helmet to helmet, not hitting a defenseless receiver which you keep hanging your hat on. there was no helmet to helmet.

the call was wrong, and you can say NECK AREA all you want and it won't make it so.......

they called helmet to helmet which it wasn't.........bad call case closed

incredible how someone who claims to be all-knowing can be so daft and out to lunch on concepts so basic....but you are

IllegalContact said:

uhhhhh......yeah, I have

he was called for unnecessary roughness - helmet to helmet, not hitting a defenseless receiver which you keep hanging your hat on. there was no helmet to helmet.

the call was wrong, and you can say NECK AREA all you want and it won't make it so.......

they called helmet to helmet which it wasn't.........bad call case closed

incredible how someone who claims to be all-knowing can be so daft and out to lunch on concepts so basic....but you are

Click to expand...

I said pages ago that it was not a helmet to helmet hit but it was an illegal hit.
You know as well as I do that the discussion has been about whether the hit was legal or not, and not about whether it was helmet to helmet.
I copied in the rule, I discussed the neck area, I cited the exact example of defenseless receiver which has nothing to do with helmet to helmet.

I, like you, was wrong at first and thought it was a legal hit, until someone else showed me the rule book and I realized I was wrong.
You seem to not be able to accept you are wrong, so you change the argument to something else and act like you were right.

So lets just do it this way.
Was the hit by Browner a legal hit or an illegal hit, based upon the rules of the NFL?

1960Pats said:

I wasn't sure on the launch either. Joker's picture clearly showed Browner with at least one foot on the ground at contact. The picture also clearly showed Browner's shoulder making contact with the face mask, enough to spin it around a little. That's more like the face area than the neck area, and should leave no doubt that the hit was too high.

Click to expand...

Here is the picture that Joker posted..



You can't tell from that picture if Browner's shoulder is making contact with Green's facemask or not.

And the picture clearly shows he didn't launch himself..

1960Pats said:

I think we can all agree that we want Browner to continue to provide hits like that for the team, but I'll be pretty upset if he takes a dumb penalty at the wrong time in the playoffs. He could have provided just as great a hit by hitting him in the chest and avoided the penalty.

Click to expand...

What makes a penalty "dumb"? A bad call by the Ref as it was in this case? A bad DPI call?

Terrible call.

RayClay said:

..

Click to expand...

I love Tedy, but he's wrong in this case.

AndyJohnson said:

I said pages ago that it was not a helmet to helmet hit but it was an illegal hit.
You know as well as I do that the discussion has been about whether the hit was legal or not, and not about whether it was helmet to helmet.
I copied in the rule, I discussed the neck area, I cited the exact example of defenseless receiver which has nothing to do with helmet to helmet.

I, like you, was wrong at first and thought it was a legal hit, until someone else showed me the rule book and I realized I was wrong.
You seem to not be able to accept you are wrong, so you change the argument to something else and act like you were right.

So lets just do it this way.
Was the hit by Browner a legal hit or an illegal hit, based upon the rules of the NFL?

Click to expand...

Legal.....100%...you still have not produced a legitimate reason as to why it should have been a penalty........exactly what rule was broken?

it was a bad call.....case closed....cuz he hit him in the f***ing shoulder

PatsBoy12 said:

Let's face it and come to terms with the fact that the NFL is a no contact league now. I honestly don't know if I could ever give up football altogether because I love the game, and especially my Patriots, so much. However, football is becoming so hard to watch now. It's so annoying! Week after week of this sh*t. Is anyone going to do something about it?

Click to expand...

I think its a difficult situation.
The way you and I want to see football played is dangerous to the players.
The momentum is moving in the direction of soft play because almost every week we hear of another player with long term effects of head injuries.
The rules are there to prevent head injuries, but to do so they have to sanction a lot of the type of hits that make the game exciting.
It seems that the referees have been instructed that it is better to miss 10 calls in favor of calling the unnecessary roughness than to miss one. I would imagine that any time a player suffers a serious injury and a penalty was not called, that the referees get the most severe criticism and punishment, because they just always throw the flag now if it looks like an injury causing hit.
I don't know the answer. I like the way college does it because every one is review so they get it right. Of course they also eject the player for helmet to helmet so they kind of have to get it right.

IllegalContact said:

Legal.....100%

it was a bad call.....case closed....cuz he hit him in the f***ing shoulder

Click to expand...

OK then what area of the body do you think is meant by 'neck area'?
And did you not see his shoulder pad up under the chin?

DaBruinz said:

I love Tedy, but he's wrong in this case.

Click to expand...

The rule is bad, but the rule says the hit was illegal.

IllegalContact said:

Legal.....100%...you still have not produced a legitimate reason as to why it should have been a penalty........exactly what rule was broken?

it was a bad call.....case closed....cuz he hit him in the f***ing shoulder

Click to expand...

You added the bold.
And, are you kidding? Have you read the posts you are responding to?
The rule states that hitting a defenseless player in the head or neck area, even with your shoulder or forearm is unnecessary roughness.
The rule defines defenseless receiver, which Green clearly was.

AndyJohnson said:

I think its a difficult situation.
The way you and I want to see football played is dangerous to the players.
The momentum is moving in the direction of soft play because almost every week we hear of another player with long term effects of head injuries.
The rules are there to prevent head injuries, but to do so they have to sanction a lot of the type of hits that make the game exciting.
It seems that the referees have been instructed that it is better to miss 10 calls in favor of calling the unnecessary roughness than to miss one. I would imagine that any time a player suffers a serious injury and a penalty was not called, that the referees get the most severe criticism and punishment, because they just always throw the flag now if it looks like an injury causing hit.
I don't know the answer. I like the way college does it because every one is review so they get it right. Of course they also eject the player for helmet to helmet so they kind of have to get it right.

Click to expand...

Hey Andy. All of that is understood. I'm talking about the game from a fan's perspective, so that's why my point is slanted so far to one side. I do understand the challenges and I do understand that part of it is player safety and part of it is the NFL wants to stop getting sued.

However, these blown calls are affecting the outcome of games. What happens if a call like that gets made in a playoff game, or worse, the SB and it costs that team the game? That just isn't right. These guys work too hard to put themselves in a position to win games. Their very lives depend on how well they play and produce. There needs to be a better way to officiate these kinds of plays. Maybe replay is the only way. I don't know how I feel about it personally, other than to say I'm willing to deal with whatever the league does to better this situation so that plays like the Browner play, which was a solid hit in every way, don't get called and points don't get taken off of the board. What if Ayers never intercepted the pass a few plays later? Maybe SD drives down and scores. A loss there would have meant that the Pats lose home-field. As a fan, I don't think any one of us would have been too pleased.

I do completely understand, and even agree for the most part, with what you're saying. It is a tough situation. This is why I believe we are seeing the beginning of the demise of football as we know it. I hate to think of a day when I no longer care about the sport, perhaps when Brady and BB and Gronk and Wilfork are all gone. But that's what I fear will happen if things continue to progress this way. Much luv and respect, Andy.

AndyJohnson said:

OK then what area of the body do you think is meant by 'neck area'?
And did you not see his shoulder pad up under the chin?

Click to expand...

shoulder pad did not go up under the chin....you must be watching some other play.......pay attention

AndyJohnson said:

You added the bold.
And, are you kidding? Have you read the posts you are responding to?
The rule states that hitting a defenseless player in the head or neck area, even with your shoulder or forearm is unnecessary roughness.
The rule defines defenseless receiver, which Green clearly was.

Click to expand...

wrong......green had several steps after the ball got to him......not the defenders fault he couldn't make a clean catch....nothing defenseless about the play.....green had plenty of time....he chose to focus on juggling rather than who would be closing

Perfect hit.

PatsBoy12 said:

Hey Andy. All of that is understood. I'm talking about the game from a fan's perspective, so that's why my point is slanted so far to one side. I do understand the challenges and I do understand that part of it is player safety and part of it is the NFL wants to stop getting sued.

However, these blown calls are affecting the outcome of games. What happens if a call like that gets made in a playoff game, or worse, the SB and it costs that team the game? That just isn't right. These guys work too hard to put themselves in a position to win games. Their very lives depend on how well they play and produce. There needs to be a better way to officiate these kinds of plays. Maybe replay is the only way. I don't know how I feel about it personally, other than to say I'm willing to deal with whatever the league does to better this situation so that plays like the Browner play, which was a solid hit in every way, don't get called and points don't get taken off of the board. What if Ayers never intercepted the pass a few plays later? Maybe SD drives down and scores. A loss there would have meant that the Pats lose home-field. As a fan, I don't think any one of us would have been too pleased.

I do completely understand, and even agree for the most part, with what you're saying. It is a tough situation. This is why I believe we are seeing the beginning of the demise of football as we know it. I hate to think of a day when I no longer care about the sport, perhaps when Brady and BB and Gronk and Wilfork are all gone. But that's what I fear will happen if things continue to progress this way. Much luv and respect, Andy.

Click to expand...

I'm not even giving an opinion (other than that i like the college way) I'm really just stating what it is.
I don't like the rule. I realize it is going to get missed a lot because it happens so fast. Hell we are sitting here with the benefit of reading the rules and looking at it in slo motion or still framed, and some people are still in denial that the hit was illegal.
It seems clear to me that the league wants to err on the side of calling it too much, which makes reviewing everyone make perfect sense. Then the ref is doing no more than saying maybe and it gets confirmed on review.

IllegalContact said:

shoulder pad did not go up under the chin....you must be watching some other play.......pay attention

Click to expand...

Of course it did. Go ahead and look at the shot taken from behind Browner that is in this thread and tell me where the outermost part of his right shoulder made contact.

By the way you still refuse to answer what your definition of neck area is. I wonder why?

IllegalContact said:

wrong......green had several steps after the ball got to him......not the defenders fault he couldn't make a clean catch....nothing defenseless about the play.....green had plenty of time....he chose to focus on juggling rather than who would be closing

Click to expand...

The rule defines defenseless (in part) as a player in the process of making a catch or just completing the catch and not yet in position to defend himself (paraphrase). How can you possibly take that to mean that they are saying once he bobbles it, instead of completing the catch, he should stop so it become legal to hit him in the head or neck area? That is moronic.
The player does not have a responsiblity to make himself not defenseless by giving up on the catch.

What does fault have to do with it? The rule also states that a punter or kicker simply by being on the field is considered defenseless, as is the QB after a Int.
But what you seem to not realize is that the correct designation of Green being defenseless because he is still attempting to catch the ball does not prohibit Browner from laying him out, it just says that while he is focussed on making the catch, you can't hit him as high as the head or neck area, even leading with your shoulder.
You seem to just not like the rule, so you are trying to find a way to eliminate it.

AndyJohnson said:

I'm not even giving an opinion (other than that i like the college way) I'm really just stating what it is.
I don't like the rule. I realize it is going to get missed a lot because it happens so fast. Hell we are sitting here with the benefit of reading the rules and looking at it in slo motion or still framed, and some people are still in denial that the hit was illegal.
It seems clear to me that the league wants to err on the side of calling it too much, which makes reviewing everyone make perfect sense. Then the ref is doing no more than saying maybe and it gets confirmed on review.

Click to expand...

Reviewing each one will present a lot of challenges and I think even that will annoy me somewhat because it would mean more commercials, but if that's what it takes, then so be it. When I think back to that bogus P.I. on Ellis Hobbs in the 2006 AFCCG or Armani Toomer on the first Giant's drive in the SB in 2007 when he pretty much grabbed Hobbs' (I believe) facemask (poor Hobbs) and used it to gain leverage on a deep play that later lead to a field goal, I think reviewing certain plays like that makes sense. Those three points loom large. Maybe if that penalty gets called, the Giants punt on that drive. Who knows?

I guess I'm in the camp that believes if you're going to instruct that the game be called this way, then you must institute safeguards that protect, not undermine, the integrity of the game. These players and coaches work too hard to have victories being determined, or at least severely impacted, by these bad/missed calls. It's just no fair to those guys when we see coaches being fired all the time and players being cut all the time. Your point about the rule is very much a good one. It's a bad rule. So the NFL needs to find a better way to legislate it.

PatsBoy12 said:

Reviewing each one will present a lot of challenges and I think even that will annoy me somewhat because it would mean more commercials, but if that's what it takes, then so be it. When I think back to that bogus P.I. on Ellis Hobbs in the 2006 AFCCG or Armani Toomer on the first Giant's drive in the SB in 2007 when he pretty much grabbed Hobbs' (I believe) facemask (poor Hobbs) and used it to gain leverage on a deep play that later lead to a field goal, I think reviewing certain plays like that makes sense. Those three points loom large. Maybe if that penalty gets called, the Giants punt on that drive. Who knows?

I guess I'm in the camp that believes if you're going to instruct that the game be called this way, then you must institute safeguards that protect, no undermine, the integrity of the game. These players and coaches work too hard to have victories being determined, or at least severely impacted, by these bad/missed calls. It's just no fair to those guys when we see coaches being fired all the time and players being cut all the time. Your point about the rule is very much a good one. It's a bad rule. So the NFL needs to find a better way to legislate it.

Click to expand...

Well you are never going to get every call right.
Many people will tell you that the quality of life for these players, and even the length of it, is more important than a win or loss.
Look at Jr Seau or Mike Webster or Ted Johnson or Andre Waters and many others.
I find it hard to disagree that the quality of the football should take a back to seat to these guys not having mush for brains when they are 45. I think the head injury issue really has to be treated differently than everything else for those reasons.

AndyJohnson said:

Well you are never going to get every call right.
Many people will tell you that the quality of life for these players, and even the length of it, is more important than a win or loss.
Look at Jr Seau or Mike Webster or Ted Johnson or Andre Waters and many others.
I find it hard to disagree that the quality of the football should take a back to seat to these guys not having mush for brains when they are 45. I think the head injury issue really has to be treated differently than everything else for those reasons.

Click to expand...

I feel this is turning into an argument even though my posts have been in line with your thinking, for the most part. I will end it here. The games matter to these guys and, though I completely understand nobody will get every call right no the steps taken, there should still be safeguards in place to try to mitigate bad, and in a lot of cases, game-altering calls. I hope they do whatever is necessary to keep the game somewhat entertaining for the fans. We are how they make their money. No fans, no revenue. I will leave it at that no matter your response. With that said, however, I do have much respect for you.