Brady intentional grounding penalty and the state of NFL officiating

[QuantumMechanic]

No, there are not rules for "not being under pressure".

The first paragraph defines what intentional grounding is, which includes being under threat of imminent yardage loss due to pressure being required. Then the items below carve out some exceptions to the general rule and (other than allowing the spike) don't negate the pressure requirement.

 

[70Dart]

From the NFL rulebook: "In the NFL Rule Book, intentional grounding occurs when "a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion."

Looks like the constant is "under pressure" so I'm pretty sure you can throw it wherever you want while in the pocket as long as you aren't under pressure. I've seen Brady and other quarterbacks do it a million times. The rulebook doesn't explicitly state anything about grounding while not under pressure.

You're not wrong, you're just not reading the entire rule as it is written. What you posted is exactly correct, however, the rule goes on to state that a passer under no pressure in the pass pocket throws the ball out of bounds it is intentional grounding.

 

[Dorito Dink]

No they don't, did you listen or read the entire thing? And if he is under pressure and throws a pass at the feet of a receiver within 10, it is deemed legal. There are also rules for not being under pressure, in the pocket and outside the pocket.

INTENTIONAL GROUNDING

It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. A realistic chance of completion is defined as a pass that is thrown in the direction of and lands in the vicinity of an originally eligible receiver. (ie; within 10 yards of the receiver, beyond 10 yards it is Intentional grounding)

Ugh. Dude, your first bolded sentence is not a list; it's a continuation of the assumption that the passer is under pressure. The entire premise of the QB throwing a "forward pass without a realistic chance of completion" and it being intentional grounding ASSUMES the passer is facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure. I really do not know how many times it needs to be re-worded.

Really not trying to be rude but I think you should just stop. You're reading the rule incorrectly.

 

[70Dart]

No, there are not rules for "not being under pressure".

The first paragraph defines what intentional grounding is, which includes being under threat of imminent yardage loss due to pressure being required. Then the items below carve out some exceptions to the general rule and (other than allowing the spike) don't negate the pressure requirement.

Yes there is. It specifically states a passer outside the tackle box will not be flagged, however if a passer is in the tackle box or pocket and he knowingly throws the ball away. He can be called for IG. Perhaps I am reading this rule wrong, I understand the immanent pressure part. But Item 1 is also pretty specific in placing the passer outside the tackle box.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

You're not wrong, you're just not reading the entire rule as it is written. What you posted is exactly correct, however, the rule goes on to state that a passer under no pressure in the pass pocket throws the ball out of bounds it is intentional grounding.

See Quantum Mechanics' post -- it hits it right on the head, and is a common aspect of how contracts and other legal documents are listed. Specifically:

- first paragraph defines what "Intentional Grounding" is: "It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. A realistic chance of completion is defined as a pass that is thrown in the direction of and lands in the vicinity of an originally eligible receiver."

- Items 1 - 3 then state that despite the above, intentional grounding shall NOT be called in these specific scenarios (outside of the tackle box at any point provided the ball goes over the line of scrimmage, the passer's motion is affected by contact with a defending player, the QB is performing an immediate spike)

- Item 4 then states that despite the above and despite item 3, a delayed spike to the QB's own feet *will* qualify as intentional grounding.

Therefore, a common thread through all of this is that the QB must be under pressure. Item 4 says that the QB *isn't* under pressure but it's grounding anyway. Item 1-3 says the QB is under pressure but it's not grounding.

This is why, like ivanvamp, I only recall intentional grounding on an end zone throwaway called once in my 30 years of watching football - and it was the 2012 game in Seattle. I'm sure there may have been others I'm forgetting. Without seeing the full replay of the 2012 game, I can't say for sure if it's legit or not. And certainly there may have been others over the years that should have been called but weren't. That said, the Denver one on Sunday was perfectly legit given the above.

 

[jah]

Anyone else think Brady is throwing the ball away more than usual instead of taking sacks (probably better as long as he doesn't get hurt) or forcing throws (thank goodness he doesn't do this)? Seems like we hear "intentional grounding" a lot more this season.

 

[70Dart]

See Quantum Mechanics' post -- it hits it right on the head, and is a common aspect of how contracts and other legal documents are listed. Specifically:

- first paragraph defines what "Intentional Grounding" is: "It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. A realistic chance of completion is defined as a pass that is thrown in the direction of and lands in the vicinity of an originally eligible receiver."

- Items 1 - 3 then state that despite the above, intentional grounding shall NOT be called in these specific scenarios (outside of the tackle box at any point provided the ball goes over the line of scrimmage, the passer's motion is affected by contact with a defending player, the QB is performing an immediate spike)

- Item 4 then states that despite the above and despite item 3, a delayed spike to the QB's own feet *will* qualify as intentional grounding.

Therefore, a common thread through all of this is that the QB must be under pressure. Item 4 says that the QB *isn't* under pressure but it's grounding anyway. Item 1-3 says the QB is under pressure but it's not grounding.

This is why, like ivanvamp, I only recall intentional grounding on an end zone throwaway called once in my 30 years of watching football - and it was the 2012 game in Seattle. I'm sure there may have been others I'm forgetting. Without seeing the full replay of the 2012 game, I can't say for sure if it's legit or not. And certainly there may have been others over the years that should have been called but weren't. That said, the Denver one on Sunday was perfectly legit given the above.

Thank you for clarifying. I clearly misunderstood the rule.Either way, I will go back to my original statement and say Refs, miss calls all the time, they will call it one way, then an identical play call it a different way. They lack consistency, and penalties at least 1 or 2 per game, should be able to be challenged. Especially if the call, will have a direct impact on the game. The Refs have a cost quite a few teams wins due to bad calls.

 

[70Dart]

Anyone else think Brady is throwing the ball away more than usual instead of taking sacks (probably better as long as he doesn't get hurt) or forcing throws (thank goodness he doesn't do this)? Seems like we hear "intentional grounding" a lot more this season.

A lot of his throw aways are coverage based. Sometimes it feels like he could knit a sweater back there but no one is getting open. But I would rather see him throw the ball away than lose yards.

 

[jah]

A lot of his throw aways are coverage based. Sometimes it feels like he could knit a sweater back there but no one is getting open. But I would rather see him throw the ball away than lose yards.

Problem is that lately, we do lose yards when he throws it away.

 

[XLIX]

Within 10 yards of the receiver. There are exceptions of course. If the receiver trips or slips, even then, too much gray area.

There is nothing in the rule book about the pass having to land "within 10 yards" of a receiver. The general rule of thumb is there has to be a receiver in the area. The actual written rule is "A realistic chance of completion is defined as a pass that lands in the direction and the vicinity of an originally eligible receiver."

 

[Plunkett2Vataha]

I think it depends on how much pressure the QB is under. Is he throwing it through the end zone because no one was open, but not really under pressure?...or is he throwing it out of the end zone to avoid a sack? The later is intentional grounding. In regards to Brady, I don't remember how much pressure he was under...how about the SB against the Giants, he was called for IG then too.

In over 50 years of watching pro football, I have only seen intentional grounding called twice with either 1) the QB in the pocket and heaving it down the middle of the field, without anyone nearby, or 2) the QB in the pocket and throwing it out of the back of the end zone without anyone nearby. We all know scenario #1 was in the SB versus the Giants (never seen that called before or since), and scenario #2 was the game in Seattle (never seen it called before or since). When Brady did it again last Sunday against Denver, I was both glad it wasn't called, and supremely irate when thinking about the Giants SB and Seattle regular season games.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Why focus on where the ball ended up? If you are QB and I am a WR and you throw a ball 10 feet directly over my head, it may well end up 15 yards away. It isn't clear from that picture, but from watching it live, I thought that the pass was in the direction of Edelman but just WAY over his head. Not 10 yards over his head, but more like 5-10 feet. It seemed to be a good no-call to me.

 

[Wax Frog]

My cynicism is so profound and my memory so good that I was actually sitting there waiting for the flag.

 

[1960Pats]

I didn't think Brady was ruled to be "under pressure" in the Broncos game but he was ruled to be under pressure in the Seattle game. I think both were the right calls

The one that I STILL have an issue with is the intentional grounding that resulted in a safety against the Giants in Super Bowl 46. I think the refs made too much of an assumption to call that grounding. If you're bombing the ball 40 yards down field, how are you to make the assumption that the receiver didn't run the wrong route? When Brady released the ball, Branch appeared to be running in the direction that Brady threw the ball. Instead, he ran a cut and the ball wasn't anywhere near him. That changed the whole dynamic of the game.

In that SB the odds of the first score of the game being a safety was 1,000 to 1. It's not a giant leap to be suspicious of the call, is it?

 

[1960Pats]

Anyone else think Brady is throwing the ball away more than usual instead of taking sacks (probably better as long as he doesn't get hurt) or forcing throws (thank goodness he doesn't do this)? Seems like we hear "intentional grounding" a lot more this season.

Maybe TB12 learned that during his short time with Tebow, who was excellent at throwing the ball away.

 

[luuked]

First of all I agree with everyone that said pressure is one of the key aspects of a grounding call.

Now, I let you guys decide yourself if the difference between @Seattle and @Denver was big enough:

From my point of view the pressure in Seattle was definitely imminent so nothing to complain about that call. BB & co shouldn't have risked a pass with 6 seconds on the clock anyway.

Now in the Denver game one could argue that Ware (#94) was also pretty close to Brady but he was still somewhat engaged with the Pats lineman.

 

[rochrist]

No they don't, did you listen or read the entire thing? And if he is under pressure and throws a pass at the feet of a receiver within 10, it is deemed legal. There are also rules for not being under pressure, in the pocket and outside the pocket.

INTENTIONAL GROUNDING

It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. A realistic chance of completion is defined as a pass that is thrown in the direction of and lands in the vicinity of an originally eligible receiver. (ie; within 10 yards of the receiver, beyond 10 yards it is Intentional grounding)

Item 1. Passer or Ball Outside Tackle Position. Intentional grounding will not be called when a passer, who is outside, or has been outside, the tackle position,throws a forward pass that lands at or beyond the line of scrimmage, even if no offensive player(s) have a realistic chance to catch the ball (including when the ball lands out of bounds over the sideline or endline). If the ball crosses the line of scrimmage (extended) beyond the sideline, there is no intentional grounding. If a loose ball leaves the area bordered by the tackles, this area no longer exists; if the ball is recovered, all intentional grounding rules apply as if the passer is outside this area.

Item 2. Physical Contact. Intentional grounding should not be called if:

1. the passer initiates his passing motion toward an eligible receiver and then is significantly affected by physical contact from a defensive player that causes the pass to land in an area that is not in the direction and vicinity of an eligible receiver; or
2. the passer is out of the pocket, and his passing motion is significantly affected by physical contact from a defensive player that causes the ball to land short of the line of scrimmage.

Item 3. Stopping Clock. A player under center is permitted to stop the game clock legally to save time if, immediately upon receiving the snap, he begins a continuous throwing motion and throws the ball directly into the ground.

Item 4. Delayed Spike. A passer, after delaying his passing action for strategic purposes, is prohibited from throwing the ball to the ground in front of him, even though he is under no pressure from defensive rusher(s).

Penalty: For intentional grounding:

1. loss of down and 10 yards from the previous spot; or
   
   
2. loss of down at the spot of the foul; or
   
   
3. if the passer is in his end zone when the ball is thrown, it is a safety. See 4-7 for actions to conserve time inside one minute of either half.

Note: If the foul occurs less than 10 yards behind the line of scrimmage, but more than half the distance to the goal line, the ball is to be placed at the spot of the pass.

In everything above, the QB facing imminent pressure is the required precursor to there being a penalty.

 

[TBR]

I saw some dumbass complaining that Brady's throwaway in Denver should've been intentional grounding and how it's such BS he gets all the calls.

Anyway, I've never heard of a player needing to be within 10 yards. Seems to be "a receiver within the area" whenever announcers and referees explain the call.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

First of all I agree with everyone that said pressure is one of the key aspects of a grounding call.

Now, I let you guys decide yourself if the difference between @Seattle and @Denver was big enough:

From my point of view the pressure in Seattle was definitely imminent so nothing to complain about that call. BB & co shouldn't have risked a pass with 6 seconds on the clock anyway.

Now in the Denver game one could argue that Ware (#94) was also pretty close to Brady but he was still somewhat engaged with the Pats lineman.

Based on those two still shots, I think the right call was made in both instances. A Seattle defender had clearly broken through the lineman and was about to hit Brady. In the 2nd case, as you note Ware is still engaged with the lineman (Solder?) so it's the right call to me.

 

[pazrul72]

My entire life I have misunderstood IG. I thought at any point as long as the ball got out of bounds it was safely throwing it away. That's why you see QB's chucking it into the stands. Reading the actual written rule there is nothing about getting it out of bounds until the QB breaks the pocket. I wouldn't have called it in either situation because it went out the back of the end zone but if I am reading this right it's about the immediate threat of losing yards not where it ends up. Learn something new everyday