I need help!

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by jman924, Mar 17, 2007.

  1. jman924

    jman924 Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    I debating with a Dolphin troll in the comments section of YouTube, on why that play by Brady with 33 seconds to go in Super Bowl 36, was NOT intentional grounding.
    Can anyone help with a point by point analysis?
  2. TomBradyWoot

    TomBradyWoot On the Game Day Roster

    the pass made it passed the line of scrimmage and he was rolling out of the pocket
  3. jman924

    jman924 Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    I tried that, but he said that to be out of the pocket, the QB must be 2 yards to the side of the tackle. It does say in the rules that the pocket extends two yards to the side of the furthest tackle or blocking TE.
  4. TomBradyWoot

    TomBradyWoot On the Game Day Roster

    I've never heard a Rams player or a Rams fan whine about the non-call so tell this Dolphins fan to go look at his poster of the 72 Dolphins.
  5. TomBradyWoot

    TomBradyWoot On the Game Day Roster

  6. Canada's #1 Pats Fan

    Canada's #1 Pats Fan Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Didn't the rules re: this become much clearer a couple of seasons after this game. I don't mean as a result of this play.

    There was also a receiver in the area with his back to the play - perhaps the judgement was that the receiver ran the wrong route - just a guess.
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2007
  7. VJCPatriot

    VJCPatriot Pro Bowl Player

    There are 2 ways a pass can be disqualified as intentional grounding.

    1. The ball lands in the vicinity of any offensive ballplayer/receiver.
    2. The Quarterback is outside of the pocket.

    There are no special rules for formation. If he is outside of the pocket it cannot be intentional grounding. BTW I believe that is one of the refereer's calls that cannot be overturned. Sounds like sour grapes to me.
  8. Bargod

    Bargod On the Roster

    He needed to get to the right side hash to be out of the pocket and that was borderline. When he started throwing the ball there was a receiver at the spot where the ball landed. He was about 10 yards away when the ball landed. The call could have gone either way. It was fairly subjective and if you're an official in that situation facing OT I'm sure a call that close didn't come into question. Definite sour grapes.
  9. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    #50 Jersey

    There is a whole website dedicated to SB36.

    He also has a message board where Pats1 and myself have basically debunked a majority of his postings.


    That being said, there is no way to truly tell if Brady was OUTSIDE the pocket or not because there is no view from the endzone on that play. Obviously, though, the referee either missed it or it was so close that the referee gave Brady the benefit of the doubt.
  10. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    #50 Jersey

    Actually, the receiver was 10 yards down field from where the ball. Its questionable whether he was supposed to have come back to Brady or not.
  11. the taildragger

    the taildragger Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    tell the guy debating you to try his luck with the tuck rule instead.

    they NEVER make that call.

    90% of fans/media just don't get it: Refs are specifically instructed NOT TO THROW FLAGS UNLESS THEY CLEARLY SEE A VIOLATION....You're not supposed to GUESS...if that flag gets tossed we could be talking about it as one of the worst calls in NFL history.

    Example one: If you don't SEE Roethlisberger break the plane in SB40, you're not supposed to award a touchdown. The ref couldn't have seen him break the plane because the slo-mo replay had the same angle as the ref, yet was still definitively INCONCLUSIVE...so how did the ref know for sure he broke the plane?...answer: he didn't, he made an assumption...and awarded points which could not then be taken away. This is the definition of a BAD CALL.

    Example two: If you don't see Hobbs touch Wayne in the end zone, you can't throw a flag based on what you THINK happened. Hobbs never touched Wayne, yet refs are instructed not to make ASSUMPTIONS...this is definitively a BAD CALL.

    You can't assume Tom was inside the tackle box...you have to be 100% sure he was inside the box at the time he released the ball. If it's too close to call you CAN'T ASSUME IT'S INTENTIONAL GROUNDING.

    get it?

    Refs are supposed to favor errors of omission over errors of commission....sorry if this goes over your friend's head.

    Bottom line FOR EVERY CLUB is this: Sometimes you get the calls and sometimes you don't.

    Over the past two years, the Pats have been royally screwed by a litany of blown calls that borders on the conspiratorial. The list is a tad longer than said "intentional grounding" and the fumble reversal due to "arm was going forward" (NOT "TUCK") in the Snow Bowl...but because the Pats are perceived to have been luckier than other teams in years past (anyone who thinks that '01 team was "lucky" has no clue, no team ENDURED MORE than they did...and which teams were more unlucky in the injury departments when they were winning??), but because we THINK they were lucky, we weren't allowed to make any noise about the fact that MAJOR blown calls arguably cost them two rings in the past two years.

    enough bull ****

    over the past six years the Pats faced the toughest average schedule in the league....won more regular season games (including record win streak)...more playoff games (including record win streak)....THEY KEEP KICKING YOUR ASS BECAUSE THEY'RE BETTER THAN YOUR SCRUB TEAM....YOU'RE NOT UNLUCKY, YOU JUST SUCK....WAKE UP!
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2007
  12. brdmaverick

    brdmaverick In the Starting Line-Up

    #32 Jersey

    you will have a tough time with that one BECAUSE IT WAS INTENTIONAL GROUNDING!!!

    In fact, that is exactly what the rule is trying to prevent. Brady was under immense pressure and threw the ball out of bounds to avoid the sack, exactly what intentional grounding is. He was not out of the pocket and he certainly wasn't throwing it to or near a receiver.

    It was intentional grounding, but we all know that intentional grounding is only called half of the time that it should be anyways.

    But yes, that play is and should have been called intentional grounding. You will have no defense against it.

    Just say that the refs didn't call it, and that penalty is only loosely enforced anyways. That's just the way it is.
  13. Canada's #1 Pats Fan

    Canada's #1 Pats Fan Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Believe me, I think TB threw the ball away. I'll never know what he was thinking at the time but he probably made the decision at that moment that this was his safest bet for getting rid of the ball with the closeness of the receiver (but not close enough for a possible INT)
  14. zippo59

    zippo59 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    I do believe that at the time intentional grounding was not given as much attention as it is now. Also the rules are looser when the QB throws the ball past the line of scrimmage.

    Ultimately the call could ahve gone either way.
  15. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    I agree that he was borderline out of the pocket, most likely he was not. He got the benefit of the non-call.

Share This Page