"Hands to the Face" Penalties

[brdmaverick]

Is it just me or are we seeing more and more "HANDS TO THE FACE" penalties?


If you ask me, I feel like the rule was put into place to avoid what D.Wise did last night. Let's just say he got his money's worth on that one.

I don't think the rule was put in place to call the ticky tack stuff that Gillmore got called for last week, or even the one the TB offensive lineman got called for last night. That call took away a full 7 points from TB since it cancelled the TD AND they missed the FG.

We spend so much time talking about the calls that don't go our way (for good reason), but I feel like we got away with one with the TB "hands to the face" penalty. Maybe it's true that things tend to even out over time.

 

[SalemPats]

Is it just me or are we seeing more and more "HANDS TO THE FACE" penalties?


If you ask me, I feel like the rule was put into place to avoid what D.Wise did last night. Let's just say he got his money's worth on that one.

I don't think the rule was put in place to call the ticky tack stuff that Gillmore got called for last week, or even the one the TB offensive lineman got called for last night. That call took away a full 7 points from TB since it cancelled the TD AND they missed the FG.

We spend so much time talking about the calls that don't go our way (for good reason), but I feel like we got away with one with the TB "hands to the face" penalty. Maybe it's true that things tend to even out over time.

I agree, i hate the ticky tacky hands to the face. Also, refs have to be smarter if it really doesn't affect the play and it's soft please don't call it. It really does change the whole complexion of the game

 

[RobertWeathers]

David Andrews has no idea what you are talking about.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

its better than talk to the hand penalty

 

[neuronet]

its better than talk to the hand penalty

Here's a 20 yarder

 

[Sicilian]

I think what's hard about it is once you start saying, "Well, this is egregious and this isn't," you're leaving more up to a judgment call. Which as we've seen with PI, can produce the most inconsistent and frustrating results.

What I don't understand is why it's an automatic first down. I get it on five yarders like defensive holding or illegal contact, with the thought being you can't tell how many yards the receiver could have gotten had he been unimpeded. But this didn't impede a receiver and it isn't a personal foul. Feels like it should be equivalent to offsides: If the yardage isn't enough for the first, it should just repeat the down IMO.

 

[Ring 6]

Is it just me or are we seeing more and more "HANDS TO THE FACE" penalties?


If you ask me, I feel like the rule was put into place to avoid what D.Wise did last night. Let's just say he got his money's worth on that one.

I don't think the rule was put in place to call the ticky tack stuff that Gillmore got called for last week, or even the one the TB offensive lineman got called for last night. That call took away a full 7 points from TB since it cancelled the TD AND they missed the FG.

We spend so much time talking about the calls that don't go our way (for good reason), but I feel like we got away with one with the TB "hands to the face" penalty. Maybe it's true that things tend to even out over time.

It was a penalty.
The penalty is there because it's otherwise a legal version of holding.

 

[Nikolai]

David Andrews has no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Wheelman]

I hope BB ripped Andrews in the meeting for that. He could have blocked 98.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

 

[Tunescribe]

Aren't refs supposed to immediately blow a play dead when a player loses his helmet?

 

[condon84]

Here's a 20 yarder

 

[jah]

Aren't refs supposed to immediately blow a play dead when a player loses his helmet?

I'm not positive but the rule may only apply to the ball carrier.

 

[Sicilian]

I hope BB ripped Andrews in the meeting for that. He could have blocked 98.

I'm sure he did, but man that's rough... forget that it should have been a penalty, with all the crap about head injuries going around, would you want to throw yourself into a block against someone who HAS a helmet when you've lost yours? Bad look for Andrews because he was complaining and unaware of the play, but I'm kind of glad he didn't try to block there.

 

[PatriotsReign]

Makes one want to whack them upside the head! Thankfully I don't see this at sporting events!

Sorry to the PC police!!!!!

 

[brdmaverick]

It was a penalty.
The penalty is there because it's otherwise a legal version of holding.

I'll have to take a look at it again but I recall it as being nothing more than ticky tack.

Sure, everything is a penalty by the letter of the law. There is illegal contact on every play, but it's not going to be called every play. So what we strive for is consistency. Much like in baseball, umpires have different strike zones you just want them to show consistency. Let me tell you, if you consistently call 'hands to the face' on plays like the TB lineman and Gillmore, it's going to be a long day and the product will suffer. If you're glad they are calling those ticky tack penalties away from the ball 'b/c it's technically a penalty' then that's fine to have that opinion, I just think most (including myself) have a different one.

 

[brdmaverick]

it's football. At some point you have to let the players play.

Sometimes I think this kind of stuff goes down............

 

[DaBronxPats14]

I hope BB ripped Andrews in the meeting for that. He could have blocked 98.

Yup! He definitely wasn't using his head.

 

[RayClay]

If they're calling it, don't do it...again.

 

[luuked]

I hope BB ripped Andrews in the meeting for that. He could have blocked 98.

Why should he do that without a helmet ? And dont give me any of this toughness ********. In the era of CTE and concussions there is no way he should have continued to play once his helmet was ripped off.