PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Taunting Penalty Enforcement


Status
Not open for further replies.

brdmaverick

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
Joined
Sep 13, 2004
Messages
6,038
Reaction score
4,157
So Gronk got flagged for taunting, and deservedly so, but I was a bit surprised by the enforcement of the penalty.

He was flagged after catching a pass for a first down that took him to the Bengals 8 yard line.

After the penalty the ball was moved back to the 23 yard line where it was first and goal. Shouldn't it have been first and ten from the 23? Is this a recent change?
 
it's only 1st and 10 if the foul occurs after a change of possession.
 
So Gronk got flagged for taunting, and deservedly so, but I was a bit surprised by the enforcement of the penalty.

He was flagged after catching a pass for a first down that took him to the Bengals 8 yard line.

After the penalty the ball was moved back to the 23 yard line where it was first and goal. Shouldn't it have been first and ten from the 23? Is this a recent change?

it's only 1st and 10 if the foul occurs after a change of possession.

The ref said "First and 10" to the loudspeaker. That's the mistake there.
 
So Gronk got flagged for taunting, and deservedly so, but I was a bit surprised by the enforcement of the penalty.

He was flagged after catching a pass for a first down that took him to the Bengals 8 yard line.

After the penalty the ball was moved back to the 23 yard line where it was first and goal. Shouldn't it have been first and ten from the 23? Is this a recent change?
Agree, I was confused by that too.
 
it's only 1st and 10 if the foul occurs after a change of possession.
I don't think that's the case. But I could be wrong.
 
I think it was enforced that way because it was a dead ball foul.
 
Essentially once Gronk was tackled it was first and goal (1st & 8, if you will).

Then there was a fifteen yard penalty.

Therefore it was still first and goal (or 1st & 23, if that helps).
 
Was just looking through the NFL rulebook online (I think it was the official one anyway) and found this. If I'm interpreting it correctly the application on Sunday was incorrect as it should have been 1st and 10 (not goal).........


ADVANCE OF NECESSARY LINE FIRST-AND-10


Article 4
After a distance penalty for a foul by the offensive team during a play from scrimmage which results in the ball being in advance of the necessary line, it is a first-and-10 for the offensive team.

Articles 4 and 6 also apply to a dead ball foul of the offensive team at the end of a play from scrimmage during which it has been constantly in possession.

A.R. 14.67 Second-and-4 on A30. Runner A1 goes to the B45. During the run, A2 clipped on the 50.

Ruling: After the penalty, the ball is still in advance of the necessary line for the first down. A’s ball first-and-10 on A35.
 
I'm still pissed about that flag. Did Gronk taunt? Sure. But the refs let it escalate by sitting on their hands.

First, Jones went low on Gronk. So Gronk had a few words. If you're worried about taunting, throw the flag right here. But no, they let it go. Then Burfict comes over and butts heads with Gronk. Throw a flag here. Nope.

Next play, Burfict goes low on Bennett, nothing. Gronk gets another catch, gets up, has something to say. You could throw the flag again, but no. Then Burfict comes over again. No flag. Finally Gronk walks away and the sideline freaks out (and looks like they come on the field) and only then, finally then, do they throw a flag.

They could have thrown the flag on Gronk right away. They could have thrown several on Burfict. Instead, the refs let the game get away from them. The chippiness would continue into the next series, and again, the refs did nothing while Burfict continued to try and bait Blount. Burfict steps on Blount intentionally. He's a dirty player, and the refs continued to hide the whistles up their asses. Then Blount gets the flag for...getting stepped on? I don't know.

The Bungles have that reputation, as does Burfict. The refs should have been watching for it as the game got out of hand. The late flag does nothing to help the situation, and it almost got out of control due to their poor handling of the situation. If Gronk and Blount are guilty of a flag, Burfict should have been guilty of a dozen.
 
Last edited:
Was just looking through the NFL rulebook online (I think it was the official one anyway) and found this. If I'm interpreting it correctly the application on Sunday was incorrect as it should have been 1st and 10 (not goal).........


ADVANCE OF NECESSARY LINE FIRST-AND-10


Article 4
After a distance penalty for a foul by the offensive team during a play from scrimmage which results in the ball being in advance of the necessary line, it is a first-and-10 for the offensive team.

Articles 4 and 6 also apply to a dead ball foul of the offensive team at the end of a play from scrimmage during which it has been constantly in possession.

A.R. 14.67 Second-and-4 on A30. Runner A1 goes to the B45. During the run, A2 clipped on the 50.

Ruling: After the penalty, the ball is still in advance of the necessary line for the first down. A’s ball first-and-10 on A35.
i was looking through the rulebook as well but missed that part.

there was an identical situation in the panthers-falcons game earlier this year. panthers 3rd and 1 @ CAR 34, newton gets 2 yards for the 1st down and is hit with taunting penalty. next play is 1st and 10 @ CAR 21:

Watch Carolina Panthers vs. Atlanta Falcons [10/02/2016] - NFL.com

8rxPdiQ.jpg


edit: never mind--this isn't identical. the key part i was missing was that it was 1st and goal from the 8.
 
Last edited:
This is how I've always understood it. And I may be wrong.

If they convert a 1st down. And the play is over. Now a personal foul is committed after the play is over. it's 15 yard penalty but still a 1st and 10.

However, because the Patriots got it to 1st and goal, it's always going to be 1st and goal. If Gronk was able to get a 1st down at the 11 yard line, it would have went back to the 26 yard line with 1st and 10.
 
So the refs let it get chippy, and flagged Gronk. If gronk scored later and did his spike in the vicinity of a bengal, he could have drawn a 2nd taunting flag and an ejection. It wouldn't surprise me to have a patriot player the first example of that......where is my tinfoil hat...
 
So the refs let it get chippy, and flagged Gronk. If gronk scored later and did his spike in the vicinity of a bengal, he could have drawn a 2nd taunting flag and an ejection. It wouldn't surprise me to have a patriot player the first example of that......where is my tinfoil hat...
Goodell is planning to use your tinfoil hat as a megaphone?
 
i was looking through the rulebook as well but missed that part.

there was an identical situation in the panthers-falcons game earlier this year. panthers 3rd and 1 @ CAR 34, newton gets 2 yards for the 1st down and is hit with taunting penalty. next play is 1st and 10 @ CAR 21:

Watch Carolina Panthers vs. Atlanta Falcons [10/02/2016] - NFL.com

8rxPdiQ.jpg


edit: never mind--this isn't identical. the key part i was missing was that it was 1st and goal from the 8.
But first and goal doesn't change that.
 
This is how I've always understood it. And I may be wrong.

If they convert a 1st down. And the play is over. Now a personal foul is committed after the play is over. it's 15 yard penalty but still a 1st and 10.

However, because the Patriots got it to 1st and goal, it's always going to be 1st and goal. If Gronk was able to get a 1st down at the 11 yard line, it would have went back to the 26 yard line with 1st and 10.

Wow, I mean, you MUST be right because I'd be shocked if every single ref at the game on Sunday didn't know the correct application.

Still, that seems like such bad logic (for the rulebook, not the poster). After all, we're essentially saying it would have been MUCH better for Gronk to go down at the 11 yard line (assuming that would be a first down) instead of the 9 yard line. If it's not in the offensive player's best interest to advance the ball it seems like something is wrong.
 
But nobody expects their own offense to get a dead ball foul.

Personally I always prefer we get a 1st and goal within 5 yards. 1st and goal at the 10 is a lot harder. I'd rather have us have a 1st and 10 at the 15 yard line than the 11 yard line. That gives us leeway to get it to 1st and goal instead of having to go for a TD on the 1st and 11. Although there have been a couple of times where a 1st down was within the 1 yard line and we got just that.
 
I suppose one could argue that personal fouls after a play that results in a first down should all be first and 25 anyway. After all, it truly affects the offense by the full 15 yards when a first down isn't made.
 
i agree w/ poster above, if in any other case it would mean just going 10 yards for a 1st down, then if before foul its & Goal, it should be adjusted to become a 1st and 10 after the foul...leaving it at goal doesnt make any sense, a 1st down is a 1st down and you should have 10 yards to go or less
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/25: News and Notes
Patriots Kraft ‘Involved’ In Decision Making?  Zolak Says That’s Not the Case
MORSE: Final First Round Patriots Mock Draft
Slow Starts: Stark Contrast as Patriots Ponder Which Top QB To Draft
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/24: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/23: News and Notes
MORSE: Final 7 Round Patriots Mock Draft, Matthew Slater News
Bruschi’s Proudest Moment: Former LB Speaks to MusketFire’s Marshall in Recent Interview
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/22: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-21, Kraft-Belichick, A.J. Brown Trade?
Back
Top