The Game Ball Thread: Week 15 at Pittsburgh

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
Live it looked more like the lunge (with his knee down) toward the EZ could be considered a "football move".
How it looks live on TV is irrelevant. On replay, he's falling as he's catching the ball. The actual rule:

Item 2. Possession of Loose Ball. To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted, or recovered, a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet or any other part of his body, other than his hands, completely on the ground inbounds, and then maintain control of the ball long enough to become a runner. A player has the ball long enough to clearly become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground, there is no possession. This rule applies in the field of play and in the end zone.
The lunge from his one knee does not qualify as being able to any of the bolded items. The director of officiating even mentioned that lunging while on the ground doesn't qualify as being a runner.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
19,272
"Football move" is no longer the rule. Why don't you read the current rule before continuing to debate it?

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/completing-a-catch/
Funny timing. CSN NE literally had a commercial up where the host was arguing that he made a football move and Tom Curran's response immediately was "well i think the most important thing is you know the rules and once you do everything becomes clear" while i was reading this post.
 

m0ckduck

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,714
I have to apologize to Corrente’s crew. I was dreading them on this game as they are flag happy.

For the most part they stayed out of the game, and not the staying out of the game where people want the refs to just let them play by not calling egregious penalties.

They were fairly consistent on what they called.
Amen.

I often wonder, how does something like this come about? Does the crew discuss how they plan to officiate the game beforehand and say things like, "Instead of calling lots of penalties this game like we normally do, let's let the players decide it!" Or is there some implied, unspoken understanding that they're going to officiate it differently than normal? Or do they— in their own minds at least— call each game the same way?
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
i finally found a screen capture of the Seattle play. There isn’t a pats player within 20 yards of where Brady threw the ball.

I go back to maintaing show me the last time someone sailed a ball out the back of the end zone 15 feet over a receivers head (which Ben could have done) and it was called intentional grounding.
The Seattle play was exactly the bolded: a Brady throw out of the back end zone while under pursuit. Doesn't much matter; I just get irrational whenever Pete Carroll is involved.
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
A8DDE140-C3D1-4573-AC54-3FCB86B489BB.jpeg
The Seattle play was exactly the bolded: a Brady throw out of the back end zone while under pursuit. Doesn't much matter; I just get irrational whenever Pete Carroll is involved.
go look at the play again. Can someone find a video? All I can find is the screen capture.

Both Pats players are barely in the television shot.

Ben is not getting called for intentional grounding if he sails it 15 feet over his receivers head. I haven’t seen that called ever.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
go look at the play again. Can someone find a video? All I can find is the screen capture.

Both Pats players are barely in the television shot.

Ben is not getting called for intentional grounding if he sails it 15 feet over his receivers head. I haven’t seen that called ever.
I stand corrected. Again, Pete Carroll, irrational thoughts, incorrect recollections, etc. Bottom line is that the play the Steelers ran had almost no chance of success as it was drawn up. Ben's bad decision was just the icing on the cake.
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
I stand corrected. Again, Pete Carroll, irrational thoughts, incorrect recollections, etc. Bottom line is that the play the Steelers ran had almost no chance of success as it was drawn up. Ben's bad decision was just the icing on the cake.
yes I agree. Ben screwed it up. He frantically signaled a play after he made the “spike it” move then claims I didn’t want to do it. Then just clock it Ben or throw it away.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,681
As Greg Bedard noted this morning in the Boston Sports Journal, after TD call was overturned the Steelers could have sent in two plays in case the next one ends up as a tackle in the field of play. They certainly had enough time to prepare for that possibility while the officials and league office were deliberating.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,297
AZ
As Greg Bedard noted this morning in the Boston Sports Journal, after TD call was overturned the Steelers could have sent in two plays in case the next one ends up as a tackle in the field of play. They certainly had enough time to prepare for that possibility while the officials and league office were deliberating.
They did have plenty of time to simply run a play. The whole "fake spike" was dumb -- just line up and run a regular play and make sure it goes to the end zone or you don't take a sack. They tried to catch the Patriots with trickery and just tricked themselves.

That said, the correct play there at home is to spike and kick the field goal. There is just too much that can go wrong on a fire drill like that where overtime is presumptively the worst case scenario. The biggest concern is a false start that ends the game with a run off.

They blew it on second down. The second down pass was idiotic and created a fire drill situation that didn't need to exist. Take your two shots at the end zone, and if you throw short of the goal line you have to be certain your guy can get in.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,432
yes I agree. Ben screwed it up. He frantically signaled a play after he made the “spike it” move then claims I didn’t want to do it. Then just clock it Ben or throw it away.
Yeah. I agree the coaching was not the greatest the last two plays. They seemed unprepared like they are just watching and waiting the whole review and only when it was overturned did they start thinking about what to do.

But I still give Ben most of the blame. They should be able to trust their pro bowl QB to not throw an int in that situation. He treats at one point and that's when he should know to throw it away.
 

Time to Mo Vaughn

RIP Dernell
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
7,204
View attachment 18987 go look at the play again. Can someone find a video? All I can find is the screen capture.

Both Pats players are barely in the television shot.

Ben is not getting called for intentional grounding if he sails it 15 feet over his receivers head. I haven’t seen that called ever.
Whoever made that graphic clearly just made up the distances between the players and the ball. The player on the bottom of the screen is above the E in the Seahawks, while the player at the top is above the Hawk.



Line 1 is 0.766 inches
Line 2 is 1.884 inches, so the player up top is at least 2.4x as far away as the player below.

The line at the bottom for scale that's the length of the endzone is .844 inches, which should be 10 yards.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,297
AZ
Can we discuss why this Flag was picked up?

I'm curious too. What is the rule? Are linemen allowed to block downfield once the ball is caught? If so, this is a very close timing play. Or are they never permitted?

If it's a timing play, maybe they were not certain of the sequence -- it's pretty close. If it's not a timing play, then I don't know why they picked up the flag.
 

pokey_reese

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 25, 2008
16,253
Boston, MA
One thing that really stood out in my mind was the missed PAT. Though it didn’t end up mattering because Ben blew the call at the end, of Ghost had hit the extra point there would have been no chance for the tying FG on the last play.

But man, Gronk all damn day, and Rowe for one big play.
 

The Needler

New Member
Dec 7, 2016
1,803
I'm curious too. What is the rule? Are linemen allowed to block downfield once the ball is caught? If so, this is a very close timing play. Or are they never permitted?

If it's a timing play, maybe they were not certain of the sequence -- it's pretty close. If it's not a timing play, then I don't know why they picked up the flag.
Of course a lineman can block once a pass is caught. What he can't do is move more than a yard downfield before blocking someone before a pass is thrown. Which he clearly did here.

Illegally Downfield. An ineligible offensive player is illegally downfield if: (a) he moves more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage without contacting an opponent (b) after losing contact with an opponent within one yard of the line of scrimmage, he advances more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage (c) after losing contact with an opponent more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage, he continues to move in any direction.
The refs might try to say he made contact in a glancing blow under (a) at the line of scrimmage, but he still violated (b). This was a penalty.
 
Last edited:

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
I'm curious too. What is the rule? Are linemen allowed to block downfield once the ball is caught? If so, this is a very close timing play. Or are they never permitted?

If it's a timing play, maybe they were not certain of the sequence -- it's pretty close. If it's not a timing play, then I don't know why they picked up the flag.
Yes, they are allowed to run upfield once the pass is thrown. Blocking is not allowed until the pass is caught.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
One thing that really stood out in my mind was the missed PAT. Though it didn’t end up mattering because Ben blew the call at the end, of Ghost had hit the extra point there would have been no chance for the tying FG on the last play.

But man, Gronk all damn day, and Rowe for one big play.
Don't think that's true. If Gost makes the PAT, it is 17-17. Pitt scores makes it 24-17. Pats FG makes it 24-20 Steelers. And then Lewis TD makes it 27-24 since they would have just kicked the XP instead of going for 2.
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
Key was the ball wasn’t out of Ben’s hand until the lineman was more than 3 yards downfield. Can’t believer they picked it up after seeing that replay.

CBS never showed one that I saw.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,297
AZ
Yes, they are allowed to run upfield once the pass is thrown. Blocking is not allowed until the pass is caught.
That's what I thought. Usually on tv you can't really see the linemen downfield unless it's a crazy angle, so the play I'm most used to seeing it happen is on a screen when a wide receiver is blocking. Usually, they seem to allow them to start their blocks a beat or two early -- unless it's like a full second or so they usually give some leeway. Usually, you only see that play called if the QB gets his timing messed up by a defensive lineman and the wide receiver has his back to it so starts to block without knowing that it took longer for the screen to get set up.

Anyway, if they give the same leeway to linemen, then that was a really close play. My guess is that they conferenced and decided it was not too early. On replay, I think they got it wrong, but it's a pretty close judgment -- the kind that gets kicked a few times every game by the best officials.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
Yeah. I agree the coaching was not the greatest the last two plays. They seemed unprepared like they are just watching and waiting the whole review and only when it was overturned did they start thinking about what to do.

But I still give Ben most of the blame. They should be able to trust their pro bowl QB to not throw an int in that situation. He treats at one point and that's when he should know to throw it away.
Every QB at some point makes a bad decision. Brady made a horrible throw earlier in the game that got picked and set up a short field. Brady's INT during the Seahawks Super Bowl wasn't much better.

I have to believe a bad decision is far more likely when the play is not being set up well. Lots of things could have gone wrong on that play that would have ended the game right then and there: a guard misses a blocking assignment resulting in a sack; an illegal procedure or formation; time expiring during the play (seen that happen more than once); a fumble; an offensive holding penalty.

This play wasn't putting the ball in the hands of your Pro-Bowl QB; it was just a badly designed play that had almost no chance of succeeding given the situation, but left lots of opportunity for failure. I think the coaches deserve 90% of the blame here.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
That's what I thought. Usually on tv you can't really see the linemen downfield unless it's a crazy angle, so the play I'm most used to seeing it happen is on a screen when a wide receiver is blocking. Usually, they seem to allow them to start their blocks a beat or two early -- unless it's like a full second or so they usually give some leeway. Usually, you only see that play called if the QB gets his timing messed up by a defensive lineman and the wide receiver has his back to it so starts to block without knowing that it took longer for the screen to get set up.

Anyway, if they give the same leeway to linemen, then that was a really close play. My guess is that they conferenced and decided it was not too early. On replay, I think they got it wrong, but it's a pretty close judgment -- the kind that gets kicked a few times every game by the best officials.
I may have misspoke. Eligible receivers are allowed to go more than one yard upfield prior to the pass being thrown, but cannot block more than one yard beyond the LOS until pass is caught. Ineligible receivers do not get the same leeway; they are not allowed more than one yard beyond the LOS until the pas it thrown. So, there were two problems:

- Right guard was 3 yards upfield before pass is thrown. Even if he's there to get a cup of coffee and a donut, that is a penalty.

- Right guard blocks the linebacker 3 yards upfield before the pass is caught (or even thrown in this case). Also a penalty.

In real time, I can see it being missed. Perhaps after they conferred they thought the pass had been caught, so picked up the flag. They cannot use replay to review penalties
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
Live it looked more like the lunge (with his knee down) toward the EZ could be considered a "football move".
Sigh. Read this tweet and please don't reference the lunge again.


GOING TO THE GROUND TRUMPS LUNGING.

He was falling. The lunge is 100% irrelevant.
 

JokersWildJIMED

Blinded by Borges
SoSH Member
Oct 7, 2004
2,742
They picked up the flag on the illegal man downfield because Pitt scored a TD on the play and they did not want to take points off the board on an "iffy" call. Pats got screwed on that one, but it happens all the time. Juju also was a beneficiary of an illegal pick on his 67 yard reception, but that wasn't called yesterday...most of the calls even out. The James non-catch was not one of those calls, as it was clearly correctly ruled, and is being blown out of proportion by ESPN Patriot hate / ratings.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
58,908
San Andreas Fault
Don't think that's true. If Gost makes the PAT, it is 17-17. Pitt scores makes it 24-17. Pats FG makes it 24-20 Steelers. And then Lewis TD makes it 27-24 since they would have just kicked the XP instead of going for 2.
So yesterday, the offense bailed out Gost just like in the Super Bowl. Someday they won’t, we’ll, 2016 AFCCG.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,432
This play wasn't putting the ball in the hands of your Pro-Bowl QB; it was just a badly designed play that had almost no chance of succeeding given the situation, but left lots of opportunity for failure. I think the coaches deserve 90% of the blame here.
We'll just have to disagree on the lion's share of blame.
Much of the situation was created by the QB panicking early by calling for the spike when they had time and also from a poor decision the previous play.

Yes all QBs make mistakes. That was an egregious one and imo he deserves the majority of the blame.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
I'm adding Dwayne Allen because he's a guy that is buying into his role and doing small things to help us win. Check out the pancake block on the Dion TD, then watch his reaction.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,838
Unreal America
The biggest concern is a false start that ends the game with a run off.
I could have sworn that there was movement before the snap on the 3rd down play. Perhaps it was because the C snapped it quick for the fake spike, but I was fully expecting a flag to be on the ground for a false start after we made the pick.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Hate to be the guy who nit-pics calls against his favored team, but I'm going to anyway. There was clear defensive holding by PGH's #25 on the 3rd down sack of Brady late in the 4th that went uncalled (top of the screen against the NE WR):
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017121709/2017/REG15/Patriots@Steelers?icampaign=scoreStrip-globalNav-2017121709#menu=gameinfo|contentId:0ap3000000894607&tab=videos
I'm sure you can find a lot of that on both sides. The refs didn't call defensive holding all day, literally not once. They only called 8 penalties total and 4 were procedural.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,212
I'm adding Dwayne Allen because he's a guy that is buying into his role and doing small things to help us win. Check out the pancake block on the Dion TD, then watch his reaction.
Great find, and good to point out the work Allen is doing. Other than an occasional flicker he's been disappointing in the passing game, but boy that kind of blocking (and enthusiasm) likely explains why he's still playing a fair amount.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
One guy who has been really, really good down the stretch this year is Nate Solder. He looked like he was done early in the season. Now I can't remember the last time he got beat on a pass play.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
Great find, and good to point out the work Allen is doing. Other than an occasional flicker he's been disappointing in the passing game, but boy that kind of blocking (and enthusiasm) likely explains why he's still playing a fair amount.
I mentioned this when Allen made his first catch a few weeks back. He received so many earnest congrats on the sideline that he seems to be very well-liked by players & coaches. BTW, I think he was induced by 2 Pittsburgh D-linemen when he got the penalty for the false start.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,069
Hingham, MA
One guy who has been really, really good down the stretch this year is Nate Solder. He looked like he was done early in the season. Now I can't remember the last time he got beat on a pass play.
Per PFF, no pressures for the 2nd time this season for Solder - other being the Raider game
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
I'm sure you can find a lot of that on both sides. The refs didn't call defensive holding all day, literally not once. They only called 8 penalties total and 4 were procedural.
Y'up, I agree, which is why I hate to point these things out but couldn't help myself. In general, I'd prefer the refs let the DBs play a bit more physical than they usually call the game, but sometimes the DBs also do get away with more than they should. Anyhow, overall I thought it was a reasonably well-called game with - as should be expected and excused - a few calls/non-calls that probably were a bit off.

edit. To my point but in the other O/D direction: I can't remember when/who it was, but there was a Steelers' reception last night where I thought the PGH WR did a great job of using one arm to create a bit of separation that, in principle, could have been called OPI, but IMO shouldn't have (and it wasn't). I even commented about it at the time, in a complimentary way.
 
Apr 7, 2006
2,505
To my point but in the other O/D direction: I can't remember when/who it was, but there was a Steelers' reception last night where I thought the PGH WR did a great job of using one arm to create a bit of separation that, in principle, could have been called OPI, but IMO shouldn't have (and it wasn't). I even commented about it at the time, in a complimentary way.
Was it on Bryant's one-handed TD catch where he was holding
GILMORE's arm for the key part of the play through the reception? That's one I think prob should've been called, but given how they were letting things go, which I like, was borderline. Frustrating, but...okay.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
Was it on Bryant's one-handed TD catch where he was holding
GILMORE's arm for the key part of the play through the reception? That's one I think prob should've been called, but given how they were letting things go, which I like, was borderline. Frustrating, but...okay.
Thanks, that's probably what I was thinking about. The homer in me wanted it called, but the rational football fan in me thought it was a good "just enough within the rules" play that I like to see let go.
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017121709/2017/REG15/Patriots@Steelers?icampaign=scoreStrip-globalNav-2017121709#menu=gameinfo|contentId:0ap3000000894472&tab=videos
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,936
There was another big play in the first half where Gilmore got beaten. The receiver suddenly created separation right before the ball came down (it was a long pass). The receiver did not seem to speed up, but Gilmore slowed down. While the TV didn't show a push-off, I don't think that there was any other explanation for what happened.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
There was another big play in the first half where Gilmore got beaten. The receiver suddenly created separation right before the ball came down (it was a long pass). The receiver did not seem to speed up, but Gilmore slowed down. While the TV didn't show a push-off, I don't think that there was any other explanation for what happened.
I believe that was the 39 yard pass to Bryant. I think Gilmore just couldn't keep up on that play. There was never any hint of any sort of push-off in any of the replays, which seemed to have a really good angle.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,936
Thanks. I didn't seen the replays well enough. He didn't bitch about it when the play ended, so maybe you are correct. If Gilmore can't keep up, that's not good at all.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
Thanks. I didn't seen the replays well enough. He didn't bitch about it when the play ended, so maybe you are correct. If Gilmore can't keep up, that's not good at all.
To be fair, I'm not sure it was Gilmore being unable to keep pace, or Bryant simply putting on another gear at the end of his route. I mean, Bryant isn't exactly slow.
 

BuellMiller

New Member
Mar 25, 2015
449
I mentioned this when Allen made his first catch a few weeks back. He received so many earnest congrats on the sideline that he seems to be very well-liked by players & coaches. BTW, I think he was induced by 2 Pittsburgh D-linemen when he got the penalty for the false start.
This (sort of). I think the linemen were actually shifting laterally (but I could be remembering wrong), which is something the Patriots caught the Steelers with a few years back at the goalline.
 

kelpapa

Costanza's Hero
SoSH Member
Feb 15, 2010
4,639
To be fair, I'm not sure it was Gilmore being unable to keep pace, or Bryant simply putting on another gear at the end of his route. I mean, Bryant isn't exactly slow.
I thought it was a combination of Bryant throwing it into overdrive and Gilmore slowing down a little as he looked back for the pass. The amount of separation Bryant got in a few steps was terrifying.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,936
I didn't notice Gilmore looking back, but if he did that would help explain it.