2019 Game Goat Thread: Wk. 9 at Ravens

[BaseballJones]

Isn't the theory that if the OL across from the DL don't move, then it's pretty apparent that the false start down the line wasn't (or shouldn't have been) caused by that DL?

It's hard to apply bright line rules in any endeavor, even football. If the refs took your interpretation of the rule, how many DL would start 1/2 yard off the ball and then try to get the DL to flinch.

The rule seems simple enough. The defenders can’t enter the neutral zone. If they do, and the OL moves, then it’s a NZI. If the OL doesn’t, and the defender gets back, no penalty. Also if the defender does NOT enter the neutral zone, no penalty. Since there’s an official looking right down the line and can see these things clearly, it’s a pretty easy call.

I think it’s nonsensical to apply one part of the rule strictly and then totally fudge another part of the rule. Especially because of “how the camera angles are”.

I’m not saying CFB is in error. He’s probably correct. But it’s a huge indictment on the NFL officiating philosophy to care more about the camera angles than actually following the pretty straightforward rule.


As for the attempts by the defense to get the OL to move....well that’s part of the game. The OL just needs to know when the snap is gonna happen and wait for it. And not react to defenders. Football 101.

 

[SMU_Sox]

The rule seems simple enough. The defenders can’t enter the neutral zone. If they do, and the OL moves, then it’s a NZI. If the OL doesn’t, and the defender gets back, no penalty. Also if the defender does NOT enter the neutral zone, no penalty. Since there’s an official looking right down the line and can see these things clearly, it’s a pretty easy call.

I think it’s nonsensical to apply one part of the rule strictly and then totally fudge another part of the rule. Especially because of “how the camera angles are”.

I’m not saying CFB is in error. He’s probably correct. But it’s a huge indictment on the NFL officiating philosophy to care more about the camera angles than actually following the pretty straightforward rule.


As for the attempts by the defense to get the OL to move....well that’s part of the game. The OL just needs to know when the snap is gonna happen and wait for it. And not react to defenders. Football 101.

ARTICLE 4. NEUTRAL ZONE INFRACTION
It is a Neutral Zone Infraction when:

1. a defender moves beyond the neutral zone prior to the snap and is parallel to or beyond an offensive lineman, with an unimpeded path to the quarterback or kicker, even though no contact is made by a blocker; officials are to blow their whistles immediately
2. a defender enters the neutral zone prior to the snap, causing the offensive player(s) in close proximity (including a quarterback who is under center) to react (move) immediately to protect himself (themselves) against impending contact; officials are to blow their whistles immediately. If there is no immediate reaction by the offensive player(s) in close proximity, and the defensive player returns to a legal position prior to the snap without contacting an opponent, there is no foul. A flexed or split receiver is considered to be in close proximity if he is lined up on the side of the ball on which the violation occurs; other offensive players are considered to be in close proximity if they are within two-and-one-half positions of the defender who enters the neutral zone. If the defender is directly over the center, a quarterback under center, the center, and the guards and tackles on both sides of the center are considered to be within close proximity; if the defender is in a gap, the two offensive players on either side of the gap are considered to be within close proximity (including a quarterback under center, if applicable)
3. a player, after he has received a warning, enters the neutral zone. It is a foul, even if he returns to a legal position prior to the snap without contacting an opponent or causing a reaction (movement) by an offensive player in close proximity.

After reading the actual rule I think your interpretation of it is wrong because you are missing 2 which specifies close proximity (which is what CFB brought up). When in doubt you can find the rule-book here. (https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/) for this specific rule: https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2019-nfl-rulebook/#article-4.-neutral-zone-infraction

 

[BaseballJones]

No I get the close proximity piece. Already mentioned it. The part I’m really having trouble with is how strictly they enforce “close proximity” while completely not caring about the very clear need to have entered the neutral zone.

 

[Bellhorn]

ARTICLE 4. NEUTRAL ZONE INFRACTION
It is a Neutral Zone Infraction when:

1. a defender moves beyond the neutral zone prior to the snap and is parallel to or beyond an offensive lineman, with an unimpeded path to the quarterback or kicker, even though no contact is made by a blocker; officials are to blow their whistles immediately
2. a defender enters the neutral zone prior to the snap, causing the offensive player(s) in close proximity (including a quarterback who is under center) to react (move) immediately to protect himself (themselves) against impending contact; officials are to blow their whistles immediately. If there is no immediate reaction by the offensive player(s) in close proximity, and the defensive player returns to a legal position prior to the snap without contacting an opponent, there is no foul. A flexed or split receiver is considered to be in close proximity if he is lined up on the side of the ball on which the violation occurs; other offensive players are considered to be in close proximity if they are within two-and-one-half positions of the defender who enters the neutral zone. If the defender is directly over the center, a quarterback under center, the center, and the guards and tackles on both sides of the center are considered to be within close proximity; if the defender is in a gap, the two offensive players on either side of the gap are considered to be within close proximity (including a quarterback under center, if applicable)
3. a player, after he has received a warning, enters the neutral zone. It is a foul, even if he returns to a legal position prior to the snap without contacting an opponent or causing a reaction (movement) by an offensive player in close proximity.

After reading the actual rule I think your interpretation of it is wrong because you are missing 2 which specifies close proximity (which is what CFB brought up). When in doubt you can find the rule-book here. (https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/) for this specific rule: https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2019-nfl-rulebook/#article-4.-neutral-zone-infraction

How is that relevant? (2) is still predicated on the defender actually entering the neutral zone, which is what BaseballJones is taking issue with in the first place.

 

[SMU_Sox]

Isn't the theory that if the OL across from the DL don't move, then it's pretty apparent that the false start down the line wasn't (or shouldn't have been) caused by that DL?

It's hard to apply bright line rules in any endeavor, even football. If the refs took your interpretation of the rule, how many DL would start 1/2 yard off the ball and then try to get the DL to flinch.

This is probably the answer.

FWIW I looked at the NCAA version of it: http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/FR19.pdf There is no close proximity rule there.

Sorry for missing your earlier post. I am not sure if I like the rule or not the way it is written because I can see both sides of it. With the offense having more advantages than the defense compared to years past I don't mind it the way it is.

I put this loss on the coaching staff. Matt Chatham's take on it on the Razor podcast is illuminating and I would encourage people to listen to it if they have the hour to spare. His take on it was that schematically they bombed initially on defense and it was the fundamentally wrong approach to attacking their offense. Paraphrasing but they tried to do 3-4 base two-gap approach and that didn't put them in the best position to succeed. The reason for that is because it is hard to hold up against offensive linemen pushing while reading what is going on at the mesh point and trying to then react to it. When they were more aggressive and gap-penetrating they had success. In the second half they let Baltimore off the hook with penalties and you can't give a potent offense multiple second chances on a drive.

Most years they have at least one loss where they don't have good game-plans and they also play with less discipline. In other words the coaching and the playing is shit. Like last year they were a bit beat up going into the bye-week. Might be recency bias but last year they also played a sloppy game and didn't have schematic answers as well against TEN.

If there is a rematch I am confident that they will play that offense much differently.

Not to get too far off course but this game reminds me that while the DL isn't necessarily a weakness it isn't a top-of-the-league unit. I think we've said this for 3-4 years now on SOSH but it wouldn't surprise me if they drafted a DT in a 2020 class that looks fairly loaded.

 

[CFB_Rules]

This is probably the answer.

FWIW I looked at the NCAA version of it: http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/FR19.pdf There is no close proximity rule there.

There is, but it's in the Approved Rulings (page FI-40 in your link).

"V. A66, a restricted lineman between the snapper and the player on the end of the line, or A72, a restricted player on the end of the line of scrimmage: 1. Lifts a hand or hands from the ground immediately when threatened by B1, who is in the neutral zone. RULING: Blow the whistle immediately. Team B dead-ball foul, offside. Penalty—Five yards from the succeeding spot

Note: Before the snap, a Team B player who enters the neutral zone may threaten a maximum of three Team A linemen. If the Team B player enters the neutral zone directly toward a Team A lineman, then that Team A player and the two adjacent linemen are considered to be threatened. If the Team B player enters the neutral zone toward a gap between two Team A linemen, then only those two Team A players are considered to be threatened "

 

[SMU_Sox]

@CFB_Rules thanks. The NCAA rule book imo is not organized nearly as well as the NFL version. If you don’t mind me asking how did you find it? I searched the page for the 7-1-xxx exceptions but couldn’t find where they were.

 

[CFB_Rules]

Study, mostly. The NCAA rule book is really two books in one. The first book is the rule book, and the second is the Approved Rulings or case book. The case book mirrors the rule book rule by rule with play scenarios to illustrate how the rules are meant to be applied. According to the NCAA, the relationship is:

"An approved ruling (A.R.) is an official decision on a given statement of facts. It serves to illustrate the spirit and application of the rules. The relationship between the rules and an approved ruling is analogous to that between statutory law and a decision of the Supreme Court".

The NFL also has a case book, but the Approved Rulings are not public. You can find the 2012 NFL case book online if you do some googling, but obviously it is out of date.

 

[tims4wins]

The play before 4th and 5 was 3rd and 7. The Ravens called a designed keeper that gained 2 yards. No big deal. And we all know the 4th down play was very close to OPI (or was).

What went without mention was that the play clock struck zero on the 3rd down play. Would backing them up to 3rd and 12 have made any difference? Who knows. But it was yet another officiating error in favor of the Ravens.

 

[Harry Hooper]

The play before 4th and 5 was 3rd and 7. The Ravens called a designed keeper that gained 2 yards. No big deal. And we all know the 4th down play was very close to OPI (or was).

What went without mention was that the play clock struck zero on the 3rd down play. Would backing them up to 3rd and 12 have made any difference? Who knows. But it was yet another officiating error in favor of the Ravens.

In NFL games, it seems the general practice is the play clock hits zero and the offense has another 1 to 1.5 seconds to get the snap off. It's not a NBA-style buzzer.

 

[Saints Rest]

In NFL games, it seems the general practice is the play clock hits zero and the offense has another 1 to 1.5 seconds to get the snap off. It's not a NBA-style buzzer.

And why isn’t it? This has always baffled me for years, put a buzzer on the play clock and then an official won’t have to split his focus from clock to ball.

 

[BaseballJones]

Ok here we go. Finally able to rewatch the second half.

Philly ball, 6:10 left in the third quarter. 2nd and 10 for the Eagles.

Shelton flinches forward just like Butler did against the Ravens. Doesn’t enter the neutral zone, but in a three point stance, he definitely moves forward.

The left guard - who is right across the line from him - moves. Whistles blow.

Based on conversation during and after the Ravens game, per CFB’s explanation, that’s an automatic neutral zone infraction.

The ref says “the defender never got into the neutral zone. False start, offense number 73.”

Romo then goes on to explain how OL are taught to move if the defenders jump but then he says “the problem is that he never got across the line.”

Can CFB please explain this to me?

 

[Byrdbrain]

Ok here we go. Finally able to rewatch the second half.

Philly ball, 6:10 left in the third quarter. 2nd and 10 for the Eagles.

Shelton flinches forward just like Butler did against the Ravens. Doesn’t enter the neutral zone, but in a three point stance, he definitely moves forward.

The left guard - who is right across the line from him - moves. Whistles blow.

Based on conversation during and after the Ravens game, per CFB’s explanation, that’s an automatic neutral zone infraction.

The ref says “the defender never got into the neutral zone. False start, offense number 73.”

Romo then goes on to explain how OL are taught to move if the defenders jump but then he says “the problem is that he never got across the line.”

Can CFB please explain this to me?

He stated in the game thread that he was surprised by the call and he would be interested in how the NFL graded it.

 

[lexrageorge]

He stated in the game thread that he was surprised by the call and he would be interested in how the NFL graded it.

Romo said both before and after the call that it should be illegal procedure as the neutral zone was never crossed. I doubt the NFL will grade it differently than what Romo thinks.

 

[Byrdbrain]

Romo said both before and after the call that it should be illegal procedure as the neutral zone was never crossed. I doubt the NFL will grade it differently than what Romo thinks.

I’m not saying which is right, BJ just asked for input from CFB per their discussion and I just relayed the information.

 

[BaseballJones]

He stated in the game thread that he was surprised by the call and he would be interested in how the NFL graded it.

Ok thanks I missed that.

 

[CFB_Rules]

Ok here we go. Finally able to rewatch the second half.

Can CFB please explain this to me?

Can't really explain. Just to be totally transparent, I get my info directly from the 15-20 or so NFL officials that I talk to. The other 100 may have a different philosophy, but typically these things come from the NFL office so there is inter-crew consistency. The philosophy is that if a defender is lined up tight on the ball, any forward movement via flinch puts him in the neutral zone. Maybe the LJ (Phil McKinnely, who I have had conversations with but I don't think we ever talked about NZIs) thought the defender wasn't lined up tight on the ball. I would argue that would be splitting hairs. Maybe the NFL has decided to change the philosophy mid-season. This happens all the time, as you've seen with replaying PI. Maybe he just screwed it up. If the NFL philosophy has changed it usually takes a few months for it to filter down to the college ranks, because officials typically won't change how they do things until they get a downgrade for it.

 

[BigJimEd]

I've seen that play several times this year and plenty over the last couple seasons so I'd say, like most things with NFL officiating, it is not consistent.

But I would also say there is a difference between being on the los and being lined up tight. So that might be much of the inconsistencies there.
But that really is just NFL making things more complicated if that is the way they are defining the infraction. It should not be hard to judge if someone was in the neutral zone

 

[BaseballJones]

So I really appreciate you, CFB, and all the knowledge you bring. Just wanted to make sure that’s clear.

That being said, it’s clear that the NFL officiating is F-ed up in a major way. The rule is clear. But it’s called one way sometimes and another way other times. You say it has to do with camera angles but that’s crap (not saying you’re not telling the truth about what you know...just that if that’s true, that’s a load of crap on the part of the NFL). The rule is clear. NZI is clearly defined. This isn’t even a judgment call really. For an official right on the line it’s pretty easy to see if a guy gets into the neutral zone. Butler got called for it. Shelton, whose movement was WORSE, didn’t. Neither entered the neutral zone.

How can this not be simple and clear from an officiating point of view?