[Super Bowl LI] - New England Patriots vs. Atlanta Falcons

Because the Falcons choked fair and square, and MATT RYAN should have done the SAME thing to avoid getting sacked on a previous drive

Similarities, but vastly different. 1st SB vid he's lucky he didnt get intercepted tossing it toward triple coverage. Can definitely make a case the hit caused change of direction. 2nd vid, throw is not even in the same stratosphere of the action. There isnt even a receiver running a deep route to give him a cause to throw it deep.

QB's are allowed some space to WASTE throws. How many times do you see QB's in the red zone sailing throws way over everyone's head over the goalpost into the backstops and its never called "grounding"? Grounding/wasted throw is even allowed if QB goes outside the tackle box and just tosses it pass the first down marker even without any receiver in area. With so much grey area it has to be not just intentional but egregious to get called.

 

It's very relevant. If he didn't get dragged down as he was releasing the ball, the ball would have been more accurate. This is what refs are looking for: did the contact affect the trajectory of the ball?

 

Like I said before. No offense, but it looks like you don't understand the rules.

 

In those instances, the QB isn't facing imminent loss of yardage b/c of defensive pressure. That's a requirement for intentional grounding.

 

Looks like you're trying to follow the rules to the letter. I just have seen enough football and IG calls to know that that's not how they call it. No offense, but it looks like you don't really watch football.

 

Actually, the rule is super vague like you posted:

"It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion."

"without a realistic chance of completion" is where the referee judgment comes from. If the refs think there would have been a realistic chance of completion with a clean throw before the contact, then they never call IG.

 

lol i don't know what else to tell you, there was a receiver in the vicinity of the throw, only a few yards out. This plays happens every game without it being called, so I don't know if you only started watching football or what. It's a judgement call, the player doesn't actually have to be within arm length to have a realistic amount to catch the ball, as long as he's in the same "zip code"

 

Why am I seeing a bunch of "the winning touchdown wasn't a touchdown"
They're saying his knee was down but if you look closely you can see the ball crosses the white line as his knee touches the ground
ATL fans salty
Hold this L

 

Atlanta should have run the danger ball up 8 and in FG range.

DD

 

Sorry, but this is absolutely wrong and you clearly have a poor understanding of intentional grounding.

 

Falcons fans are salty after suffering the worst collapse and defeat in the history of professional football, and possibly all of organized sports.

Thanks for that headline.

 

Sorry, but you're not making much sense on this issue and you clearly don't watch a lot of football if you think that was IG.

 

Since you're unfamiliar with intentional grounding, I must not watch a lot of football? Yep, that makes sense.

It's my own fault for asking a football question in a basketball forum. People actually think referees can make calls based on what they think would've happened in an alternate universe...

 

Wekko dude, you're embarrassing yourself. You're the only person I've seen bring this up and it's been 24 hours.

You're a slalty douche. AND YOU ARE WRONG

STFU

 

Dude, referees make calls like that all the time. They determine whether a ball was "catchable' on pass interference calls, they let go of small holding if they don't think it affected the result of the play, etc. It's my own fault for answering a dumb, obvious football question in a basketball forum.

 

Yes. They determine whether or not it was "catchable" based on where it landed in this universe....not in an alternate one.

 

I would like to know what Belichek was thinking before and after his decision to throw on first down at the goaline in OT. Think that was most interesting decision. And no Blount. And no Brady sneak.

 

But they have to consider if the player could have gotten there if they weren't being interfered in the "alternate universe".

 

Sorry, but I'm not wrong. Like I've said countless times, if you want to say that the ball landed in the vicinity of the receiver (~8 yards), that's fine. That's a judgment call.

But this guy claims to understand intentional grounding rules and says that it's not intentional grounding b/c Brady was being tackled as he threw the ball, even though the defender made contact with him before he began his throwing motion. That directly contradicts the rules.

And fwiw, I was rooting for the Patriots.

 

It still just boggles the mind as to what Atlanta was doing on their last series after the great Julio catch at the 20 yard line.

In my opinion, Atlanta coaches are entirely to blame for that loss. I believe it has to be inexperience in situations like that.

After the great catch, RUN-RUN-RUN-FG. That's all you had to do. That's it. And, you're Super Bowl champs. It's like they stuck to their pass happy game plan for all situations.