Have the Seahawks drawn a single opposing holding penalty?

[hawknation2015]

Correct me if i'm being really stupid,but is Aaron Rodgers God and therefore given free plays for big yards when flags have been thrown and it should have been blown dead,or is that just against the Seahawks ?

If I recall correctly, you are probably referring to the difference between a regular defensive offsides penalty and an Encroachment/Neutral Zone Infraction. The flag for the former gives the offense a "free play," while flags for the later are dead ball fouls.

 

[daveyoung52]

Thank you, i stand corrected,but still have a bad taste in my mouth on this subject.

 

[purpleneer]

Correct me if i'm being really stupid,but is Aaron Rodgers God and therefore given free plays for big yards when flags have been thrown and it should have been blown dead,or is that just against the Seahawks ?

If I recall correctly, you are probably referring to the difference between a regular defensive offsides penalty and an Encroachment/Neutral Zone Infraction. The flag for the former gives the offense a "free play," while flags for the later are dead ball fouls.

They are both free plays if there isn't another reason to blow it dead: making an offensive player move, or unabated to the QB. I think he's referring to the fact that a couple of them should have been blown dead due to an OL moving. Still a defensive penalty, but no play should be allowed.

 

[hawknation2015]

Correct me if i'm being really stupid,but is Aaron Rodgers God and therefore given free plays for big yards when flags have been thrown and it should have been blown dead,or is that just against the Seahawks ?

If I recall correctly, you are probably referring to the difference between a regular defensive offsides penalty and an Encroachment/Neutral Zone Infraction. The flag for the former gives the offense a "free play," while flags for the later are dead ball fouls.

They are both free plays if there isn't another reason to blow it dead: making an offensive player move, or unabated to the QB. I think he's referring to the fact that a couple of them should have been blown dead due to an OL moving. Still a defensive penalty, but no play should be allowed.

Those are the definitions of Encroachment and Neutral Zone Infraction, right?

Encroachment is when a defender touches an offensive player before the ball is snapped.

Neutral Zone Infraction is when a defender moves beyond the line of scrimmage before the ball is snapped, causing an offensive player to false start.

If the defender caused the offensive lineman to move before the ball was snapped, then it should have been a dead ball penalty.

Normal offsides penalties are not blown dead unless they constitute an Encroachment/Neutral Zone Infraction or the defender has an unabated path to the quarterback, in which case the play will be blown dead to protect the QB.

 

[Rob12]

We have to have the whiniest fan base ever! We are 4-4 because of performance, not because of the ref's! Post's like this and then stupid petition to ban Buck and Aikman are what makes our fan base look so bad.

No one is whining. This is an intelligent thread that has a mountain of data that supports the idea of us at least questioning why teams do not get penalized when they play us.

No one... And I mean NO ONE in this thread is saying we're a .500 team because of the refs.

 

[lobohawk]

Seattle's broken play offense also leads to a lot of no call holds I feel.

But to me it just says not a lot of penalties are called during Seattle games overall then.

If they are 19th in the league that means they are bottom half in the league in having calls go against them. Which means there are 18 teams that get more penalties. If they were truly bias. Why not call more penalties on Seattle.

I think there is more to it. And a lot of different views

The main point here isn't how many are called against the Hawks vs how many are called against other teams. Pretty sure Hawk fans know the team gathers lots of penalties.

Rather it points the odd fact that Seattle has been last in the NFL for calls against opponents when they play them. In fact teams by and large are getting fewer calls when playing the Hawks than their own average playing other teams. Not saying it's bias, but we're going on 2 years of this.

 

[daveyoung52]

Agree,refs could have put us at .250 if they were really trying to finish our season,this team deserves .500 or better,hoping for balanced calling in second half.

 

[sc85sis]

I think it's more than two years for the Hawks, and it's definitely more than two years for Pete. This same phenomenon occurred when he was coaching at USC.

 

[scutterhawk]

There has not been a single game this season where the opposing team had more penalties than the Seahawks.

There has only been ONE game this season where the opposition had more penalty yards than the Seahawks: vs. Detroit (25 yards vs. 37 yards -- a low penalty game).

The craziest penalty differentials were against GB and Cinci, the two most challenging games of the season:
@ Green Bay Packers -- 35 penalty yards vs. 92 for the Seahawks
@ Cincinnati Bengals -- 35 penalty yards vs. 112 for the Seahawks

According to this link, our opponents have had ZERO defensive holding or pass interference calls against them:
http://www.nflpenalties.com/team/seattl ... iew=logben

WTF!? Zero defensive holding or pass interference calls through eight games? How is that even possible?

It's not.
The odds for the numbers discrepancies are absolutely absurd.
Funny how almost all those exact same teams that we play, have a decrease in penalties when facing the Seahawks, and then all of the sudden, get an increase in penalties when facing everyone else. :141847_bnono:

 

[seabowl]

I would love for just once the announcers mention the penalty difference when talking about the "fail Mary" etc... When the game is on nationally. I think the rest of the country believes that the Hawks get every call and that the NFL is actually biased towards the Hawks.

This would be a great topic on Mike and Mike but it'll never happen.

 

[NINEster]

It's the league making up for the "perception" that the Seahawk DBs hold on every play.

Legal or not, when enough opposing coaching staffs complain about it and an article is written in the NY Times, the "perception is reality".

 

[ZagHawk]

We have to have the whiniest fan base ever! We are 4-4 because of performance, not because of the ref's! Post's like this and then stupid petition to ban Buck and Aikman are what makes our fan base look so bad.

I don't know about whiniest, but I agree 4-4 is due to performance not refs. Hard to complain about refs when the Hawks got gifted a win against Detroit, and whatever the heck happened with that double timeout field goal against the Cowboys. ATL, NO, and the Rams all lost this weekend. Hope the Hawks we are waiting for show up on Sunday.

 

[BullHawk33]

No need to hold pedestrians.

That said, I find myself unsympathetic to our lack of calls. I would rather have less officiating throughout a game and let the players play, then save the penalties for the safety issues.

 

[purpleneer]

They are both free plays if there isn't another reason to blow it dead: making an offensive player move, or unabated to the QB. I think he's referring to the fact that a couple of them should have been blown dead due to an OL moving. Still a defensive penalty, but no play should be allowed.

Those are the definitions of Encroachment and Neutral Zone Infraction, right? Yes, but it really can be explained as simply as I did (with the obvious addition of presnap contact to the reasons I listed and fixing my ignorance of the terms). Encroachment really is a specific neutral zone infraction; I don't get why it is listed separately rather than in the NZI subsets. The only real difference between all of these and Offsides is the reason to blow dead.

Encroachment is when a defender touches an offensive player before the ball is snapped.

Neutral Zone Infraction is when a defender moves beyond the line of scrimmage before the ball is snapped, causing an offensive player to false start.

If the defender caused the offensive lineman to move before the ball was snapped, then it should have been a dead ball penalty. This is what I saw and assumed his question was about. At least one of Bennett's penalties that gave GB free plays caused an OL to move before the snap and should have been blown dead. This is really the only issue here; the rest is just getting me to look up and clarify rulebook terms.

Normal offsides penalties are not blown dead unless they constitute an Encroachment/Neutral Zone Infraction or the defender has an unabated path to the quarterback, in which case the play will be blown dead to protect the QB. Sematics here, but that actually puts it officially into the NZI category, again illustrating that they are fundamentally the same infraction, offsides with subsets dictating whether the play can happen or not.