KJ Wright illegal bat

[HawkGA]

Dez gets a pass taken away last year, media heads bitch about enforcement of stupid rule.
Hawks win on a batted ball, media heads bitch about non enforcement of stupid rule.

It amazes me how much the NFL and ESPN are stepping on themselves with this. Basically ignoring a great story to end the football game and focusing on a technicality. That is not a good way to build an audience. They must think deflategate was good for them because it kept them in the news.

 

[niveky]

No foul if this is it:

Rule 12-4-1(a) explains that an illegal bat occurs if “a player of either team bats or punches a loose ball in the field of play toward his opponent’s goal line. While Rule 12-4-1(a) doesn’t expressly require intent, Rule 3-2-5(g) defines illegal batting as “the intentional striking of the ball with hand, fist, elbow, or forearm.”

not towards the opponents goal line

Edit: someone else could find the actual rule, someone smarter than me.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-dolphins-patriots-game-comes-under-scrutiny/

That says TOWARDS OPPONENT GOAL LINE.....he was past the opponents goal line and hit it out the back of the endzone....does no one understand reading comprehension? I mean...am I missing something here?

 

[HawkFreak]

No foul if this is it:

Rule 12-4-1(a) explains that an illegal bat occurs if “a player of either team bats or punches a loose ball in the field of play toward his opponent’s goal line. While Rule 12-4-1(a) doesn’t expressly require intent, Rule 3-2-5(g) defines illegal batting as “the intentional striking of the ball with hand, fist, elbow, or forearm.”

not towards the opponents goal line

Edit: someone else could find the actual rule, someone smarter than me.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-dolphins-patriots-game-comes-under-scrutiny/

That says TOWARDS OPPONENT GOAL LINE.....he was past the opponents goal line and hit it out the back of the endzone....does no one understand reading comprehension? I mean...am I missing something here?

I did see another post that mentioned it being illegal to bat the ball in any direction in either endzone.

What I don't understand is someone reported that the "spirit of the rule" in this case is that the Lions could recover it for a TD. Regardless of the fact that it didn't appear any Lion would be able to before KJ got it...why then is a punter or QB allowed to deny the opposing team the opportunity to recover an muffed snap or fumble in the endzone by batting it out for a safety? I know some explained that the safety and possession change is the penalty so they don't call the "illegal bat in any direction in either endzone"...but in the "spirit of the rule" they intentionally denied the team the chance at recovering football and scoring 7 points. There's certainly no guarantee that gaining 2 points and the ball would turn into more than the 7 points a recovered ball would give the opposing team.

 

[Uncle Si]

I like how this thread has been around since yesterday evening, and has 4 pages already.

Either way, that game was a terrible mess. I can't believe that the Seahawks pulled it off. Pure luck. Makes me worried for the games to come...

As for the bat, I think it's interesting that after the game the folks on ESPN were dumbfounded that it was against the rules. I suppose that there's no reason in getting too upset about it now - it came out in our favor. But still, we got lucky. Very lucky.

There is no such thing as luck

Great player made a great play when it counted.

Why can't that be enough. And you are right, noone understood the rule. Wright could have easily just scooped it up.

 

[Our Man in Chicago]

I did see another post that mentioned it being illegal to bat the ball in any direction in either endzone.

Last night, I read a fan asking if The Tip should have been illegal in this manner, since it was an intentional tip to a teammate in the end zone. I cannot say by the criteria posted above that it was legal, save that it was on a passed ball and not a fumbled one. It was a bat, either way.

 

[Ramfan128]

No foul if this is it:

Rule 12-4-1(a) explains that an illegal bat occurs if “a player of either team bats or punches a loose ball in the field of play toward his opponent’s goal line. While Rule 12-4-1(a) doesn’t expressly require intent, Rule 3-2-5(g) defines illegal batting as “the intentional striking of the ball with hand, fist, elbow, or forearm.”

not towards the opponents goal line

Edit: someone else could find the actual rule, someone smarter than me.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-dolphins-patriots-game-comes-under-scrutiny/

That says TOWARDS OPPONENT GOAL LINE.....he was past the opponents goal line and hit it out the back of the endzone....does no one understand reading comprehension? I mean...am I missing something here?

I did see another post that mentioned it being illegal to bat the ball in any direction in either endzone.

What I don't understand is someone reported that the "spirit of the rule" in this case is that the Lions could recover it for a TD. Regardless of the fact that it didn't appear any Lion would be able to before KJ got it...why then is a punter or QB allowed to deny the opposing team the opportunity to recover an muffed snap or fumble in the endzone by batting it out for a safety? I know some explained that the safety and possession change is the penalty so they don't call the "illegal bat in any direction in either endzone"...but in the "spirit of the rule" they intentionally denied the team the chance at recovering football and scoring 7 points. There's certainly no guarantee that gaining 2 points and the ball would turn into more than the 7 points a recovered ball would give the opposing team.

Firstly, I want to say that Seattle deserved to win the game. And if the refs had called it correctly, there's no guarantee the Lions score; even if they do, Seattle would have had over a minute, so even if Detroit scores, there's still not guarantee they win the game.

Having said that, my fiancée is the only one that can back me up on this, but as soon as I saw the play I said "that's a foul". I wish it would have been called, but they are so inconsistent with it that it's not surprising that they didn't call it. What Peyton Manning did for example in the superbowl against the Seahawks on the first play of the game was the same foul - and as previously noted we've seen multiple punters and QBs do it - what's the difference though?

When is the last time you saw a team intentionally bat the ball out of the end zone when a player fumbles while going into the end zone? This is the first time I've seen it happen.

Here's the difference to me: when the ball goes into the offenses own end zone, any outcome is better for the defense than what the penalty would be. So when Peyton batted the ball out of the end zone for a safety against Seattle in the superbowl, they should have thrown a flag and said illegal batting 5 yard penalty against Denver....but the penalty would be declined every time.

Now, it still should be called, because it's a foul for a reason. And maybe they come up with a new enforcement because a punter or QB batting the ball IS an advantage - it prevents the defense from potentially getting a TD.

But the difference here is that when a ball is fumbled into the defenses end zone, good things can happen for BOTH teams - either a turn over or a TD. So the difference between the two scenarios is that one really only benefits one team, while the other could benefit both teams - to be clear, I'm saying that both SHOULD be called. I'm just explaining my take on why it's typically NOT called.

Either way...the Lions deserved to lose. I don't feel bad for the Lions, I feel bad for the fans, who seem to get the short end of big calls every year. The fans didn't fumble, so all they're going to be focused on is the call (rightfully so)....but the Lions literally fumbled the game away, so they have nothing to complain about.

As for why ESPN spent time on it....if another network or twitter broke the news about the illegal bat, it would look pretty bad for ESPN to not have caught it when it was on their network.

 

[Ramfan128]

I like how this thread has been around since yesterday evening, and has 4 pages already.

Either way, that game was a terrible mess. I can't believe that the Seahawks pulled it off. Pure luck. Makes me worried for the games to come...

As for the bat, I think it's interesting that after the game the folks on ESPN were dumbfounded that it was against the rules. I suppose that there's no reason in getting too upset about it now - it came out in our favor. But still, we got lucky. Very lucky.

There is no such thing as luck

Great player made a great play when it counted.

Why can't that be enough. And you are right, noone understood the rule. Wright could have easily just scooped it up.

I agree with the first two parts.

The rule is in place because it's not that easy to pick up a moving football in the heat of a game with 21 other players on the field with you. Maybe he could have - but he deemed it better not to risk it, which tells you something. Players do things every week that they get penalized for, and they didn't NEED to do it...illegal block in the back away from the return, etc. Still gets called and hurts the team.

 

[uncle fester]

C'mon, four pages in and no one's done it? Well, I couldn't resist...

 

[idahawks]

I knew this was illegal and when he did it I thought it would cost us the game. I've seen it called in a Boise State game once. A bsu player batted a loose ball back so his teammate could recover it and they called him on it. The offensive team retained possession.

 

[Sarlacc83]

This is why the NFL is becoming nigh unwatchable. Arguments about rules are more important than the play on the field.

 

[Uncle Si]

I like how this thread has been around since yesterday evening, and has 4 pages already.

Either way, that game was a terrible mess. I can't believe that the Seahawks pulled it off. Pure luck. Makes me worried for the games to come...

As for the bat, I think it's interesting that after the game the folks on ESPN were dumbfounded that it was against the rules. I suppose that there's no reason in getting too upset about it now - it came out in our favor. But still, we got lucky. Very lucky.

There is no such thing as luck

Great player made a great play when it counted.

Why can't that be enough. And you are right, noone understood the rule. Wright could have easily just scooped it up.

I agree with the first two parts.

The rule is in place because it's not that easy to pick up a moving football in the heat of a game with 21 other players on the field with you. Maybe he could have - but he deemed it better not to risk it, which tells you something. Players do things every week that they get penalized for, and they didn't NEED to do it...illegal block in the back away from the return, etc. Still gets called and hurts the team.

I understand your point, but I think he deemed it better not to because he didn't know the rule. I don't see this as the same thing as struggling to keep up with a player in the heat of a play. The two don't seem comparable to me.

Is what it is though.

 

[Hawkboi]

As far as I understand the rule, the ball must be moving in a different direction and then batted out... For instance if the ball took a bounce back towards the goal line or the field of play and KJ batted the ball the other direction out, then it's an illegal batting of the ball. However, in this case the ball's momentum would have carried the ball out of the endzone anyway and the Ref who was right there saw that and called the bat a non issue, that's why it wasn't called... He just gave it a little victory nudge, so maybe unsportsmanlike conduct could have been called, but that would have been lame also...

There always has to be something controversial to talk about... But, when it's all said and done, it's a W for our Seahawks!!! :th2thumbs:

 

[hawkfannj]

You sure it's illegal? I see guys do it all the time in the endzone. I think it's only illegal for the offense to bat it forward.

It's definitely illegal but it's a judgement call

 

[HawkGA]

This is why the NFL is becoming nigh unwatchable. Arguments about rules are more important than the play on the field.

Yep. And you'd think the NFL would realize this. I don't ever remember the head of officiating commenting right after a game like this. Mike P. used to do something on, what, Tuesday or Wednesday on NFL Network. That's okay, that's a bit more cold and matter of fact analysis AFTER reviewing the game tape and DISCUSSING it with the on field officials. This was just a low class move by a glory hound putting at risk the credibility of his own crew AND his sport. Idiotic.

 

[Popeyejones]

Not that my opinion much matters on this issue, but I think the appropriate response is to just accept it, be grateful for it, and move on.

As a 9ers fan I had to do that when my team beat the Giants in the playoffs on a blown call toward the end of the game. It happens. I felt really bad for Giants fans but it's not like I wish they had gotten the call right. :mrgreen:

As for this, if people want to object to the word "lucky" they can just use Carroll's word: "fortunate."

Basically, you have Pete Carroll saying the refs screwed up, the VP of officiating saying the refs screwed up, and you have Wright saying he intentionally batted it because he didn't know the rule and won't do it again.

The Hawks were fortunate. So what?

Of course people are going to talk about it because the Hawks got really fortunate on a blown call at the worst time for the other team. It happens. Rather than complaining about that, would anyone actually prefer the alternative that the ref got the call right? Of course not.

Sheesh, just be happy about it and move on. Coming up with silly reasons for why the Hawks weren't fortunate just comes off as sour grapes from a winner (the worst kind; a lot of 9ers fans did this too after the Giants game, and I said the same thing to fellow 9ers fans then). :th2thumbs:

 

[PackerNation]

I knew this was a penalty as well as something similar happened to Green Bay when we played the Steelers a few years back:



The Packers got the ball back and on the ensuing play, Eddie Lacy scores a TD. In the end though, the Packers ended up losing that game, but the penalty on that play was noteworthy because it rarely happens. Both players and referees should know all the rules. Even the more obscure ones. The refs should know these rules! PERIOD! They get paid a lot of money to do this. For guys that have been doing this a good majority of their lives, they screw up way too often. Also, where was the "live feed" to New York that the head referee could not have called it down?

Batting the ball is illegal and it should have drawn an immediate flag. That means the Lions get the ball at the spot of the fumble, plus a 10 yard penalty. In this case, they would have gotten it at the 1 yard line and then half the distance to the goal. Clearly, he pushes the ball out:



Who knows what would have happened after that. No guarantee the Lions score against that defense and even if they did, the Seahawks most likely get the ball back with time on the clock.

The Seahawks outplayed the Lions all game, so thanks for handing them a loss. It helps us out in keeping us on top of the division.

On another note, your offense has given up more points in the last 8 quarters than your defense has! :shock:

#Kam

 

[Popeyejones]

Who knows what would have happened after that. No guarantee the Lions score against that defense and even if they did, the Seahawks most likely get the ball back with time on the clock.

I think the (at all reasonable) best case scenario for the Hawks in that situation would really be that they stonewall the Lions from the 1/2 yard line three times while burning all their timeouts in the process and the game going to OT.

Of course, as we all know, other things can happen.

It doesn't look like Advanced NFL Stats does the in game win probability models anymore (which if true really, really sucks), but up by 3 with your opponent having first and goal at your half yard line and 90 seconds left, I can't imagine the Hawks' win probability would have been high.

EDIT: Looks like the non-call swung the win probability by 70%. I would have thought it was higher, but sheesh, a 70% swing on a play only happens a few times a year at most, I'd guess (e.g. the Super Bowl last year; Kap's fumble at the 1/2 yard line against the Rams last year).

 

[Hawkpower]

Not that my opinion much matters on this issue, but I think the appropriate response is to just accept it, be grateful for it, and move on.

As a 9ers fan I had to do that when my team beat the Giants in the playoffs on a blown call toward the end of the game. It happens. I felt really bad for Giants fans but it's not like I wish they had gotten the call right. :mrgreen:

As for this, if people want to object to the word "lucky" they can just use Carroll's word: "fortunate."

Basically, you have Pete Carroll saying the refs screwed up, the VP of officiating saying the refs screwed up, and you have Wright saying he intentionally batted it because he didn't know the rule and won't do it again.

The Hawks were fortunate. So what?

Of course people are going to talk about it because the Hawks got really fortunate on a blown call at the worst time for the other team. It happens. Rather than complaining about that, would anyone actually prefer the alternative that the ref got the call right? Of course not.

Sheesh, just be happy about it and move on. Coming up with silly reasons for why the Hawks weren't fortunate just comes off as sour grapes from a winner (the worst kind; a lot of 9ers fans did this too after the Giants game, and I said the same thing to fellow 9ers fans then). :th2thumbs:

Fortunate that the refs didnt throw a ridiculous flag?

Sure.

Detroit getting the ball back on the one inch line there would have been the real travesty. KJ gained no advantage by tapping that ball out, and the ref swallowed his whistle appropriately.

In no way did Detroit deserve to get the ball back on a technicality.

 

[Popeyejones]

Fortunate that the refs didnt throw a ridiculous flag?

Sure.

Detroit getting the ball back on the one inch line there would have been the real travesty. KJ gained no advantage by tapping that ball out, and the ref swallowed his whistle appropriately.

In no way did Detroit deserve to get the ball back on a technicality.

Hiya,

Just wanted to let you know that I read your post, but am choosing not to reply to it substantively.

No worries on it, but if we went back and forth on it I'm guessing we'd just end up where we started with some antagonism thrown in too. :lol:

So, I think we're better off just agreeing to disagree rather than trying to convince each other. :th2thumbs:

Congrats on the win, though. (which I say sincerely; it's not even remotely sarcastic or winking)

 

[Hawkpower]

I knew this was a penalty as well as something similar happened to Green Bay when we played the Steelers a few years back:



The Packers got the ball back and on the ensuing play, Eddie Lacy scores a TD. In the end though, the Packers ended up losing that game, but the penalty on that play was noteworthy because it rarely happens. Both players and referees should know all the rules. Even the more obscure ones. The refs should know these rules! PERIOD! They get paid a lot of money to do this. For guys that have been doing this a good majority of their lives, they screw up way too often. Also, where was the "live feed" to New York that the head referee could not have called it down?

Batting the ball is illegal and it should have drawn an immediate flag. That means the Lions get the ball at the spot of the fumble, plus a 10 yard penalty. In this case, they would have gotten it at the 1 yard line and then half the distance to the goal. Clearly, he pushes the ball out:



Who knows what would have happened after that. No guarantee the Lions score against that defense and even if they did, the Seahawks most likely get the ball back with time on the clock.

The Seahawks outplayed the Lions all game, so thanks for handing them a loss. It helps us out in keeping us on top of the division.

On another note, your offense has given up more points in the last 8 quarters than your defense has! :shock:

#Kam

Steve Young, Trent Dilfer, Ray Lewis, and Jon Gruden did not know the rule.

So there's that.