KJ Wright illegal bat

[canfan]

All I want to know is if its Ok to Call K.J. "Batman" now? :?:

 

[fenderbender123]

Maybe that IS what he thought and the reason why he didn't throw the flag.

That still doesn't make those 2 plays, at all, comparable, IMO.

I'll admit they are different. KJ's was more intentional, but they could be comparable in that they both used the palms of their hands to intentionally but gently push the ball in a direction to their favor. If the NFL hasn't defined what "batting" or "punching" the ball is, then I can see why a referee wouldn't consider that a bat or a punch, and would rather consider a wind up and really hard strike of the football as a penalty.

And yeah, that could be why he didn't throw the flag. I do like the no-call in this situation (obviously).

 

[bbsplitter]

This rule is still confusing me. So let's say he had grabbed it, and only gotten one foot in, before going out of bounds. Technically he would not have established possession, with only 1 foot in, and he would have advanced the ball out of bounds while NOT "in possession" of it (technically). So uh, how is that different then what he did?

 

[bigtrain21]

This rule is still confusing me. So let's say he had grabbed it, and only gotten one foot in, before going out of bounds. Technically he would not have established possession, with only 1 foot in, and he would have advanced the ball out of bounds while NOT "in possession" of it (technically). So uh, how is that different then what he did?

I get the feeling this rule was created for a totally different kind of play and the way they worded it included this type of play. I don't think the rule makers would generally have a problem with Wright doing what he did. Some nerd looked it up 10 minutes after the game and created a controversy. Even the guy ESPN paid to have in the Booth with them didn't mention it until 12 minutes after the game ended.

 

[BullHawk33]

This came out of the Holy Roller play. They had to create a penalty to prevent the offense from trying to advance the ball forward without maintaining possession. I don't understand why they had to make an offensive ball fumbled through the endzone a change of possession and a touchback. It should be the same as the rest of the normal field of play.

They will probably change it so that it is placed back where the offense last had possession after this season.

 

[WilsonMVP]

Who cares? if green bay can get the ball back after one of our O linemen recovered a fumble then we can do it too.

Yup. Exactly.

At least this one got a review.

The GB play didn't even get a review. Just like the AZ "interception" that cost a game 2 years ago didn't even get a review.

That said I honestly don't know why Wright doesn't just fall on the ball. He's halfway into the endzone and obviously pushes the ball out of the end zone. If he falls on it, which he easily could've done, it's the same result. Why not just fall on it ?

I dont remember the media making a big stink about that one...anyone else...the ARz "interception" that hit the ground

 

[rastahawk]

Funny thing happened to me last night when this play unfolded. When the ball came loose I screamed "KJ grab it and take a knee!". He batted it out so I thought meh I guess he knows what he's doing afterall he's the actual NFL player and I'm just a dumb fan. The fact that there was no subsequent call reaffirmed me that he did the right thing. Then sure enough the issue came up in the post-game and then I was like damn it he should have just either taken possession of it and walked out, or taken a knee.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

I figured the non-call was to make up for SB XL. :stirthepot:

 

[ExpatPack]

Okie, as a Packer fan I'm gonna weigh in on this. No way that the Bat Out of Hell was as bad as the Fail Mary. It was an illegal bat by Wright, yes. it's because Wright didn't know the rule and it's an odd rule to begin with. If he had, Wright could have grabbed the ball and knelt down. Touchback.

Yes it was the wrong call but it was the sort of mistake where you say, "Umm, that's the rule?" Like Wright, I certainly didn't know that.

 

[Smellyman]

Someday they will call a pick play on the Pats, Packers or Broncos.

Until then I won't be freaking out about this call.

The pick plays and blocking downfield gives them advatages all game long on every play.



Calling a penalty on that play would've been a travesty.

 

[Seahawk]

There is no way you can watch that and conclude Earl intentionally batted the ball out of bounds. KJ Wright's was far more obvious. Again, completely different play.

I'm not sure what you are looking at. It's clearly the same. How can YOU not see what everyone else sees?!
In both cases there was a forced fumble.
In both cases the ball was batted out of the end zone for a safety.

Forget about intent and what the ref saw, both plays are identical and neither play was called for illegal batting.
KJ clearly pushes the ball out.
Earl clearly pushes the ball out.

I even remember comments from the analysts saying "Earl not only forced the fumble, but had the presence of mind to also knock the ball out of the end zone for a safety". Seems nobody knows about this obscure rule.

To bring up "The Tip" is just wrong. Now THAT is clearly a different play.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Stupid rule that nobody knew about. If that's what they want to hang on to, so be it. Cry me a river.
Kam made the play to save the game, period. Guaranteed most players in the league don't know that rule, and would have done the exact same thing KJ did.

 

[WilsonMVP]

Someday they will call a pick play on the Pats, Packers or Broncos.

Until then I won't be freaking out about this call.

The pick plays and blocking downfield gives them advatages all game long on every play.



Calling a penalty on that play would've been a travesty.

What about not calling encroachment when Packers Oline LITERALLY moves before the ball is hiked as the defender goes into the neutral zone...unlike what happened with us last night when none of our Oline moved so Wilson was able to LEGALLY throw it

How many times have the Packers benefited and probably won a game due to this during this season

 

[WilsonMVP]

So much crying about it in the media FFS

Its almost like Kam didnt make an AMAZING play and the lions just somehow got TOTALLY SCREWED and had all 11 guys around the ball and would of got it had that Mean KJ Wright not knocked the ball out of bounds :roll:

Idk how this is a big deal. Like seriously. If that same thing happened to us I would be blaming Doug or whoever WR was stupid enough to not secure the ball...not whine like a little blank about a technicality. If KJ stumbles around and tries to grab the ball and fails and goes out of bounds its the same damn thing. No lions defender had a chance to make the play and idk if the ball wouldnt of just bounced out on its own anyway without KJs help

And any Packers fan whining about penalties is always rich considering their only superbowl win in almost 20 years was aided in part by the officials screwing the Vikings over and over in a close game that if they had lost ultimately they dont even make the playoffs

If you dont remember http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ight-game/

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

If, as officials have stated, it's a subjective call based on a play that would not have changed anything on the field if the player had done differently, why the outrage and bickering about it? Nobody bitches about other subjective flags or non-flags. Nobody screams for days when an official rules a pass "uncatchable", thus wiping out a pass interference penalty. Why is this one subjective call/non-call so damned important if KJ's actions, no matter what he did, wouldn't have affected anything?

 

[WilsonMVP]

If, as officials have stated, it's a subjective call based on a play that would not have changed anything on the field if the player had done differently, why the outrage and bickering about it? Nobody bitches about other subjective flags or non-flags. Nobody screams for days when an official rules a pass "uncatchable", thus wiping out a pass interference penalty. Why is this one subjective call/non-call so damned important if KJ's actions, no matter what he did, wouldn't have affected anything?

This...look..it would be one thing if there was a lions player right there in the mix with KJ...but there wasnt...It would be a totally legit complaint if the Lions had a shot to get it...They DIDNT

Good thing it was against the Lions. God forbid if this happened against the Packers. Probably be a meeting by congress because its so serious haha

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

If, as officials have stated, it's a subjective call based on a play that would not have changed anything on the field if the player had done differently, why the outrage and bickering about it? Nobody bitches about other subjective flags or non-flags. Nobody screams for days when an official rules a pass "uncatchable", thus wiping out a pass interference penalty. Why is this one subjective call/non-call so damned important if KJ's actions, no matter what he did, wouldn't have affected anything?

This...look..it would be one thing if there was a lions player right there in the mix with KJ...but there wasnt...It would be a totally legit complaint if the Lions had a shot to get it...They DIDNT

Just like a pass interference no call on an "uncatchable" ball.

 

[ringless]

Kam made a great play, and there was other bad calls this week that were just as costly as this one. At the end of the day Calvin is the one to blame. If he protects the ball and lets momentum do its thing the Lions score and more likely than not win the game.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

Kam made a great play, and there was other bad calls this week that were just as costly as this one. At the end of the day Calvin is the one to blame. If he protects the ball and lets momentum do its thing the Lions score and more likely than not win the game.

Are you saying that a subjective non-call on a play that wouldn't have changed anything if the player hadn't even reacted to the ball was a bad call?

 

[ringless]

Kam made a great play, and there was other bad calls this week that were just as costly as this one. At the end of the day Calvin is the one to blame. If he protects the ball and lets momentum do its thing the Lions score and more likely than not win the game.

Are you saying that a subjective non-call on a play that wouldn't have changed anything if the player hadn't even reacted to the ball was a bad call?

What I am saying is if Lions fans want to be upset than they should be upset with Calvin. Calvin made a bad play, Kam made a great one. The call was just the cherry on top of it all no matter which way you lean. Do I feel in that situation it would be a stupid call to make. Yes, it was clear that he could have just grabbed it and downed it or gone out of bounds. At the same time the rules are in place for a reason and even though the bat penalty in this case would have been a ridiculous call it should have been called because a penalty was committed.