Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ    Contact Us  Your donations are greatly appreciated! Donate  Chat Room

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 86 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:11 am 
* NET X's & O's Guru *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:24 am
Posts: 8615
Location: PNW
hawker84 wrote:
AbsolutNET wrote:
What does Jack Tatum have to do with the ball breaking the plane of the goal line?

You don't sound old because you don't like a rule, you sound old because you started talking about one thing and ended up talking about something totally unrelated.


the whole post was in reference to the league is getting soft, using that rule as one of the examples.. all these ticky tack fouls and calls/rulings makes it harder for me to enjoy the game.. the game was played differently back in the tatum and LT days,, do you not agree?


I think the game was officiated differently, of course. The game itself has evolved and changed and I dont think anyone disagrees with how you feel about the amount of new rules we've seen over the past 4 or 5 years. I just don't understand how the goal line rule relates in any way and was just bustin your balls for being a meandering geriatric.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:11 am 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
hawker84 wrote:
my point is , i don't like the rule... not trying to make it hard to understand? i don't like it, that's just my opinion.. i think a player should maintain possesion of the ball, just like any other play on the field.. you're entitled to disagree..


Maintain possession of the ball until when? Until the play is over, correct? Once the ball breaks the plane, the play is over. End discussion.

TDOTSEAHAWK wrote:
They actually used to get killed on the field. Between 1900 and 1910 there more than 50 on field deaths in football.


Most of them were skull fractures, I believe. One of the reason why the argument to go back to LESS head protection never flew with me. Yeah it would make players stop using their helmets as weapons, but skull fractures are way worse than concussions.

tonyseahawk wrote:
Actually, Jeremy Shockey caught the ball in the endzone in the center and a split second after his feet touched, he was nailed and the ball dislodged. Results......touchdown. The rule for that game was, he caught the ball in the air, had possession, and the second both feet touched, the play is over resulting in a touchdown.

I think its a crap rule, and should have went the other way. But that was the way they ruled it and that dick Mike Peroeirerarra said at the time is what the correct call


I remember this play, was in the stadium when it happened. It shouldn't have been a TD, and I believe the subsequent rules that have been put in place would make it an incompletion in today's game.

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:26 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
i am a meandering geriatric, it has to be true.. i get pumped up when i see a flippin grass stain these days... how'd i get so old, where did the time go.. lol don't even get me started on the touchdown celebrations...

FTW, i understand how the rule works, i simply don't like it, you're putting to much thought into it my friend... i ain't mad at you tho bro, you've got the best Sig on the .Net

edited for spelling

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Last edited by hawker84 on Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:33 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:08 pm
Posts: 904
You are thinking about it wrong. Lets say you get two feet down in the end zone, and then fumble. That shouldn't count? Just like when the player is down, as soon as the requirements for a TD are satisfied the play ends. If you have possession while 1 inch of the ball gets in, you fulfilled the requirements. Makes perfect sense to me.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:35 am 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
hawker84 wrote:
i

FTW, i understand how the rule works, i simply don't like it, you're putting to much thought into it my friend...



Or maybe you aren't putting enough into it?

You said this: "i played in an era where not only the ball had to cross the plane, you had to actually maintain possesion of it"

The rule for the ball crossing the plane (and subsequently the play being over) has been in place since 1889. So I HIGHLY doubt you played in an era that is different than today's rules regarding that. You also vaguely state that you think you should have to "maintain possession" and I ask, up until when? Some arbitrary point AFTER the ball has crossed the end line? That doesn't make any sense, and is contrary to the way football has been played for 100+ years.

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:41 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
jeeezzz.. agian , i UNDERSTAND the rule!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and i understand it's been in place for a long time.......

let's just say when i played, you made sure you secured the ball before,during, and after breaking the plane..... and yes i've had td's taken off the board for fumbling after i've crossed the plane.. i was a reciever in case you were wondering...

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Last edited by hawker84 on Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:41 am 
* NET Alumni *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:47 am
Posts: 3883
I know the old football rule was based on rugby, and was abolished years and years ago. I am sorry I didn't read the whole thread. Just wanted to chime in if nobody else did. It is called a "try", and you have to go over the line and physically place the ball on the ground to score. It is one of the few things I remember from my physical education classes for teachers. We had to learn about so many different sports and how they were related and developed from each other and so on. It was seriously a difficult class because the guy who taught it has a doctorate in sports science and has a history degree and made sure we knew EVERY game on the planet. I believe the breaking the plane rule came into place a long time ago, like seriously in the days when they just started with the forward pass.

If anything the rules have changed the other way, where now you're required to keep holding onto a ball when you hit out of bounds, and that rule didn't used to be in place. It seems you just had to have possession in bounds and it didn't matter what happened out, and there was also a force out rule that no longer exists.

_________________
Image
R.I.P. Dad. I miss you. You will never be forgotten
1/12/39 - 8/7/08


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:45 am 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
hawker84 wrote:
jeeezzz.. agian , i UNDERSTAND the rule!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and i understand it's been in place for a long time.......

let's say when i played, you made sure you possed the ball before,during, and after breaking the plane..... and yes i've had td's taken off the board for fumbling after i've crossed the plane.. i was a reciever in case you were wondering...


Like I said in my first post, the difference is most likely calling a game real time without having instant replay to back up the call. A lot of the time I think refs lean on instant replay in situations like you are describing, and it has become a crutch. Human error doesn't change the rule though, and that is what I am saying.

As for you understanding the rule and how long it has been in place, you could have fooled me :mrgreen:

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:01 am 
* El Primo *
* El Primo *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
Posts: 5222
Location: Skagit County, WA
When I first started playing foots, a player's 'forward progress' had to be stopped before he was considered 'down.' Can you imagine Lynch in such a scenario? In college it was the 'knee down' rule, but not in the pros.

While I miss some of the old, blood, snot, and teeth, flying about, I also understand the NFL is a business. A business which tries to protect it's investments.

2 cents.

_________________
If you're walking on thin ice, you might as well dance.................................................Mom


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:04 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
finally, we can end the discussion on an agreement.. :180670: absolutely instant replay and human error play a big part in the calls these days... there's plenty of rules and rule changes established with the modern game i don't agree with, that rule being one of many...

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:12 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:09 pm
Posts: 3408
OP is avoiding the quesiton everyone is asking him. Maintain the ball, UNTIL WHEN? Does he have to hold the ball until he walks off the field towards his teammates? Or does he need to control it until after the game ends? So is OP in favor of spiking the ball in celebration being called a fumble? Make your point clear OP, when do you think the play should be ruled over?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:18 am 
* NET Radish *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:18 pm
Posts: 18007
Location: Spokane, Wa.
therealjohncarlson wrote:
OP is avoiding the quesiton everyone is asking him. Maintain the ball, UNTIL WHEN? Does he have to hold the ball until he walks off the field towards his teammates? Or does he need to control it until after the game ends? So is OP in favor of spiking the ball in celebration being called a fumble? Make your point clear OP, when do you think the play should be ruled over?



Oh yeah, a smart assed answer fits right in here.

:141847_bnono:

_________________
Image
The SuperB owl ladys have left the building with our thanks.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:27 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
i will take the high road still...

how about it's over , just like when a play is over on the playing field... i don't have a problem with players diving across the corner of the endzone and putting the ball over the pileon, kind of like the tight end for the steelers did yesterday... but say a running back tries to dive over the pile and reaches the ball out over the line, and it gets dislodged i feel should be ruled a fumble...

if a reciever comes down with two feet in bounds, gets blasted and holds onto the ball, TD, if it becomes dislodged imcomplete pass, (i've seen this called a TD this year, more than once)

so to answer your question, i don't have a clear answer (one step, two steps i don't know), other than, maintain posession after crossing the line..

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:31 am 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
hawker84 wrote:
i will take the high road still...

how about it's over , just like when a play is over on the playing field... i don't have a problem with players diving across the corner of the endzone and putting the ball over the pileon, kind of like the tight end for the steelers did yesterday... but say a running back tries to dive over the pile and reaches the ball out over the line, and it gets dislodged i feel should be ruled a fumble...

if a reciever comes down with two feet in bounds, gets blasted and holds onto the ball, TD, if it becomes dislodged imcomplete pass, (i've seen this called a TD this year, more than once)

so to answer your question, i don't have a clear answer (one step, two steps i don't know), other than, maintain posession after crossing the line..


No offense, but you aren't doing yourself any favors here. Just let it be.

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:35 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
sorry i don't like the rule, if you have a problem with that, they're plenty other threads..

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:39 am 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
hawker84 wrote:
sorry i don't like the rule, if you have a problem with that, they're plenty other threads..


It isn't that, I don't care one way or another. But from the very start claiming that the rules were different when you played, to not having any real semblance of what should and shouldn't be considered maintaining possession in your opinion, your argument comes out flat. We can talk about what rules we like and dislike all day long, there are many that I think are stupid and detract from the game. It is just odd to hear someone denounce a rule that has been in place for so long and is a fundamental part of the game at all levels.

Either way, I think this thread has run its course. Have a good day, hopefully you are enjoying the win to the fullest.

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:42 am 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:51 am
Posts: 2409
Want to take this to another level? Would the NFL be as popular, and would teams throw the ball as much as they do now if the rules reverted to where every incomplete forward pass was like a lateral, a free ball, and whoever got to it first had possession?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:45 am 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
seedhawk wrote:
Want to take this to another level?


No.

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:47 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am
Posts: 2447
It's a very good rule change.

Any rule that takes away referee judgement is a good thing IMO. "Breaking the plane" is a very simple thing to review, either the ball crossed the line or not. When you start bringing in judgement about possession, then that gives the refs and review officials more changes to screw up the call.

_________________
If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:51 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
good point...

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:53 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:09 pm
Posts: 3408
I understand what the OP is saying on an emotional level even though he hasnt really thought out his platform. Whats funny though is that I disagree with what hes saying mostly on an emotional level. I am generally for things that make the game more exciting and imo theres not many things more exciting than a player heroically diving for the endzone in hopes of just crossing that goal line. Like Tates play for example. He weaved through multiple players and put his body on the line to dive head first into the endzone. You would see a lot less of that if they made OPs suggested rule change. Players would worry more about protecting the ball going into the endzone, so Tate would have likely just tried to run in and would have came up a couple yards short.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:57 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
HawksFTW wrote:
hawker84 wrote:
sorry i don't like the rule, if you have a problem with that, they're plenty other threads..


It isn't that, I don't care one way or another. But from the very start claiming that the rules were different when you played, to not having any real semblance of what should and shouldn't be considered maintaining possession in your opinion, your argument comes out flat. We can talk about what rules we like and dislike all day long, there are many that I think are stupid and detract from the game. It is just odd to hear someone denounce a rule that has been in place for so long and is a fundamental part of the game at all levels.

Either way, I think this thread has run its course. Have a good day, hopefully you are enjoying the win to the fullest.


never said the rules were different, i said it was not enforced the same, at least not in the leagues i played in... and just because a rule has been around for 100+ years doesn't mean it's a good one. but i do agree with Largent, putting more reviews in the hands of the officials could cause more harm than good..

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:06 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
bottom line, we all have our difference of opinions on rules that would or would not improve the game, what's exciting to watch for you persay, could be unexciting for me... some are into stats, some just wins and loss's... i have absolute zero problem with people disagreeing with my opinions.. something i've always thought of lately , and wanted to see what others thought. that's all.

i love the death defying, whirley bird , flipporama td's as much as the next person, just wished they'd hang on to the ball a little more once they landed..

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 7:29 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:22 am
Posts: 664
A lot of things are upgraded as time goes on. In "the day" computers were as big as Volkswagen's, casette tapes were revolutionary, and women wore frumpy clothing. Now, you can drive to your nearest gas station and buy coffee from an aspiring porn star while browsing the web on your mobile device all while never leaving the confines of your vehicle.

Entertain me.

_________________
Image
San Fransisco. Still partying like it's 1981.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 7:46 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:03 pm
Posts: 1047
I like the rule, if the defense actually made a play, the guy wouldn't be in the position to score anyway. It isn't without benefits for the defense. If a RB thinks he is close he may reach the ball out and get it stolen before the line (something we see a lot of the time). For every Rice fumble after crossing the goal line there is one of these: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/badgers/179834941.html


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 7:51 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:26 am
Posts: 1522
kidhawk wrote:
hawker84 wrote:
true, they're getting killed now.. crossing the plane then fumbling i can kind of see, but if you're stretching out for the goal line and fumbled should be a fumble, or if you're in the air, catch the ball, get hit as you land and the ball is dislodged , i think the defense made the play and should be awarded the stop... ]

not everyones cup of tea, JMO


If you are in the endzone when you are making a catch, you must still continue through to make the catch legal before it's a touchdown. The defense can knock the ball out or knock you out of bounds to make it not a catch and therefor not a touchdown. This is the rule and has been enforced many times.


How long has this rule been in effect anyway? I remember in 05 against the Giants, jeremy shockey jumped up and caught a pass in the endzone and only the tips of his toes came to the ground for a split second before he was blown up by Marquand Manuel and the ball came loose. The play was reviewed and called a TD.

_________________
----


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:08 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
Posts: 3078
Location: Anchorage, AK
First of all more interpretation = more ways the Seahawks can get screwed. We get screwed enough on what shouldn't be an interpretation.

To the last post - two rules

1) having possession outside the end zone and bringing it in. The play is over when the player crosses the plane if the end zone.

2) catching it in the end zone. Catch and come to the ground with full control of the ball / maintaining possession as you go to the ground even if you land out of bounds (feet in bound). Rule was clarified a few years ago and subsequently the lions were screwed after Calvin Johnson put the ball on the ground after a one-handed catch


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:27 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 1:45 pm
Posts: 1067
I think it would pretty cool if we took this idea to hockey. Not only does the puck have to cross the goaline but it has to stay in the net - imagine the battles in front/inside the net.

I do think it is cool that a self proclaimed "old guy" is quoting Notorious B.I.G in his sig.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 1:53 am 
* NET Alumni *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:35 am
Posts: 4588
Location: Seattle, WA
This is a crazy silly thread. Not only has breaking the plane been a rule forever. Watch the Tate TD again. The ground causes the fumble. He would've been ruled down even if not in the endzone.

_________________
http://twitter.com/EJZ206


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 2:06 am 
* Mr Random Thought *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 9831
The rule always made sense to me. A football field is supposed to be 100 yards long, not 100 yards and 8 inches long.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:27 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
kobebryant wrote:
I think it would pretty cool if we took this idea to hockey. Not only does the puck have to cross the goaline but it has to stay in the net - imagine the battles in front/inside the net.

I do think it is cool that a self proclaimed "old guy" is quoting Notorious B.I.G in his sig.


lol, i'm not that old, plus i was saying it way before he was ever biggy smalls...

anyways i look at it like this... you take that exact same play, redo it exactly as it unfolds with the exact same results.. but instead of him falling into the endzone, he falls at the one,the ball is jarred loose.. would it still be considered a catch? i don't think so.. and that is why i don't like the rule..

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:34 am 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
hawker84 wrote:

anyways i look at it like this... you take that exact same play, redo it exactly as it unfolds with the exact same results.. but instead of him falling into the endzone, he falls at the one,the ball is jarred loose.. would it still be considered a catch? i don't think so.. and that is why i don't like the rule..


Which play? Rice's TD catch? If so, yes it would still be a catch, and in fact there is chance it wasn't even a fumble as his knee is down at almost the exact same time as he is being hit. At worst, it would have a been a catch and fumble, as he had clear possession and turned up field to run.

Now that you are starting to question whether or not it was even a catch, makes me wonder if you truly understand the rules of the game to begin with? :|

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:39 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
i think it was a catch, but i think if it was in the field of play it would have been reviewed as a possible fumble...as boom boom of a play as it was , i think it could have been ruled a fumble, if it happened on the one...

the fact that you can't except the fact that i know what the rule is and i just don't like it is laughable at this point... you don't have to agree with my opinions dude... doesn't mean i don't know the rules.. K

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:42 am 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
hawker84 wrote:
i think it was a catch, but i think if it was in the field of play it would have been reviewed as a possible fumble...as boom boom of a play as it was , i think it could have been ruled a fumble, if it happened on the one...

the fact that you can't except the fact that i know what the rule is and i just don't like it is laughable at this point... you don't have to agree with my opinions dude... doesn't mean i don't know the rules.. K


Fumble yes, I agree with, that would have been up for review. But this is what you said:

Quote:
would it still be considered a catch? i don't think so.. and that is why i don't like the rule..


So what are you trying to argue? That it wouldn't be a catch, a fumble, or a TD? Between your vague reasoning, inability to keep your argument straight, and your defensiveness, not sure what you are hoping to accomplish here.

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:45 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
i'll agree with you , i didn't word that post right... yes i thought it was a catch, but i also think if he had come down on the one instead of in the endzone it would have been ruled a fumble... sorry for the confusion.

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:48 am 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
hawker84 wrote:
i'll agree with you , i didn't word that post right... yes i thought it was a catch, but i also think if he had come down on the one instead of in the endzone it would have been ruled a fumble... sorry for the confusion.


So you don't like the rule that a play is over as soon as the ball crosses the end line because...get this...if he was a yard short of the endzone, it would have been a fumble? Am I reading this correctly?

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:57 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
no... had nothing to do with being stopped short of the endzone...

i don't like the rule because if that same play happend in the field of play, it would have at the least been reviewed as a possible fumble. my whole point was i feel they should have to make the same plays in the endzone just like on the field... having said that, i understand there are other situations that the endzone offers that you do not get on the field of play such as diving for the corner and hitting the pileon with the ball, etc... so there would have to be some exceptions..

since it was the seahawks that scored on that play, i love the call.. had it been a bears TD, i would have been pissed..

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:08 pm 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
hawker84 wrote:
no... had nothing to do with being stopped short of the endzone...

i don't like the rule because if that same play happend in the field of play, it would have at the least been reviewed as a possible fumble. my whole point was i feel they should have to make the same plays in the endzone just like on the field...


It was reviewed as a possible fumble, you realize that, yes? It was confirmed to be a touchdown.

The play is no different than a runner's forward progress being stopped, and then the ball coming out; the play is dead in that situation as well, as soon as the whistle blows, as you can't challenge forward progress. Obviously there are some arbitrary rules that are unique to scoring plays, but the essence of the rule is the same across the board.

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:17 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:13 pm
Posts: 1733
hawker84 wrote:
call me old fashioned or whatever, but i hate that rule, where only the ball has to cross the plane to be considered a touchdown.. i played in an era where not only the ball had to cross the plane, you had to actually maintain possesion of it... i can't count how many td's have been scored in the last few years where the ball has been fumbled emmediately after the ball crossed the goal.

before you attack, don't get me wrong, i'm very grateful for the Rice and G Tate TD's yesterday, but i just think this game is getting too damn soft, can't touch qb's any more even when there outside the pocket, can't touch recievers any more, a slight hands to the face is a huge penalty... just go ahead and purchase the flags, because that's the direction this league is heading to, flag football..

guess i'm just longing for the old days, when football was about blood and guts, and players like Tatum and LT were to be feared when you cross the middle or run the ball.. guess i'm just getting old and stuck in my ways.. your opinions?


Wow, so what you are saying is that any vulnerable player is free game to blow up so he can be separated from the ball and if that happens there is no TD even if the ball crosses the plane of the goal line clearly in the possession of that player. This is an interesting approach but contrary to the present rules and an approach which would lead to more than one serious injury.

The game can still have physicality but there is no need to encourage a situation where players can get hurt. I disagree with you.

_________________
Until we develop a pass rush that will cause opposing teams to be forced to scheme to defend it we will never be able to completely take the final step. Until the OLine is strengthened the team will remain weak.


Last edited by jammerhawk on Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:17 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
all scoring plays are reviewed, again i know it's a shocker but i do know and understand most of the rules... and you're trying to tell me the whistle was blown before that ball came out... beg to differ.. apples and oranges..


let's just agree to disagree because at this point we're just repeating ourselves... i respect your opinions and everyone elses , just don't agree with a rule that's been around forever.. i also don't like the horse collar rule, we can debate that and get a fresh start? NO? :1:

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:18 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
jammerhawk wrote:
hawker84 wrote:
call me old fashioned or whatever, but i hate that rule, where only the ball has to cross the plane to be considered a touchdown.. i played in an era where not only the ball had to cross the plane, you had to actually maintain possesion of it... i can't count how many td's have been scored in the last few years where the ball has been fumbled emmediately after the ball crossed the goal.

before you attack, don't get me wrong, i'm very grateful for the Rice and G Tate TD's yesterday, but i just think this game is getting too damn soft, can't touch qb's any more even when there outside the pocket, can't touch recievers any more, a slight hands to the face is a huge penalty... just go ahead and purchase the flags, because that's the direction this league is heading to, flag football..

guess i'm just longing for the old days, when football was about blood and guts, and players like Tatum and LT were to be feared when you cross the middle or run the ball.. guess i'm just getting old and stuck in my ways.. your opinions?


Wow, so what you are saying is that any vulnerable player is free game to blow up so he can be separated from the ball and if that happens there is no TD even if the ball crosses the plane of the goal line clearly in the possession of that player. This is an interesting approach but contrary to the present rules and an approach which would lead to more than one serious injury.

The game can still have physicality but there is no need to encourage a situation where players can get hurt. I disagree with you.
huh? not saying that at all

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Last edited by hawker84 on Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:20 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
where anywhere in my post or post's did i say i want to see more vunerable players getting hit? reaching.

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:26 pm 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
hawker84 wrote:
all scoring plays are reviewed, again i know it's a shocker but i do know and understand most of the rules... and you're trying to tell me the whistle was blown before that ball came out... beg to differ.. apples and oranges..


All scoring views are up for review, yes. There is a two step process though. They are either buzzed down to the field to be looked at, or are confirmed. This specific instance Mike Carey actually went under the hood to examine the play, which doesn't happen automatically.

And no, I am not saying the play was whistled dead. I am saying the play is dead as soon as the ball crosses the end line in the possession of a player. Similar to how a play is dead as soon as the whistle blows on the field. You are asking for the plays in the endzone to be consistent with what is called on the field, and I am showing you exactly that. Just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean it isn't true.

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:35 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
Posts: 3078
Location: Anchorage, AK
1) In the field of play the Rice catch is complete and he is without a doubt DOWN. He lands on the ground with the ball in possession (which is why it was deemed a TD) then gets hit and the ball comes loose when he is on the ground. That is down by contact at the moment of impact. No fumble would be called if this was in the field of play, endzone, in his backyard, Madden NFL or wherever this was played. The only place that is a fumble is on the Chicago Bears message board........

2) When you break the plane the play has to end. The whole goal of the game of football is to get more points than the opponent. This is accomplished by getting the ball across the plane into the opponents endzone or kicking a FG. If you break the plane the play is dead the second it happens. Otherwise what he lands everyone can pile up on him and take a few licks and then we see if the ball is still in possession.

What about a play in the middle of the field. The player reaches out the ball is at the 40 yard line, the body is at the 38 yard line, knee is down, he is touched, the ball comes loose. Where do you want the ball placed? The rules say it is on the 40 yard line and the offense keeps the possession.

Should this also be a turnover then? Should the ball be back on the 38 yard line? if you place it on the 40 yard line then why would a touchdown be different?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:37 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:32 am
Posts: 1453
Location: Victoria BC
hawker84 wrote:
call me old fashioned or whatever, but i hate that rule, where only the ball has to cross the plane to be considered a touchdown.. i played in an era where not only the ball had to cross the plane, you had to actually maintain possesion of it... i can't count how many td's have been scored in the last few years where the ball has been fumbled emmediately after the ball crossed the goal.

before you attack, don't get me wrong, i'm very grateful for the Rice and G Tate TD's yesterday, but i just think this game is getting too damn soft, can't touch qb's any more even when there outside the pocket, can't touch recievers any more, a slight hands to the face is a huge penalty... just go ahead and purchase the flags, because that's the direction this league is heading to, flag football..

guess i'm just longing for the old days, when football was about blood and guts, and players like Tatum and LT were to be feared when you cross the middle or run the ball.. guess i'm just getting old and stuck in my ways.. your opinions?

I am another old codger I hear ya I feel your pain.

_________________
Seahawks + PC/JS + Russell Wilson = Superbowl XLVIII +


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:37 pm 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
mikeak wrote:
What about a play in the middle of the field. The player reaches out the ball is at the 40 yard line, the body is at the 38 yard line, knee is down, he is touched, the ball comes loose. Where do you want the ball placed? The rules say it is on the 40 yard line and the offense keeps the possession.

Should this also be a turnover then? Should the ball be back on the 38 yard line? if you place it on the 40 yard line then why would a touchdown be different?


Exactly. These type of plays show the uniformity I was trying to express. It is the same call regardless of where it is at on the field, granted that the officials call it correctly.

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:39 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
it's not the same,nor is it true... the rule states (correct me if i'm wrong) that the play is dead as soon as the ball crosses the plane.. a play on the field is dead after the whistle blows.. therefore it is nothing alike. so what am i not understanding? plays on the field and plays in the endzone are no where near consistent as to how to they are called dead..

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:45 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
Posts: 3078
Location: Anchorage, AK
I had a great freaking post but hit post reply instead of submit - AAARRGGGH

In the field of play the play is not dead based on a whistle. It is dead based on the player being down by contact either on the tackle causing him to go down or touched on the ground.

The play in the endzone is dead based upon accomplishing the goal of brining the ball across the field into the endzone. There is nothing else to accomplish.

my original post was much better so give me credit for that instead :D


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:48 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
first of all those are two different plays arer entirely different

.. but to answer, i've always felt the ball should be placed where the ball carriers body first touches the ground, be it a knee, hand or whatever... if the ball comes loose, during the stretching it out process, then i feel it should be ruled a fumble..because he is still making a football move.. i know the ground can't cause a fumble , yet another rule i don't like..

the rice play .. he was hit and the ball was dislodged at the same time he was contacting the ground, had that play been on the 20 yrd line, you cannot tell me that play wouldn't have been reviewed and possibly called a fumble...

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: breaking the plane
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:50 pm 
* NET E-Knight *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:06 am
Posts: 4157
hawker84 wrote:
it's not the same,nor is it true... the rule states (correct me if i'm wrong) that the play is dead as soon as the ball crosses the plane.. a play on the field is dead after the whistle blows.. therefore it is nothing alike. so what am i not understanding? plays on the field and plays in the endzone are no where near consistent as to how to they are called dead..


It mind boggling that you don't see this, maybe you are just being obtuse on purpose.

Each play has a designated end, where upon that point the play is dead, and nothing after that matters. In the field of play, that is the whistle being blown (either due to a player being down or forward progress stopped), a player stepping out of bounds, or the ball crossing the end line in the possession of a player. They all essentially achieve the same thing, play over. You are calling for the continuation of a play which has been deemed dead, just because you don't like the finality of it.

Would you rather go back to the rules pre-1889 where you had to physically place the ball on the ground in the endzone? At what point would a play be over in the endzone then? This is the problem, you are taking something which is arbitrary in nature (the endline) but universally agreed upon, and wanting to replace it with something much more complex in applying in action, but also arbitrary. My vote is for the universally agreed upon rules, which everyone and their mother can see with their own two eyes (unless your name is Bill Leavy).

With that said, I am out of this discussion. If you don't get it by now, you never will.

_________________
cboom wrote:
Wilson is the worst QB I have seen as a Hawks fan. And I have been around long enough to see them all.


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 86 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Galen96, godzillarad, Google [Bot], gulliver, Scottemojo, Seanhawk, SoulfishHawk, themunn, TXHawk, Yahoo [Bot], YaktownHawK and 78 guests

 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.