Bill Simmons of Grantland on the Earl Thomas "roughing" flag

BocciHawk

Active member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
1,108
Reaction score
5
A good read...

What's acceptable? Where are the lines? Last Sunday, the Seahawks-Dolphins game swung on a seemingly ludicrous call: Ryan Tannehill throwing the ball up for grabs in the end zone right as Seattle's Earl Thomas (running full-speed) jumped toward him with his arms outstretched, trying to deflect what ended up being a truly rancid pass that Seattle picked off easily. Only one problem: As Thomas was following through with his deflecting motion, Tannehill moved and one of Thomas's hands struck him in the head. Accidental, unintentional contact that only Bruce Lee or one of the Matrix characters could have avoided. What happened? They whistled Thomas with a penalty and gave the ball back to the Dolphins, who immediately tied the game and went on to win by three.

As the only person who picked the Seahawks to make the Super Bowl, as well as someone who would have wagered on Seattle (laying three points) if gambling were legal, the call left me more outraged than Alton's whiny, pathetic, legacy-altering, mail-in-of-a-performance in The Challenge did three days later. I even wondered in a tweet why the league didn't make helmet-to-helmet and inadvertently-hit-someone-because-they-were-in-midair-when-the-target-moved-and-couldn't-stop-because-it's-effing-impossible-to-change-what-your-brain-already-told-your-body-in-less-than-a-split-second penalties reviewable. If the goal of the instant-replay process is "getting game-turning calls correct," then shouldn't coaches be able to challenge massively important 15-yard penalties that may have been interpreted incorrectly? In the moment, I genuinely believed that Thomas's penalty (a) was the wrong call, and (b) altered the course of that Seahawks-Dolphins game.

Here's the funny part: Two days later, I learned that the NFL penalized Thomas for the play. Fifteen thousand dollars!!!! My man Mike Florio even defended the league and said it was the right call! And you know what else? IT PROBABLY WAS THE RIGHT CALL! You're not allowed to intentionally hurt quarterbacks, mistakenly hurt quarterbacks or even hurt their feelings anymore. It's a zero-tolerance policy for anything involving the words "quarterbacks" and "hurt." Same goes for defenseless receivers over the middle. Same goes for punters as they're kicking the football. Same goes for defenseless kick returners or defensive players getting annihilated by blind-side blocks … well, except for you, Eric Weddle.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/869 ... cautiously
 

kidhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2009
Messages
22,900
Reaction score
2,645
Location
Anchorage, AK
I feel his pain, but that hit (penalty) didn't really alter the outcome. It was that ensuing kickoff where Leon Washington ran back the TD. If they let us keep the INT, we never get that big run back, so basically both TD are nullified. of course possession would have flipped there, but we didn't really do a lot with the ball late in that game anyway due to poor play calling (be it Carroll or Bevell doesn't really matter).
 

Zebulon Dak

Banned
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
24,551
Reaction score
1,417
kidhawk":3dot3zal said:
I feel his pain, but that hit (penalty) didn't really alter the outcome. It was that ensuing kickoff where Leon Washington ran back the TD. If they let us keep the INT, we never get that big run back, so basically both TD are nullified. of course possession would have flipped there, but we didn't really do a lot with the ball late in that game anyway due to poor play calling (be it Carroll or Bevell doesn't really matter).

I think it deflated the defense. They thought they'd held. They thought they had a turnover. They thought they'd gotten off the field. Then Leon scores on the KR and they're right back out there with no chance to rest. Not that it's an excuse to blow the game the way they did, but I totally think it had an effect on the D.
 

kidhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2009
Messages
22,900
Reaction score
2,645
Location
Anchorage, AK
Zebulon Dak":3gxupktg said:
kidhawk":3gxupktg said:
I feel his pain, but that hit (penalty) didn't really alter the outcome. It was that ensuing kickoff where Leon Washington ran back the TD. If they let us keep the INT, we never get that big run back, so basically both TD are nullified. of course possession would have flipped there, but we didn't really do a lot with the ball late in that game anyway due to poor play calling (be it Carroll or Bevell doesn't really matter).

I think it deflated the defense. They thought they'd held. They thought they had a turnover. They thought they'd gotten off the field. Then Leon scores on the KR and they're right back out there with no chance to rest. Not that it's an excuse to blow the game the way they did, but I totally think it had an effect on the D.

It is true, that every event can change the following event, but the score would have been no different.

Could the outcome have been different? Sure, but it's not like it was the game winning TD at the end of the game. Many things could have happened for us to still lose this game had they not called the penalty.
 

theENGLISHseahawk

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
9,977
Reaction score
0
We had a touchback right? Would've rather had the offense at the 20 with the same 7-point lead and giving the defense a breather. Plus, we'd just had two long drives from that range. And Tannehill went off after getting away with that. It was almost his 'phew' moment... and he took advantage. Prior to that call he was having a truly miserable day. I think it altered the course of the game.
 

kidhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2009
Messages
22,900
Reaction score
2,645
Location
Anchorage, AK
theENGLISHseahawk":150wgzn3 said:
We had a touchback right? Would've rather had the offense at the 20 with the same 7-point lead and giving the defense a breather. Plus, we'd just had two long drives from that range. And Tannehill went off after getting away with that. It was almost his 'phew' moment... and he took advantage. Prior to that call he was having a truly miserable day. I think it altered the course of the game.

Of course it "altered the course of the game", pretty much each play alters the course of the game in some way shape or form, but that doesn't mean the outcome would have been any different. We can all wish and dream, but we know that doesn't do us any good. Besides, it's done and over. It's time to move on to Chicago and HOPE LIKE HELL for a W
 

Zebulon Dak

Banned
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
24,551
Reaction score
1,417
kidhawk":vkz7wuvr said:
theENGLISHseahawk":vkz7wuvr said:
We had a touchback right? Would've rather had the offense at the 20 with the same 7-point lead and giving the defense a breather. Plus, we'd just had two long drives from that range. And Tannehill went off after getting away with that. It was almost his 'phew' moment... and he took advantage. Prior to that call he was having a truly miserable day. I think it altered the course of the game.

Of course it "altered the course of the game", pretty much each play alters the course of the game in some way shape or form, but that doesn't mean the outcome would have been any different. We can all wish and dream, but we know that doesn't do us any good. Besides, it's done and over. It's time to move on to Chicago and HOPE LIKE HELL for a W

It's a shitty rule and it altered the course of the game. Nobody's saying we for sure win if that INT stands but at least it's reasonable. We should have won anyway but I really think that was the turning point. The D fell apart after that.
 

theENGLISHseahawk

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
9,977
Reaction score
0
kidhawk":2pwu8n2a said:
theENGLISHseahawk":2pwu8n2a said:
We had a touchback right? Would've rather had the offense at the 20 with the same 7-point lead and giving the defense a breather. Plus, we'd just had two long drives from that range. And Tannehill went off after getting away with that. It was almost his 'phew' moment... and he took advantage. Prior to that call he was having a truly miserable day. I think it altered the course of the game.

Of course it "altered the course of the game", pretty much each play alters the course of the game in some way shape or form, but that doesn't mean the outcome would have been any different. We can all wish and dream, but we know that doesn't do us any good. Besides, it's done and over. It's time to move on to Chicago and HOPE LIKE HELL for a W


Why do you presume I haven't moved on? We're talking about whether this had an impact here in terms of the final score and I think it possibly did. Not wishing a dreaming, just an opinion. And the first sentence is a little glib - clearly this was a major talking point.
 

Hawks46

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
7,498
Reaction score
0
Funny, but when Leon ran that kick back, I was like "man, that was great, but the D needed some rest, this is gonna hurt".

I had zero confidence we were stopping the Dolphins on the next drive.
 

Twisted

New member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
1,552
Reaction score
0
kidhawk":jcy8x4hh said:
I feel his pain, but that hit (penalty) didn't really alter the outcome. It was that ensuing kickoff where Leon Washington ran back the TD. If they let us keep the INT, we never get that big run back, so basically both TD are nullified.

you're forgetting a few things here

the time it ran off the clock

momentum
 

firebee

New member
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
1,679
Reaction score
0
Location
Florence, Oregon
The call was a bad call. Thomas wasn't even trying to hit the QB he was going for the PD. All these new rules and policies have, pretty much, put the entire fate of a game in the hands of referees with no system in place to challenge their call. That should not have been called roughing. He wasn't even going for the QB hit. He was going for the PD. How does somebody get roughing when they're going for a pass deflection? Only in Goodell's NFL. Apparently a defensive player is not supposed to touch a QB in any way shape or form. Pretty soon we'll start calling fouls on defensive players anytime they reach for the ball or get in an offensive player's running lane. It'll be like outdoor basketball on grass.
 

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
Put me in the camp for "it probably altered the game." A swing of possession is pretty huge- even more so when the team that won scored 17 points in the 4th quarter and won on the final play. Not a ton of room for margin for error there.
 

lukerguy

Active member
Joined
Feb 18, 2012
Messages
2,320
Reaction score
20
Zebulon Dak":3paizg22 said:
kidhawk":3paizg22 said:
I feel his pain, but that hit (penalty) didn't really alter the outcome. It was that ensuing kickoff where Leon Washington ran back the TD. If they let us keep the INT, we never get that big run back, so basically both TD are nullified. of course possession would have flipped there, but we didn't really do a lot with the ball late in that game anyway due to poor play calling (be it Carroll or Bevell doesn't really matter).

I think it deflated the defense. They thought they'd held. They thought they had a turnover. They thought they'd gotten off the field. Then Leon scores on the KR and they're right back out there with no chance to rest. Not that it's an excuse to blow the game the way they did, but I totally think it had an effect on the D.

Not only did it deflate them, but they were extremely tired. WIth virtually no break the rest of the game after Leon's TD.
 

Rainger

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
3,847
Reaction score
2,111
Location
Brisbane OZ Down Under Hawk
kidhawk":5884mjoc said:
I feel his pain, but that hit (penalty) didn't really alter the outcome. It was that ensuing kickoff where Leon Washington ran back the TD. If they let us keep the INT, we never get that big run back, so basically both TD are nullified. of course possession would have flipped there, but we didn't really do a lot with the ball late in that game anyway due to poor play calling (be it Carroll or Bevell doesn't really matter).
:pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface:
 

Rainger

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
3,847
Reaction score
2,111
Location
Brisbane OZ Down Under Hawk
just cause you have 8590 posts doesnt make you right Kidhawk. :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface:
 

mistaowen

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
6,334
Reaction score
606
How does a free first down in the red zone instead of an interception/touchback not alter the game? At the least we get a first down or two and give our D a quick break with a 7 point lead.
 

ivotuk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
23,058
Reaction score
1,750
Location
North Pole, Alaska
kidhawk":2dzw2xhy said:
I feel his pain, but that hit (penalty) didn't really alter the outcome. It was that ensuing kickoff where Leon Washington ran back the TD. If they let us keep the INT, we never get that big run back, so basically both TD are nullified. of course possession would have flipped there, but we didn't really do a lot with the ball late in that game anyway due to poor play calling (be it Carroll or Bevell doesn't really matter).

Wrong, it went from our ball to a TD. It altered the game in a major way. And you can't say that Leon would not have run one back for a TD, there is know way to know that. He has been getting close all year, it was only a matter of time. And how do you know that after the INT, Russell Wilson wouldn't have drove the field for a TD and burned a lot of time off of the clock? You don't.

It was a game altering play because of the 7 points scored there.
 

ivotuk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
23,058
Reaction score
1,750
Location
North Pole, Alaska
I liked this from the comments section

"P.S. QBs should start pump faking and then running underneath the player who jumped if they are going to start calling this roughing the passer.

At some point the player has to protect themselves."
 

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
29,242
Reaction score
9,688
Location
Sammamish, WA
I'm still not sure how not ONE person on TV mentioned the fact that Reggie Bush clearly was bobbling the ball before he scored that TD. That play was huge in the game, should have been a touchback. But this is the Seahawks we're talking about.
 

Latest posts

Top