Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 51
  1. #1
    RamTime Guest

    Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    I have to run this through my peeps here at ClanRam before adding it to the site or adding it to the ever growing ink blot next to the Patriots 1st Superbowl.

    http://www.stlouisrams.net/download/grounding2.wmv


  2. #2
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,376
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    Unbelievable how blatantly obvious that is.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Three
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  3. #3
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,560
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    As I've said before, that's the non-call that I find inexcusable. While the others could arguably have been missed by the refs (although that's hard to imagine), this one was right in front of everyone's noses. Plus, it clearly impacted the outcome, because the drive probably would have stalled had it been called.

  4. #4
    Scidog68's Avatar
    Scidog68 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Modesto, California, United States
    Age
    45
    Posts
    405
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    Maybe I'm the ignorant one here, but isn't that the epitome of "Intentional Grounding"? The only way it could have been more blatant is if he threw it straight down.


    Hooah


    Win, Lose or Draw... Rams for Life!
    :football:

  5. #5
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,376
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    If NFL officials received a video encyclopedia that shows them what every call in the game looks like, this is what they'd see when they decided to look up Intentional Grounding.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Three
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  6. #6
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,338
    Rep Power
    127

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    INTENTIONAL GROUNDING OF FORWARD PASS
    1. Intentional grounding of a forward pass is a foul: loss of down and 10 yards from previous spot if passer is in the field of play or loss of down at the spot of the foul if it occurs more than 10 yards behind the line or safety if passer is in his own end zone when ball is released.
    2. Intentional grounding will be called when a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage due to pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion.
    3. Intentional grounding will not be called when a passer, while out of the pocket and facing an imminent loss of yardage, throws a pass that lands at or beyond the line of scrimmage, even if no offensive player(s) have a realistic chance to catch the ball (including if the ball lands out of bounds over the sideline or end line).


    I hate to give the Pats a break on anything, but does section 3 apply here?

  7. #7
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,560
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    No, because Brady was clearly "in the pocket" when he threw the ball away. Look at the hash-marks (which were inside of where the OTs lined up - i.e. "the pocket"). He's still within them when he releases the ball.

  8. #8
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,338
    Rep Power
    127

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    No, because Brady was clearly "in the pocket" when he threw the ball away. Look at the hash-marks (which were inside of where the OTs lined up - i.e. "the pocket"). He's still within them when he releases the ball.
    Where the OT is lined up and exactly where Brady was when he releases the ball is the determining factor. It looked like a close call to me that could have gone either way.

  9. #9
    RamTime Guest

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    As I've said before, that's the non-call that I find inexcusable. While the others could arguably have been missed by the refs (although that's hard to imagine), this one was right in front of everyone's noses. Plus, it clearly impacted the outcome, because the drive probably would have stalled had it been called.
    Patriots OC said if the ball carrier would not have gone out of bounds after they made the first down they would have killed the clock for overtime. So one could assume that with a 2nd and twenty from their own 30 with 29 seconds left and no timeouts they surely would have killed the clock. Amazingly enough Patriot fans do not see the grounding on this play. I made a BB at stlouisrams.net and it has been mostly patriot fans against myself and the stuff they come up with is hilarious. One of them even said. "since Brady was on the 31 yard line and the pressure was on the 33 yard line perhaps the officials did not feel it was an immenent amount of pressure." Yep a step and a half is not pressure according to the braintrust at Boston fan central. check it out http://stlouisrams.net/v-web/bulletin/bb/

  10. #10
    jkramsfan's Avatar
    jkramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Destin,Fl.
    Age
    50
    Posts
    3,507
    Rep Power
    44

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    Thanks For The Great Pictures, Its A Close Call But It Is Grounding

  11. #11
    talkstoangels61's Avatar
    talkstoangels61 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Illinois
    Age
    53
    Posts
    954
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    we all know that if not for the 11th,We would have won the game period!

  12. #12
    .ramfan.'s Avatar
    .ramfan. is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    23
    Posts
    321
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    Quote Originally Posted by jkramsfan
    Thanks For The Great Pictures, Its A Close Call But It Is Grounding
    Agreed.

    GO RAMS!!!

  13. #13
    RamTime Guest

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    Quote Originally Posted by .ramfan.
    Agreed.

    GO RAMS!!!
    It may have been close to being close but it is not close. 2 YARDS OUTSIDE THE OFFENSIVE TACKLE UNLESS THE TIGHT END DROPS BACK TO PASS PROTECT THEN ITS TWO YARDS OUTSIDE THE TIGHT END. If the tackle lined up on the hash mark and brady threw it from the hash mark that ain't close. Unless you think 15 yards away from the receiver is a realistic chance of catching the ball.

  14. #14
    Curly Horns's Avatar
    Curly Horns is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    1st & Goal
    Posts
    2,600
    Rep Power
    58

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    Quote Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike
    It looked like a close call to me that could have gone either way.
    Pocket Area: Applies from a point two yards outside of either offensive tackle and includes the tight end if he drops off the line of scrimmage to pass protect. Pocket extends longitudinally behind the line back to offensive teamís own end line.

    I disagree, it does not look close to me at all. The right side hash marks are two yards outside of the OT and Brady is clearly inside of the hash mark when he releases the ball.


    IT WAS INTENTIONAL GROUNDING


    Bernie Kukar has a birds-eye view of this play and yet refuses to throw the flag.

    Absolutely pathetic!!





  15. #15
    txramsfan's Avatar
    txramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, MO
    Age
    50
    Posts
    7,266
    Rep Power
    65

    Re: Another View Of The "Not Intentional Grounding"

    I love ya RamTime, we go back a long way on these board but bro....you can't do anything about the past but you can attempt to make the future brighter. In a way, I guess you are making the future brighter by calling the Zebras on this debacle and letting them know that there are inquiring eyes watching.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •