"That's not a rule....."

I don't know if this was discussed during the game last night, but I thought I'd give us all a distraction from the fiasco about the running back who should not be named....

In Super Bowl XXX (I think), there was a play on a Steelers punt where a Cowboys player was pushed into the ball by a Steelers player - it touched the Cowboy first and then the Steelers recovered. The referees explained to Cowher that if the played gets pushed into the ball deliberately, it's as if the touching never occurred, to which Cowher replied.... "That's not a rule...." The referee said, I assure you it is and he conceded something like, "Well.... if it's a rule, I guess....."

In yesterday's Monday Night game, on an Eagle punt, an Eagle got 'dragged' into the path of the ball (deliberately it would appear), it touched him first and then the Falcons recovered. I didn't hear any subsequent discussion because my volume was on mute (I mean, it's Collinsworth, for crying out loud, do I want to HEAR that????)

Has the rule changed? What was different about last night's play? And most importantly, is it too late to go back and give the Steelers the win for Super Bowl XXX????

 

Excellent question for which I have no answer, but there should be a rule to prevent this. It's now happening in the MLB too with players applying aggressive and continual tags on sliding baserunners which then are caught for a fraction of a second off the bag on Super Slo-Mo replay and runners are being called out. It happened to the Pirates in a recent game.

All this said, I agree with you that the Steeler's should be now awarded the Lombardy Trophy for SB XXX which means they will have achieved their Stairway to 7 and it's on to Crazy Eights!

 

had we won XXX I would only have the bengals, ravens and pats on my hate list

 

Nah, if they had let the play stand, "He who's name shall not be mentioned" would have thrown THREE interceptions!

 

I'm still more pissed about the AFC Championship loss to the Chargers, the year before, than I am about losing SBXXX.

 

Yep, funny that the 2 SB loses don't bother me as much as the Charger loss and the playoff loss to Denver with that no name QB whose name escapes me at the moment. (growing old is such fun)

 

But did anyone see that eagles play. Didn’t the Falcons player deliberately steer/push him into the ball? Why wouldn’t eagles have maintained possession?

 

The one that always stuck in my craw was the play against (I think) the Chargers where a guy went to fair catch the ball and it clanged off his head and 15 yards upfield where a Steeler recovered it. They gave it to the Chargers because they said the Steelers interfered with a fair catch as the ball had yet to hit the ground. There was no chance that the guy would have been able to recover the ball as it was nowhere near him.

 

On the HS level the ball is live . We have always taught players to force a guy into the ball if you can . I like it that way ... If it's a Peter then get away ..If you close enough to be blocked into a live ball then that's whats up ...

 

I didn’t see it, but I’ve just spent far too much time reading the NFL rule book on punts because your question piqued my interest.

The best I came up with is that it was to do with the obstruction rule, where you aren't allowed to prevent the returner getting to the ball prior to the catch, including knocking anyone into their way.

Perhaps in the SB (assuming the rules were similar) the refs called that, but in the Eagles game they interpreted it differently?

I may well have missed a more obvious rule, difficult to read the PDFs on a phone.

 

Tim Tebow?

I'm still mad about the playoff loss to the Donkeys where Bubby Brister fumbled the snap.

 

Dude, thanks for looking it up. After further review, Rule 9-2-4 specifies that a player on the receiving team who is engaged in blocking who touches the ball first creates a live ball (which is what happened yesterday). A passive player on the receiving team who is deliberately knocked into the ball does not create a touch (as was the case in super bowl XXX). I know nobody was really interested.... and in the end I answered my own question.... and the Steelers still lost super bowl XXX, but at the VERY least, it’s abundantly clear that....um.... what was I talking about???

 

Aha, problem solved.

I find the more obscure rules interesting. I probably need to get out more.