2018 Bengals

If the zebras are going to call that roughing the QB, D - lineman might as well get their moneys worth, as Dunlap tried to " soften " the hit on Luck as much as possible.
 
Stirred not Shaken said:
If the zebras are going to call that roughing the QB, D - lineman might as well get their moneys worth, as Dunlap tried to " soften " the hit on Luck as much as possible.
Click to expand...

Bengals had a few very questionable calls in that one...a couple of personal fouls/roughting the passers were garbage.

The ejection......nah. Give that guy a big fine but in no way should that be an ejectable situation.
 
thavoice said:
Bengals had a few very questionable calls in that one...a couple of personal fouls/roughting the passers were garbage.

The ejection......nah. Give that guy a big fine but in no way should that be an ejectable situation.
Click to expand...

It was 100% electable. Hitting a sliding quarterback, late, in the head, with your helmet. It literally does not get worse.
 
Gh0st said:
It was 100% electable. Hitting a sliding quarterback, late, in the head, with your helmet. It literally does not get worse.
Click to expand...

He wasn't sliding, he was being tackled by Michael Johnson; that said, it was clearly a penalty.
 
Termite2 said:
He wasn't sliding, he was being tackled by Michael Johnson; that said, it was clearly a penalty.
Click to expand...

Penalty?
Yes.

Fine him?
Yes.

Eject him?
No.


If it was so egregious I wonder why it took them so long to do so. Announcers speculated if they got word in their ear to do so.

To eject a guy and possibly change the landscape of a game on a call like that is a bad look for the integrity of the game.



(and I am not a bengals fan...)
 
thavoice said:
Penalty?
Yes.

Fine him?
Yes.

Eject him?
No.


If it was so egregious I wonder why it took them so long to do so. Announcers speculated if they got word in their ear to do so.

To eject a guy and possibly change the landscape of a game on a call like that is a bad look for the integrity of the game.



(and I am not a bengals fan...)
Click to expand...

The second it happened the announcers were surprised he wasn't immediately ejected. It took barely any conversation to decide to eject him. Absolutely no argument from Marvin Lewis when it happened.
 
Over / under on how many games Vontez will play before getting ejected.
With the new rules and his PED suspension he will be lucky to play 5 full games.
 
Gh0st said:
The second it happened the announcers were surprised he wasn't immediately ejected. It took barely any conversation to decide to eject him. Absolutely no argument from Marvin Lewis when it happened.
Click to expand...

Marvin Lewis never argues with the refs.
 
Didn't get to watch but had the game on the dvr, just watched the play. The crowd made the ejection more than anything, the NFL could have made the call from New York also but they gave the foul, marked the yardage then proceeded to talk about it. Didn't appear the referees were going to do it on the field without someone urging them to do it.
 
adselder09 said:
Didn't get to watch but had the game on the dvr, just watched the play. The crowd made the ejection more than anything, the NFL could have made the call from New York also but they gave the foul, marked the yardage then proceeded to talk about it.
Click to expand...

exactly. the announcers even hinted that maybe someone from replay got in their ear for the ejection. It wasn't a quick decision.
 
TylerDurden said:
Possibly, but given how many aspects of this you've been wrong about, you're probably not the best person to make that determination.
Click to expand...

Lay it out proferssor. Why is it not something he should have been ejected for?

The announcers called it a slide, certainly looked like he was giving himself up on the play. Doesn't really matter, because they are treated the same way.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/20180...ameinfo|contentId:0ap3000000959351&tab=videos
Click to expand...

Take a look so you can refresh your memory.

PLAYERS IN A DEFENSELESS POSTURE

It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.

Players in a defenseless posture are:
A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass (passing posture)
A receiver attempting to catch a pass who has not had time to clearly become a runner. If the player is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player
The intended receiver of a pass in the action during and immediately following an interception or potential interception. If the player is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player.
Note: Violations of this provision will be enforced after the interception, and the intercepting team will maintain possession.

A runner already in the grasp of a tackler and whose forward progress has been stopped
A kickoff or punt returner attempting to field a kick in the air
A player on the ground
A kicker/punter during the kick or during the return (Also see Article 6(h) for additional restrictions against a kicker/punter)
A quarterback at any time after a change of possession (Also see Article 9(f) for additional restrictions against a quarterback after a change of possession)
A player who receives a “blindside” block when the path of the offensive blocker is toward or parallel to his own end line.
A player who is protected from an illegal crackback block (see Article 2)
The offensive player who attempts a snap during a Field Goal attempt or a Try Kick
Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:
forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenselessplayer by encircling or grasping him
lowering the head and making forcible contact with the crown or ”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenselessplayer’s body
illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body. (This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless player, as defined in Article 7.)
Note 1: The provisions of (b) do not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or helmet in the course of a conventional tackle or block on an opponent.

Note 2: A player who initiates contact against a defenseless opponent is responsible for avoiding an illegal act. This includes illegal contact that may occur during the process of attempting to dislodge the ball from an opponent. A standard of strict liability applies for any contact against a defenseless opponent, even if the opponent is an airborne player who is returning to the ground or whose body position is otherwise in motion, and irrespective of any acts by the defenseless opponent, such as ducking his head or curling up his body in anticipation of contact.

Penalty: For unnecessary roughness: Loss of 15 yards and an automatic first down. The player may be disqualified if the action is judged by the official(s) to be flagrant.
Click to expand...

Here are the rules for you.
 
I think it warranted the ejection based on the rules, but Luck DID NOT give himself up. He actually started to dive head first to the marker just as he was tackled by Nickerson, who kind of twisted him upright as he was taking him to the ground. I don’t think it was a malicious hit, just one that violates the rules and likely the league wanted to set an example of what would happen if there was a head to head collision like that.
 
Gh0st said:
Lay it out proferssor. Why is it not something he should have been ejected for?

The announcers called it a slide, certainly looked like he was giving himself up on the play. Doesn't really matter, because they are treated the same way.
Click to expand...

I agree it doesn't matter, but I'm not sure how a player being tackled looks like a player "giving himself up," which constitutes a feet first slide.



Take a look so you can refresh your memory.



Here are the rules for you.
Click to expand...

Okay, thanks for the refresher on defenseless players.
I wasn't up in arms over the ejection, but I certainly wouldn't have been surprised if he stayed in the game. As others have mentioned, it wasn't an immediate ejection by the officials on the field so obviously there was at least some question in their mind as well.
 
eastside_purple said:
I think it warranted the ejection based on the rules, but Luck DID NOT give himself up. He actually started to dive head first to the marker just as he was tackled by Nickerson, who kind of twisted him upright as he was taking him to the ground. I don’t think it was a malicious hit, just one that violates the rules and likely the league wanted to set an example of what would happen if there was a head to head collision like that.
Click to expand...

It should have definitely been an ejection if Nickerson made the tackle
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top