Burgold Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 First, the Bills are stomping us and I am not saying that the refs are responsible for their lead right now. That said, Huh? Why was Fitzpatrick allowed back in? They stopped the clock because of his injury. The Bills did not use a time out. He's not allowed to play the following snap. What's going on here? Also, and this one I may just not understand the rules, but why was there no ten second run-off? The blather about the play not being to stop the clock... what the heck was that rush about if not to stop the clock? It's an absolutely free play and do-over. That should have been half time, shouldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 First, the Bills are stomping us and I am not saying that the refs are responsible for their lead right now. That said,Huh? Why was Fitzpatrick allowed back in? They stopped the clock because of his injury. The Bills did not use a time out. He's not allowed to play the following snap. What's going on here? Also, and this one I may just not understand the rules, but why was there no ten second run-off? The blather about the play not being to stop the clock... what the heck was that rush about if not to stop the clock? It's an absolutely free play and do-over. That should have been half time, shouldn't it? Both really confused me, especially Fitzpatrick being allowed in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted October 30, 2011 Author Share Posted October 30, 2011 And just because I want to whine about something else... Is it our line or Beck. We've allowed the Bills to double their sack production for the year in the first half???? Goodness. I realize our line is down half its players, but that's disgustingly embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drkstar Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 a TO was used to get the QB back into the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDoyler23 Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/timingfinal Timing in Final Two Minutes of Each Half On kickoff, clock does not start until the ball has been legally touched by player of either team in the field of play. (In all other cases, clock starts with kickoff.) A team cannot buy an excess time out for a penalty. However, a fourth time out is allowed without penalty for an injured player, who must be removed immediately. A fifth time out or more is allowed for an injury and a five-yard penalty is assessed if the clock was running. Additionally, if the clock was running and the score is tied or the team in possession is losing, the ball cannot be put in play for at least 10 seconds on the fourth or more time out. The half or game can end while those 10 seconds are run off on the clock. If the defensive team is behind in the score and commits a foul when it has no time outs left in the final 40 seconds of either half, the offensive team can decline the penalty for the foul and have the time on the clock expire. Fouls that occur in the last five minutes of the fourth quarter as well as the last two minutes of the first half will result in the clock starting on the snap. ___________________________ Here's what the NFL Rulebook says, but it makes my head hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonkFan8 Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 The clock was running and an offensive penalty caused it to stop. I'll be really pissed if this game comes down to 3 points (which, let's be honest, isn't likely to happen). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2006Skins Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 The Bills were forced to use their final timeout because Fitzpatrick was injured. That's why he was allowed back in. I'm not clear about the runoff, I thought any penalty like offsides, illegal procedure in the final minute led to a 10 sec runoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 And just because I want to whine about something else... Is it our line or Beck. We've allowed the Bills to double their sack production for the year in the first half???? Goodness. I realize our line is down half its players, but that's disgustingly embarrassing. We have no depth on our line. People in the game thread want to blame Shanahallen for this, but to me, that's a completely flawed train of thought. They were handed a **** sandwich, and had to deal with a depleted draft in 2010 (and 2011, really, trading down merely allowed us to gain the picks we should have had in the first place) and a lockout in 2011. We should be impressed every time the players on this roster manage to successfully get out of bed and put their pants on in the morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goskinz0721 Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 First, the Bills are stomping us and I am not saying that the refs are responsible for their lead right now. That said,Huh? Why was Fitzpatrick allowed back in? They stopped the clock because of his injury. The Bills did not use a time out. He's not allowed to play the following snap. What's going on here? Also, and this one I may just not understand the rules, but why was there no ten second run-off? The blather about the play not being to stop the clock... what the heck was that rush about if not to stop the clock? It's an absolutely free play and do-over. That should have been half time, shouldn't it? Yeah, I didn't understand the off-sides call without a 10-second runoff. They were offsides because they didn't want to take the time to get aligned correctly. So they lined up offsides when the ball was snapped instead of snapping the ball when they were setup correctly. I think it was the wrong call by the refs. One other play: On the FG block, didn't the guy barrel over the center to get up the middle to block that? I didn't think they could do that. Neither play is a reason we're getting our asses handed to us. Our offense is offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin49 Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 First, the Bills are stomping us and I am not saying that the refs are responsible for their lead right now. That said,Huh? Why was Fitzpatrick allowed back in? They stopped the clock because of his injury. The Bills did not use a time out. He's not allowed to play the following snap. What's going on here? Also, and this one I may just not understand the rules, but why was there no ten second run-off? The blather about the play not being to stop the clock... what the heck was that rush about if not to stop the clock? It's an absolutely free play and do-over. That should have been half time, shouldn't it? Aside from the fact that you are right, it does not take away from the fact that the redskins simply suck, and have no answer for any team right now. So refs and all, nothing will save this team from another dismal season. We are YEARS away from being anything near competitive. QB is only one of many issues. If you truly care about this team , don't watch any more games. It will only bring you down. I'm going to go do something constructive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreek1973 Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 OMG this is just pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 Yeah, I'm almost positive they used a TO when Fitzpatrick was hurt, And the Offsides was a dead ball foul. The clock didn't stop because of the penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted October 30, 2011 Author Share Posted October 30, 2011 even though the reason that the guy was offsides because the team was hurrying to stop the clock? Seems a bit ridiculous. Doesn't matter a bit in this game, but seems very odd to me. I'm not sure about the to's. Maybe you guys are right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 even though the reason that the guy was offsides because the team was hurrying to stop the clock? Seems a bit ridiculous. Doesn't matter a bit in this game, but seems very odd to me. I'm not sure about the to's. Maybe you guys are right. I don't really see what that has to do with anything. They lined up and spiked the ball, a WR was beyond the line. I don't get why you would run off 10 seconds for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted October 30, 2011 Author Share Posted October 30, 2011 because the purpose of the play was to stop the clock... why reward the team for failing to get lined up in time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mi6 Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 Really, does it even matter? The game is a blow out. Losers find excuses, winners just win. And, hate saying this ... The Bills are winners. They are better coached, and more talented thant the Skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 Can we please stop calling out the refs for every bad call? The refs, as you all know, aren't responsible for this stink fest. Seeing complaining about officiating here every week gets really old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted October 30, 2011 Author Share Posted October 30, 2011 What was the goddamn first line of the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 What was the goddamn first line of the OP. You do the same thing every week. Or it seems like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted October 30, 2011 Author Share Posted October 30, 2011 You do the same thing every week. Or it seems like it. Then they should stop making such bad calls every week! More frustrated with the post above yours, kdawg. Honestly, I was more seeking clarification on the non runoff and why the qb was let in... there was never a hint of we're losing because of the refs, but rather a wtf? How come they did what they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 Then they should stop making such bad calls every week! More frustrated with the post above yours, kdawg. Honestly, I was more seeking clarification on the non runoff and why the qb was let in... there was never a hint of we're losing because of the refs, but rather a wtf? How come they did what they did. Wish I had an answer. The game is on, but I'm in a stupor watching it. I don't think I've really taken much of the second half in. It's just... on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted October 30, 2011 Author Share Posted October 30, 2011 I feel the same. Actually, stopped watching. Using the tv as a radio. How did we go from a pleasant surprise to absolutely clueless and hopeless after the bye? I can understand why with the O, but the D has turned into an absolute sieve and all the good tackling has stopped. It's ridiculous. Sad. Pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 I feel the same. Actually, stopped watching. Using the tv as a radio. How did we go from a pleasant surprise to absolutely clueless and hopeless after the bye? I can understand why with the O, but the D has turned into an absolute sieve and all the good tackling has stopped. It's ridiculous. Sad. Pathetic. Still want me to eat that crow about the D, burg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted October 30, 2011 Author Share Posted October 30, 2011 Still want me to eat that crow about the D, burg? You mean I have to eat crow about eating crow? Is that anything like a double negative? Didn't think so... :kickcan: Man, the game sucked so badly I'm almost through my blues and can laugh. Philly took me a day and a half. That's a bad, bad sign. Like Jim Zorn bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 ok here we go: this is one of the rule changes made in 2007- Two-minute warning/10-second runoff: The requirement that the offense has to be behind in the score or the score has to be tied for a 10-second clock runoff to be exercised against the offense for an excess timeout with two minutes to go in the first half or in the game has been eliminated. Now a 10-second runoff will take place no matter what the game situation. Any possible advantage for the offense (e.g., the old rule would not require a 10-second runoff if it were ahead) has been eliminated. The defense has the option to decline a 10-second runoff (which will give it more time should it get the ball back). And the call was offsides... Offside: A player is offside when any part of his body is beyond his scrimmage or free kick line when the ball is snapped or kicked. Obviously the player was offsides during the snap or it wouldn't have been a penalty at all. So I'm thinking the ref was stuck in 2006, and thought he was real smart in remembering that if the team has the lead, it doesn't run 10 seconds off the clock. You'll notice he even looked up at the scoreboard. He was wrong. The rule changed 4 years ago. I don't care if it cost the game or not, the officiating is getting worse and worse every year, for every team across the league. edit- by the way, 'excess timeout' doesn't mean calling a timeout when you have none, it means stopping the clock via penalty whether it was intentional or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.