The Illegal Motion. Agree or Disagree?

[d0ublestr0ker0ll]

Originally posted by skins4eva

You're kidding right? Did you happen to see our other offensive series? We would have been shutout had the defense not put us in a position to score

Dude, offense in the NFL lives, breathes, and dies at the offensive line. Anybody that questions Gibbs' ability to draw up incredible passing plays doesn't know what they're talking about. The O-line is in shambles, it sucks. But our receivers are very good, and Brunell floated that pass to Portis with great touch...as much as you probably despise him. When there is penetration 7/10 plays, you will not succeed. I don't care if you have Peyton Manning and Marvin Harrison, you need blocking. By the way, the defense made the turnover...but our offense "scored" the touchdown. We aren't impotent, just rebuilding. Sad but true. Obviously some people can't handle it and give the officials a free pass. Should have won that game. Period.

[terpskins]

Originally posted by d0ublestr0ker0ll

I'll shortsight you! :finger:

Haha. Anyways, why is it shortsighted? What is the logical thing to do, Mr. Logical? Why don't we just set up 120 cameras around the stadium and set them with alarms so whenever there is a slight penalty they can go off? Before you know it, cyborgs will have to play this game to stay away from bullcrap penalties. If the play were to go off without a flag, the Packers, nor anybody else on the entire planet would have accused Thrash of being in illegal motion. As somebody said earlier, subtle penalties were happening without flags all game long. And my point is, during the crusial last minutes of the game you should only worry about crusial actions. Otherwise, you should just set up a computer system and forget about the human ability to know when to let the 2 teams go at each other without any nit picking.

:laugh:

:no:

I read a few other threads with this same message and I was incredibly surprised by some of the people who actually agree with you. It seems like the entire www.extremeskins.com braintrust is on your side, so I'll give it my best shot.

The way I see it, if the refs see a penalty, they ought to call it. It is not their job to determine which calls are immaterial and which ones are material. Impartiality dictates this. I can understand getting mad at the refs for missing calls (because that is a direlection of their duties) but to actually encourage them to not make calls that they see is, in my opinion, ludicrious. Who are the refs to determine what is crucial and what is not, and what makes you so sure they will get that right? This type of approach actually gives the refs more power.

If you could devise a way of determing what is crucial and what is not, then maybe you would have a point. Moreover, I'm not sure how many GB fans think the call was trivial.

edited to add: Don't really see where you're going with the whole "cyborg," "computer system" thing. That's not a logical extreme.

[skins4eva]

You're right, I know nothing about football and how integral a strong offensive line is to success. But, let me tell you something else, all-knowledgeable-football-person. You apparently must have thought that brunell's horribly thrown passes to coles and jacobs in the first half had nice touch. He had all day there, but couldn;t make the throws. In fact, I can't even finish responding to your comments because they belay your ignorance about football. We "scored the td" we were within the 20 yard line--against GB's defense---WE ARE SUPPOSED tO SCORE TD's from there!!!!!!!!!!!!! And pressure?????? Even when Brunell has time, it's rare that he can make the throws. My god, watch the game again, you clearly need to stay awake for the first half this time.

[nickfox45]

i saw the play, saw no penalty. and i agree that if it was a penalizable(thats a word...maybe) play, then the vast majority of the time, that isnt called.

how bout this for a conspiracy theory, the pack are now back in the hunt for their division with a viking loss, while the skins are clearly out of reach with 3 teams ahead of them. anyone else get a sense this just builds better late season storylines at the expense of the skins?

[d0ublestr0ker0ll]

Originally posted by skins4eva

You're right, I know nothing about football and how integral a strong offensive line is to success. But, let me tell you something else, all-knowledgeable-football-person. You apparently must have thought that brunell's horribly thrown passes to coles and jacobs in the first half had nice touch. He had all day there, but couldn;t make the throws. In fact, I can't even finish responding to your comments because they belay your ignorance about football. We "scored the td" we were within the 20 yard line--against GB's defense---WE ARE SUPPOSED tO SCORE TD's from there!!!!!!!!!!!!! And pressure?????? Even when Brunell has time, it's rare that he can make the throws. My god, watch the game again, you clearly need to stay awake for the first half this time.

Mark Brunell: 25/44 218 YDS 2 TD 2 INT

(Shoulda been 3 TD)

From what I saw, we had a bad first half on both sides of the ball. Brunell missed passes, yes. He's not exactly great. But he threaded the needle in tight coverage and took a bunch of hits from the oh-so-terrible Green Bay defense. When there was good blocking, there was also a defensive end that would hook around the backside. When that happens, Brunell doesn't know whether the guy tripped or if he's coming to crack him in the skull. It makes you ancy in the pocket, and can be considered a semi-hurry (as if he wasn't hurried enough this season). The ball is sailing on Brunell, but he has good composure...and he knows when pressure is coming (which is 7 out of 10 times he drops back to pass). Why do we get confused with blocks whenever somebody blitzes?

Being a quarterback for 6 years of my life, I know what it's like when your running game is shut down (for 70 yards on 17 carries by the way). The D can have a feast on you, especially when your offensive line sucks dirt. Talk about Greg Williams' exotic blitzes, check out Green Bay! They had 8 men in the box. Yeah, that isn't intimidating at all. Especially when you've been sacked 4 times and hurried all throughout the game. Why has this turned in to a conversation about our dismal offense? Why are Redskins fans fighting! MAN THIS SUCKS!

:puke:

[JWB]

Originally posted by d0ublestr0ker0ll

Mark Brunell: 25/44 218 YDS 2 TD 2 INT

(Shoulda been 3 TD)

From what I saw, we had a bad first half on both sides of the ball. Brunell missed passes, yes. He's not exactly great. But he threaded the needle in tight coverage and took a bunch of hits from the oh-so-terrible Green Bay defense. When there was good blocking, there was also a defensive end that would hook around the backside. When that happens, Brunell doesn't know whether the guy tripped or if he's coming to crack him in the skull. It makes you ancy in the pocket, and can be considered a semi-hurry (as if he wasn't hurried enough this season). The ball is sailing on Brunell, but he has good composure...and he knows when pressure is coming (which is 7 out of 10 times he drops back to pass). Why do we get confused with blocks whenever somebody blitzes?

Being a quarterback for 6 years of my life, I know what it's like when your running game is shut down (for 70 yards on 17 carries by the way). The D can have a feast on you, especially when your offensive line sucks dirt. Talk about Greg Williams' exotic blitzes, check out Green Bay! They had 8 men in the box. Yeah, that isn't intimidating at all. Especially when you've been sacked 4 times and hurried all throughout the game. Why has this turned in to a conversation about our dismal offense? Why are Redskins fans fighting! MAN THIS SUCKS!

:puke:

That's nice and all but this thread is not about Brunell, it is about THAT PLAY!!!! It was ridiculous. End of story.

[terpskins]

Originally posted by d0ublestr0ker0ll

Being a quarterback for 6 years of my life, I know what it's like when your running game is shut down (for 70 yards on 17 carries by the way). The D can have a feast on you, especially when your offensive line sucks dirt. Talk about Greg Williams' exotic blitzes, check out Green Bay! They had 8 men in the box. Yeah, that isn't intimidating at all. Especially when you've been sacked 4 times and hurried all throughout the game. Why has this turned in to a conversation about our dismal offense? Why are Redskins fans fighting! MAN THIS SUCKS!

:puke:

Being a MMQ for most of my life, I can tell you that the problem is not the running game.

(Btw, 70 yards on 17 carries is not bad)

This probably became of conversation about our dismal offense because most people would rather blame the players and coaches than the refs. I'm inclined to agree. You insinuated that the refs were the deciding factor. The only deciding factors in a game are the coaches and players.

[d0ublestr0ker0ll]

Originally posted by terpskins

I read a few other threads with this same message and I was incredibly surprised by some of the people who actually agree with you. It seems like the entire www.extremeskins.com braintrust is on your side, so I'll give it my best shot.

The way I see it, if the refs see a penalty, they ought to call it. It is not their job to determine which calls are immaterial and which ones are material. Impartiality dictates this. I can understand getting mad at the refs for missing calls (because that is a direlection of their duties) but to actually encourage them to not make calls that they see is, in my opinion, ludicrious. Who are the refs to determine what is crucial and what is not, and what makes you so sure they will get that right? This type of approach actually gives the refs more power.

If you could devise a way of determing what is crucial and what is not, then maybe you would have a point. Moreover, I'm not sure how many GB fans think the call was trivial.

edited to add: Don't really see where you're going with the whole "cyborg," "computer system" thing. That's not a logical extreme.

It doesn't give them more power by any means, how would it do that? Having the mindset to know what the circumstances are is just regular old common sense. Back to to basketball comparison...you don't call bullcrap like throwing the ball in while the player's toe is on the line in the final minutes of a crucial game. You don't call wimpy fouls in the paint during the final minutes either. An illegal motion because of his foot not being flat on the ground is just nit picking. It happens all the time, and he decides to throw the flag with 2 minutes left in a 6 point game while the team that's down has the ball in the Red Zone. Just seems very nit-picky to me. If something like that happend at a Texas Tech basketball game, Bobby Knight might bite the ref's nose off.

[terpskins]

Originally posted by JWB

That's nice and all but this thread is not about Brunell, it is about THAT PLAY!!!! It was ridiculous. End of story.

Dude, you need to read his post. That's his point.

[terpskins]

Originally posted by d0ublestr0ker0ll

It doesn't give them more power by any means, how would it do that? Having the mindset to know what the circumstances are is just regular old common sense. Back to to basketball comparison...you don't call bullcrap like throwing the ball in while the player's toe is on the line in the final minutes of a crucial game. You don't call wimpy fouls in the paint during the final minutes either. An illegal motion because of his foot not being flat on the ground is just nit picking. It happens all the time, and he decides to throw the flag with 2 minutes left in a 6 point game while the team that's down has the ball in the Red Zone. Just seems very nit-picky to me. If something like that happend at a Texas Tech basketball game, Bobby Knight might bite the ref's nose off.

You expect the refs (who you already blame for being too involved) to ascertain when it is appropriate to call a penalty and when it is not. But, you don't see how that gives them more power!

Whether it happens all the time, some of the time, or none of the time is not my point. My point is that every time the refs see a penalty they should call it.

If you feel a particular penalty is too nit-picky, then you should want the rule stricken from the rule book. Instead, you and many others are saying that refs should just ignore the rules. That is not the correct approach.

Anyway, your contention about the refs being a deciding factor. They were no more a deciding factor than Brunell throwing an interception when he is clearly within striking distance. In football, I don't really think there are any deciding factors. Just a series of decisions that ends with a win or loss.

[buzzlightbeer81]

http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=4139

[d0ublestr0ker0ll]

All my point is, is that they should let the boys play. I understand your point, but I also know that refs are encouraged to try to stay away from screwing with a game with a call on something extremely subtle late in the game. It's a call that would be justified if both teams knew that the refs were paying attention to players making full stops after a motion. But that wasn't established throughout the game. It was happening, and no flags were being thrown. Out of nowhere (in the crucial drive of the game, where the refs are supposed to call the obvious and stay away from the little things) he throws a flag because Thrash's leg wasn't at a completely full rest. And didn't the ref from the other side of the field throw the flag? Aren't there 3 more refs closer to where Thrash was? I don't know, I've been brought up knowing that refs stay away from petty stuff in crunch time. Anybody else?:doh:

[TheSteve]

He rocked "slightly" before the ball was snapped. It was such a nitpicky call at such a critical time. That's what my problem is.

[Craig]

Wah wah wah. Good teams overcome questionable calls.

[halter91]

It's BS call. I still don't think it makes that big of a difference. When it rains, it pours.

[TC4]

I replayed it on my TiVo three times at the 2 minute warning

There was NO F---ING ILLEGAL MOTION!!!!

G--DAMN REFS!!!!

[SkinsFTW]

Originally posted by terpskins

The way I see it, if the refs see a penalty, they ought to call it. It is not their job to determine which calls are immaterial and which ones are material. Impartiality dictates this. I can understand getting mad at the refs for missing calls (because that is a direlection of their duties) but to actually encourage them to not make calls that they see is, in my opinion, ludicrious. Who are the refs to determine what is crucial and what is not, and what makes you so sure they will get that right? This type of approach actually gives the refs more power.

That would be good if they made the call on that sort of thing regularly. But to wait until the last 5% of a game and make a call on a scoring play, when the exact same movement had been going on all game long, is wrong and suspicious. The refs admitted to costing us the Dallas game, in a case like this we might have lost anyway but WTF!

[Gamebreaker]

My problem with the play is illegal motion is usually called IMMEDIATELY after it's caught, like a false start. So the pass from Brunell to Portis should've never taken place if there was really illegal motion.

What bothers me immensely, is that Brunell had ample time to find a reciever, throw it, Portis catch and there was not even a hint of a flag until Portis is 5 yards away from the endzone. That was bull****, you never see a false start called that late. Penalties on the offense before the snap means the play should be immediately stopped. Why would it take the ref so long to throw that flag? I smell bull****.

Yet I disagree with those that said it cost us the game. Yes, we would've been winning. Yet there was no guarantee we could've kept the lead with the Packers getting the ball back with 2 minutes still on the clock. That game was far from over.

[Waldo da Magnificent]

Originally posted by Gamebreaker

My problem with the play is illegal motion is usually called IMMEDIATELY after it's caught, like a false start. So the pass from Brunell to Portis should've never taken place if there was really illegal motion.

What bothers me immensely, is that Brunell had ample time to find a reciever, throw it, Portis catch and there was not even a hint of a flag until Portis is 5 yards away from the endzone. That was bull****, you never see a false start called that late. Penalties on the offense before the snap means the play should be immediately stopped. Why would it take the ref so long to throw that flag? I smell bull****.

Yet I disagree with those that said it cost us the game. Yes, we would've been winning. Yet there was no guarantee we could've kept the lead with the Packers getting the ball back with 2 minutes still on the clock. That game was far from over.

Not true. While you can't see the ref throw the flag, FOX threw up the yellow "flag" banner, indicating the penalty, immediately after the snap, while Brunnel was still back pedaling. Only false start penalties stop the play; the play continues with illegal motion calls.

[spjunkies]

Originally posted by Waldo da Magnificent

Not true. While you can't see the ref throw the flag, FOX threw up the yellow "flag" banner, indicating the penalty, immediately after the snap, while Brunnel was still back pedaling. Only false start penalties stop the play; the play continues with illegal motion calls.

Nope, the play should've been blown dead because no matter what the down had to be replayed.

[sjinhan]

all i say is that... if you go back and look at film all players motioning was somewhat moving foward just a bit when they are turning to face foward or when they motion across and they take a step back to clear the QB and then like kind of curve foward a little toward the line of scrimmage...

the penalty i guess technically correct since thrash was moving (didnt see replay yet though assuming he is...) but the problem with the call is that almost everytime someone is motioning this is occuring... if the official want to make this an issue you do it early in the game, you do it in the middle of the game... you DO NOT do it on bascially deciding drive on the deciding TD play when you have allowed it throughout the whole game... now that is BS...

[Thiebear]

Dont worry, Gibbs will get a call today with an apology...

[barefoot]

The penalty called was illegal motion. The motion man does not have to be set. However he can't be in a foward motion when the ball is snapped. If another player is in motion at the same time, one of them has to be fully set at the snap of the ball. NEITHER happend, so nothing about it was TECHNICALLY correct. It was a BAD call.

[Skinsfan1966]

I voted no it wasnt necessary, but it did occur

[Pocono]

The amazing thing to me is given the importance of this call to the presidential election that immediately after the points were taken off the board it wasn't announced that the play was under review......not by the officials upstairs but by the Supreme Court.