That was a disco move, not a football move....

[AsylumGuido]

(12-30-2010 06:20 PM)Beef Wrote:  How would the Saints be penalized? Roddy caught the pass. That's not penalizing the Saints if offsetting in this circumstance = the catch stood. The catch is the catch. You gave up a 20 yard gain & 1st down if the offsetting nonsense wasn't even called. That's the point.

Again, if Greer would have intercepted it, you end up with the ball because offsetting cancels each other out. I got no problem with that being fair.

In your hypothetical, your argument isn't viable because those aren't offsetting penalties. A 5 yard illegal motion or shift already forces a whistle blow & the play ruled dead. If a personal foul (or anything even like defensive holding for instance) happens afterwards, it's obviously not offsetting so there is no incentive to do what you said & go open season on anyone. You can't have an offsetting penalty after the play is dead.

Okay. Roddy is at the line, before the snap a defensive player jumps offsides and a flag is thrown. Roddy, knowing the defense has drawn a penalty, grabs his defender by the face mask and throws him to the ground. This leaves him wide open for an easy toss and catch touchdown. The two penalties offset by rule since an offside call does not stop the play. You are saying that the TD should stand. Right? And don't think this is outlandish. If a play were to stand on offsetting penalties this would become common occurrence.

[AsylumGuido]

The point you are not getting is that the reason why a play is rerun on offsetting penalties is that quite often the result of the play was due to what happened during the infraction.

[V Chip]

(12-30-2010 06:20 PM)Beef Wrote:  How would the Saints be penalized? Roddy caught the pass. That's not penalizing the Saints if offsetting in this circumstance = the catch stood. The catch is the catch. You gave up a 20 yard gain & 1st down if the offsetting nonsense wasn't even called. That's the point.

The Saints ARE penalized because the Falcons committed a penalty and got away with it. Had the Saints not committed a penalty, the Falcons would lose the play AND lose yardage to the penalty. The Falcons benefit from the Saint penalty by not being forced back 10 yards; the Saints benefit from the Falcon penalty by not having the play stand.

Offsetting doesn't mean "lets act like nothing happened," it means there is one for both sides (also more clarification below). They don't enforce them both by marking off yardage, but the play doesn't happen just like a regular singular penalty.

(12-30-2010 06:20 PM)Beef Wrote:  In your hypothetical, your argument isn't viable because those aren't offsetting penalties. A 5 yard illegal motion or shift already forces a whistle blow & the play ruled dead. If a personal foul (or anything even like defensive holding for instance) happens afterwards, it's obviously not offsetting so there is no incentive to do what you said & go open season on anyone. You can't have an offsetting penalty after the play is dead.

First off, offsetting penalties does not mean "the same penalty was committed by both the offense and the defense." It simply means there are penalties on both the offense and the defense.
Second, illegal shift doesn't blow the play dead.

The hypothetical still stands -- if your system were in place, an penalty on one team that occurs at or near the snap would then allow the other team to commit any penalty they wanted (well, unless it's a 5-yard to 15-yarder offset, in which case the 5 yarder is ignored and the 15 yarder is enforced) because they know the play is going to stand, which makes no sense.

[Beef]

(12-30-2010 06:31 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  Okay. Roddy is at the line, before the snap a defensive player jumps offsides and a flag is thrown. Roddy, knowing the defense has drawn a penalty, grabs his defender by the face mask and throws him to the ground. This leaves him wide open for an easy toss and catch touchdown. The two penalties offset by rule since an offside call does not stop the play. You are saying that the TD should stand. Right? And don't think this is outlandish. If a play were to stand on offsetting penalties this would become common occurrence.

No, not right. Those are not offsetting penalties. One is a 5 yard misdemeanor & the other is a 15 yard felony (personal foul). Just because it's a "free play" as they say, the offense still has rules.

Chronology & severity do of course factor in.

Answer this, if at the beginning of a play, the DB grabs the WR's facemask & a flag is thrown for the facemask, but they continue running & 20 yards down the field the WR pushes the DB down & then catches the ball, what do you think happens?

[Beef]

(12-30-2010 09:19 PM)V Chip Wrote:  The Saints ARE penalized because the Falcons committed a penalty and got away with it. Had the Saints not committed a penalty, the Falcons would lose the play AND lose yardage to the penalty. The Falcons benefit from the Saint penalty by not being forced back 10 yards; the Saints benefit from the Falcon penalty by not having the play stand.

Offsetting doesn't mean "lets act like nothing happened," it means there is one for both sides (also more clarification below). They don't enforce them both by marking off yardage, but the play doesn't happen just like a regular singular penalty.

"... and got away with it." HUH??? In what bizzarro world is that true? How does losing 20 yards & a 1st down = "got away with it"???

Your logic is completely one sided. All you do is explain what would have happened if the Saints didn't commit the PI, you never take into consideration the fact that they DID, which of course completely cancels out your argument that the Saints were penalized. In the end, you can't escape the fact the Saint's benefitted significantly more than the Falcons did as a result of the double-PI. We lost 20 yards & a 1st down, you lost nothing.

How you can call that equal I don't know, but it's not freaking equal.

(12-30-2010 09:19 PM)V Chip Wrote:  First off, offsetting penalties does not mean "the same penalty was committed by both the offense and the defense." It simply means there are penalties on both the offense and the defense.
Second, illegal shift doesn't blow the play dead.

The hypothetical still stands -- if your system were in place, an penalty on one team that occurs at or near the snap would then allow the other team to commit any penalty they wanted (well, unless it's a 5-yard to 15-yarder offset, in which case the 5 yarder is ignored and the 15 yarder is enforced) because they know the play is going to stand, which makes no sense.

Again, NO it does not. Chronology & severity are obvious factors you're choosing to ignore & misinterpret my point to exagerate yours.

[AsylumGuido]

(12-30-2010 09:31 PM)Beef Wrote:  No, not right. Those are not offsetting penalties. One is a 5 yard misdemeanor & the other is a 15 yard felony (personal foul). Just because it's a "free play" as they say, the offense still has rules.

First of all, these are most definitely offsetting penalties. You obviously do not know the rules. It is a waste of time to debate ethics of rules if you don't understand them.

[AsylumGuido]

(12-30-2010 10:24 PM)Beef Wrote:  "... and got away with it." HUH??? In what bizzarro world is that true? How does losing 20 yards & a 1st down = "got away with it"???

Your logic is completely one sided. All you do is explain what would have happened if the Saints didn't commit the PI, you never take into consideration the fact that they DID, which of course completely cancels out your argument that the Saints were penalized. In the end, you can't escape the fact the Saint's benefitted significantly more than the Falcons did as a result of the double-PI. We lost 20 yards & a 1st down, you lost nothing.

How you can call that equal I don't know, but it's not freaking equal.


Again, NO it does not. Chronology & severity are obvious factors you're choosing to ignore & misinterpret my point to exagerate yours.

I'm sorry, Beef, but you have progressed beyond the point of rational thought. You are projecting the outcome of two plays that did not go your way and trying to irrationally argue why they are universally unfair. You have presented nothing other than the argument of "it isn't fair to the offense" and a blatant misinterpretation of offsetting penalties in your support.

But, I am impressed by your passion.

[Beef]

(12-30-2010 10:32 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  First of all, these are most definitely offsetting penalties. You obviously do not know the rules. It is a waste of time to debate ethics of rules if you don't understand them.

You're obviously misunderstanding what I'm saying. The answer to your questions is "NO", the TD should not stand because obviously, those are not equal level severity penalties.

So now you're going with the "you don't understand the rules so I'm done debating" card when it's clear you're the one that can't grasp context?

I see.

[AsylumGuido]

(12-30-2010 10:41 PM)Beef Wrote:  You're obviously misunderstanding what I'm saying. The answer to your questions is "NO", the TD should not stand because obviously, those are not equal level severity penalties.

So now you're going with the "you don't understand the rules so I'm done debating" card when it's clear you're the one that can't grasp context?

I see.

You just confirmed my point. Those penalties do offset. I'm not sure where you got this "equal level severity" thing from. The penalties offset under the NFL rules.

Okay, I'll make it your way, all "even Steven". The defensive player hits the QB in the head. The flag is thrown for roughing the QB, FELONY!!!! Roddy sees this and grabs the face mask of corner covering him and slings him to the ground, FELONY!!!. He get that same toss and easy catch and prances into the end zone.

Equal severity.

Give it up, dude. You are quickly losing credibility.

[Beef]

(12-30-2010 10:40 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  I'm sorry, Beef, but you have progressed beyond the point of rational thought. You are projecting the outcome of two plays that did not go your way and trying to irrationally argue why they are universally unfair. You have presented nothing other than the argument of "it isn't fair to the offense" and a blatant misinterpretation of offsetting penalties in your support.

But, I am impressed by your passion.

No, you just can't make a convincing argument that either of those penalties is fair so you're spinning your way out as hard as you can by going personal. Don't you know when it gets personal, it's like sure fire proof you lost the argument?

A) Falcons lost 20 yards & a 1st down on the double-PI while the Saints lost nothing, period. You have yet to make an argument supporting how that's fair. And "well that's just the rules that everyone is subject to" still doesn't prove it's fair & sure as hell still doesn't make the end result equal.

B) Falcons ended up with a turnover on the 1 yard line on what could have been completely avoidable due to a TD 2 plays earlier. Again, the Falcons got screwed while the Saints got a second chance & the end result was a beyond HUGE benefit for the Saints. And you still haven't made an argument supporting how that's fair either.

In the end on both situations, Falcons got screwed & Saints benefitted significantly. And as I've said from the beginning, if the roles would have been reversed, I'd be saying the same things about how you guys got screwed & we benefitted & that I think the rules for those penalties aren't fair. Whether you believe that or not, that's how I feel.