• The KillerFrogs

Anyone else ever see grounding called on a miscommunication pass?

Fred Garvin

Fred Garvin

I service the entire Quad Cities Area
TopFrog said:
Completely different play.

Yes you can as an official determine what is intentionally avoiding a sack and standing in a clean pocket and make a throw that looks bad because of miscommunication or route mistake. Maybe you need to watch more football and learn what you are seeing.
Click to expand...

Watch the YouTube video. Morris was about to get crushed by a defender. He was clearly under pressure. Maybe you and Countryfrog need to get a room.
 
A

arlingtonbell

Active Member
ShreveFrog said:
A QB is frequently under that same pressure. If receiver just runs the right route we wouldn't be having this discussion. Morris was not throwing the ball away.
Click to expand...
And i reiterate it is not up to officials to judge intent. We could eliminate alot of calls if we could factor," i didnt mean to hold but the back hit the wrong gap" into officiating
 
PurpleBlood87

PurpleBlood87

Active Member
Fred Garvin said:
No matter the nomenclature, it is a penalty. Shrevefrog - you need to watch more football. Heck it was called THE NEXT DAY in the NFL. The biggest judgement part of the call is if the QB is under pressure. No one can know the QB's intention. That's always a guess, therefore its not really important toward making the call. If the QB is under pressure, still in the pocket / tackle box and the ball is no where near an eligible receiver, its going to be called.
Click to expand...
Sometimes the ref just says "grounding".
 
A

arlingtonbell

Active Member
An-Cap Frog said:
It would not have been a penalty if he didn't have a rusher in his face. It is whether he was conserving yardage (i.e. a sack) or not. (Rule 7 Section 3 Article 2 Item H)
Click to expand...
You are correct although in truth I have seen that called as well and its discussed ad nauseum in clinics yet it still seems to happen.
 
A

arlingtonbell

Active Member
ShreveFrog said:
Then that’s more officiating stupidity.
Click to expand...
Great so you want a group of officials who you already believe dont know what they are doing to actually try and judge intent and whats going through the hearts and minds of 22 players and a bunch of coaches on each play? Maybe we can just hire a panel to sit in the booth and decide what to call?
 
An-Cap Frog

An-Cap Frog

Member
arlingtonbell said:
You are correct although in truth I have seen that called as well and its discussed ad nauseum in clinics yet it still seems to happen.
Click to expand...
The tough part is that some of this is subjective. Was there a receiver in the area? How close do they need to be? 10 yards, 5 yards, 2 yards? Also, is there pressure on the QB enough that he risked losing yardage? Is grounding the same for Morris, for Duggan, for Boykin, for Dalton?
 
ShreveFrog

ShreveFrog

Full Member
@arlingtonbell - Officials don't judge a player's intent, you say?
Ok, QB is running down the field with the ball. A safety going full speed launches at him, just as the qb goes into a slide, hitting the qb while he's on the ground. Is that a roughing penalty for a late hit?
 
A

arlingtonbell

Active Member
ShreveFrog said:
@arlingtonbell - Officials don't judge a player's intent, you say?
Ok, QB is running down the field with the ball. A safety going full speed launches at him, just as the qb goes into a slide, hitting the qb while he's on the ground. Is that a roughing penalty for a late hit?
Click to expand...
yes because the intent isnt a factor in the play you just described. You just described a QB going into a slide and you said LAUNCH. There is no judgment their either its an automatic and either you correctly get the call or you dont but that has zero to do with assessing INTENT. We welcome you and anyone else on here to join a local chapter to officiate then you can decide what you think is important factors in deciding what to call and not to call. On my crew we have philosophies which enable us to keep our foul count amongst the lowest in the chapter so i agree with you that for the majority of calls common sense and ruling on intent can be used as a deteermining factor. However we can use common sense all day and that ING and QB late hit you described is not going to be ruled on based on what YOU think the intent is, its expressly written thus that rules the day. Use intent and judgment on holding calls, DPIs and such but not the 2 plays you seemingly want to continue arguing even though the NCAA director of officials has visually told you that you are incorrect
 
ShreveFrog

ShreveFrog

Full Member
A defender launching at a ball carrier to make a tackle is not a clean play? I think some of you have reading comprehension issues.
 
A

arlingtonbell

Active Member
ShreveFrog said:
@arlingtonbell - Outrageous that you would penalize a defender for attempting a clean tackle. And you actually officiate games? God help the teams.
Click to expand...

Spike said:
This thread needs to die. @ShreveFrog and @arlingtonbell are 2 of my favorite KFC people both on here and in real life. They should be friends. This play did not cost us the game.
Click to expand...
No worries. Id love to meet him despite our feelings in regard to this particular play. We are all passionate members of the same Frog family its a difference of opinion nothing personal. Love u Spike! We're good i have no further comment on this play
 

Latest posts

Top