Officiating..
- Thread starter PowayRamFan
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
RaminExile
Hall of Fame
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2013
- Messages
- 3,065
You are right FLV - but this is the problem!
Why should a punter be classed as being "defenseless" on a return? Why should a QB be classed as being "defenceless" on an INT like the flag on Dunbar (was it? Cant remember) against Carson Palmer the other week. If they're on the field - they can make a block. Special teamers and defenders are trying everything they can to clear a path to the end zone - and things happen at 100mph on the field. Should they wear a bib or something to point out they are defenceless? Will we see actual "red-shirts" on the field itself??
As far as I'm concerned the only time a player is "defenceless" and so shouldn't be hit in the head is when he's actually in the act of kicking the football - or is in the air or underneath a kick waiting to catch it because these are obviously dangerous situations.
The officiating is bad at the moment because the rules are bad. The officials are being put in a position where they have to make marginal judgement calls within a split second of seeing two tremendous athletes collide at 40mph. They are aware the league is driving player safety. As a result we see a lot of bogus calls like the Brockers "roughing the passer" call.
Yamahopper
Hall of Fame
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2010
- Messages
- 3,838
It sucks every game.
I don't blame the refs as much as I do all the rule changes and the so called focus on players safety. The rule book has to be twice the size as it was 20 years ago, more chances to screw the pooch on calls.
I don't blame the refs as much as I do all the rule changes and the so called focus on players safety. The rule book has to be twice the size as it was 20 years ago, more chances to screw the pooch on calls.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2010
- Messages
- 17,672
- Name
- Haole
What is said in the actual Rulebook is secondary to the jersey ,,, and possibly the jersey # ,,, that the player is wearing.
What pisses me off about all this is that these so called "defenceless" players can make a tackle to prevent the touchdown yet people can't block them.
Also you have morons like RG3 who actually publicly say that they will use these rules to their advantage. I seem to remember him saying that he would make it seem like he is going out of bounds than change at the last second and turn it upfield cause the defender would probably be letting up.... If that were to start happening.... the rules would actually endanger the quarterbacks cause no defensive player would take a chance that he be "faking" going out of bounds.
RG3 is such a spoiled little shit.... Can't stand the guy
Also you have morons like RG3 who actually publicly say that they will use these rules to their advantage. I seem to remember him saying that he would make it seem like he is going out of bounds than change at the last second and turn it upfield cause the defender would probably be letting up.... If that were to start happening.... the rules would actually endanger the quarterbacks cause no defensive player would take a chance that he be "faking" going out of bounds.
RG3 is such a spoiled little shit.... Can't stand the guy
Ah.. ok.. thanks for clearing that up for me flv.... The rule seems a lot more logical now.
I thought the new rule had these guys running down the field untouched to make a tackle....
thanks for the explanation my friend :bigup:
I thought the new rule had these guys running down the field untouched to make a tackle....
thanks for the explanation my friend :bigup: