Please Explain the Calls

[jrry32]

Don't see why everyone is so hung up on that one call / rule. The offense still screwed the pooch afterwards by going 3 and out. And after a great punt, the Skins started way back at their 35, so it's not like they benefited greatly from it. And with how terrible the run defense was at that point, I don't think it would've mattered where they started from.

I think it makes a huge difference. You're really limited in what you can do when you're starting at the 2. Starting at the 10 isn't ideal, but you can at least throw the ball without worrying about a safety.

Plus, they spent a ridiculous amount of time trying to figure things out.

 

[rdlkgliders]

You can't decline personal fouls............................can you

 

[VeteranRamFan]

You can't decline personal fouls............................can you

Well, lets see. So your team scores a TD on a given play, the refs threw a flag and it is announced that a personal foul was committed by the opposing team. If you can't decline the penalty, you would lose the TD you just scored so yes, you can deny it.

The problem with this call is there were off setting penalties. Different rules apply, reply down is the most common.

 

[fearsomefour]

If that's the rule it's dead wrong and should be addressed . It penalizes the wrong team . I still think they just screwed it up

Yeah crazy.
So, in this case, the kicking committed a personal foul and the return team paid for not by starting at the 2.

 

[fearsomefour]

Don't see why everyone is so hung up on that one call / rule. The offense still screwed the pooch afterwards by going 3 and out. And after a great punt, the Skins started way back at their 35, so it's not like they benefited greatly from it. And with how terrible the run defense was at that point, I don't think it would've mattered where they started from.

It's interesting.
Don't really remember seeing that enforcement.

 

[VeteranRamFan]

Was in the wrong interpretation, if the Rams had downed the ball in the end zone, would it had been a safety? The rule needs to be amended to read, that if on the kickoff, it goes to the end of the play not where the kickoff was caught.

I hear ya but think of it like this, if our return man ran all the way for a touchdown, where do you call the play back to? Now the kicking team would get screwed by not enforcing the holding call on the receiving team.

 

[London59]

Washington got away with a few false starts today and a lot of holding. But nothing you can do about that. We still could have won the game. We failed.

Wow! I rewatched the Rams final kick off and did frame by frame. Closest Ram is a half yd behind the line when the ball is kicked. The fix was in on this game! A blatant miss yet again by the refs calling offsides. Seriously, everyone please go back and watch the false off sides call and then the missed false start on their tackle. The refs were beyond horrible and only became horrible when the Rams threatened to win!

 

[jrry32]

After a little bit of thought, I remember this being implemented when the league was trying to speed up the game.

Off setting penalties means we replay the down, but instead of getting everyone lined up again for a kickoff or a punt, they apply this rule.

Well, like so many of their rule changes, they did a shitty job thinking this one through.

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

I still don't understand how they thought it would make any sense. Especially for a kick return.

.

 

[UKram]

How do you expect us to explain it ? Booger and his crew had a hard eboyghbtime figuring it out

The man is incompent and I never want him to red another Rams game as long I live

 

[So Ram]

that was a bummer...never got the explanation either by Dean Blandino

The NFL is corrupt !!

 

[Psycho_X]

.

I still don't understand how they thought it would make any sense. Especially for a kick return.

.

Yeah I've read this entire thread and I still don't have any understanding of this rule at all. It simply makes no logical sense so I just can't comprehend it I guess. I don't know.

 

[den-the-coach]

Yeah I've read this entire thread and I still don't have any understanding of this rule at all. It simply makes no logical sense so I just can't comprehend it I guess. I don't know.

IMO, they came up with this rule without factoring in it would happen on a kickoff, so you have to follow the rule, which states, it goes back to the original line of scrimmage, which in this case was the two yard line where Cooper caught the ball, however, what would of happened if he caught the ball in the end zone and brought it out?

The rule now has to be tweaked because for some reason like everything else when they try to improve things and in this case, the speed of the game, they don't factor in every scenario for some odd reason. BTW, how Dean Blandino has a job with that Cheshire Cat grin on his damn face is beyond me.

 

[~lyser]

I think the rule was applied correctly, it is just a stupid rule.

On another note, I feel anytime the kickoff is in the end zone, the return team should take the touchback at the 25. Too many bad things can happen on the return - NOT reaching the 25, fumble, penalty, stupid rule applied etc.

 

[nighttrain]

Well, like so many of their rule changes, they did a crappy job thinking this one through.

fisher was on Rules Committee wasn't he?

go figure
train

 

[den-the-coach]

fisher was on Rules Committee wasn't he?

go figure
train

Not that I never mind taking a shot Fisher, however, he was not on the rules committee this off season as the rule was put into place in 2017. Again they followed the rule correctly, but have to tweak to apply to kickoffs and just make it a touch back and start at the 25.

 

[RamBall]

It has to have been the wrong call. Shouldn't they have rekicked it?

Or both penalties nulify each other and the Rams get the ball where the return ended, as if no penalty happened.

 

[bomebadeeda]

Don't see why everyone is so hung up on that one call / rule. The offense still screwed the pooch afterwards by going 3 and out. And after a great punt, the Skins started way back at their 35, so it's not like they benefited greatly from it. And with how terrible the run defense was at that point, I don't think it would've mattered where they started from.

Would we have run the same set of plays if we started at the 10 or 15? I'd say no. Your plays you run from inside your own 5 yd line always has "safety if you mess up" (a holding call in the end zone.....). You don't have the same problem a bit further out.

 

[RamBall]

Wow! I rewatched the Rams final kick off and did frame by frame. Closest Ram is a half yd behind the line when the ball is kicked. The fix was in on this game! A blatant miss yet again by the refs calling offsides. Seriously, everyone please go back and watch the false off sides call and then the missed false start on their tackle. The refs were beyond horrible and only became horrible when the Rams threatened to win!

The Rams have always had to beat the officials to get a win. There have been so many games decided by the officials over the years it is almost impossible for it to not be a conspiracy.

 

[Ramhusker]

The call I have a question about other than this crazy call was the PI on Woods. Wasn't the pass caught by Gurley behind the line of scrimmage? If that were the case, you can block as if it were a running play correct? I know you can in college ball.