NFL may consider negating touchdowns for taunting penalties

  • Thread starter Thread starter PhxRam
  • Start date 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.

PhxRam

Guest
When Seahawks receiver Golden Tate began waving at Rams safety Rodney McLeod at the 25-yard line on Tate’s way to an 80-yard touchdown, the official threw the flag before Tate had even crossed the goal line. But even though Tate committed a penalty before he scored, the touchdown still counted.

Next season, a player who does the same thing may negate his own touchdown.

NFL head of officiating Dean Blandino said on NFL Network that he thinks the Competition Committee will explore changing the NFL’s taunting rules to make them more similar to the taunting rules in the NCAA. In college football, if a player commits a taunting penalty on a touchdown, the touchdown is called back and the 15-yard penalty is enforced from the spot where the taunting began.

“A lot of people felt that the touchdown shouldn’t have counted [but] a taunting foul is always treated as a dead-ball foul, meaning whatever happened during the play counts, and the foul is enforced on the next play, which would be the kickoff,” Blandino said. “In college, this action would take back the touchdown. Tate started taunting at the 25-yard line. The college rule, that’s enforced at the spot of the foul, so they’d go from a touchdown to first-and-10 at the 40, which would be a gigantic penalty. The NFL rule, it’s a dead-ball foul, it’s enforced on the kickoff. But I’m sure that’s something that the Competition Committee will look at in the offseason.”

Taking away a touchdown for taunting seems awfully harsh. Then again, there’s a simple way to avoid that happening: Don’t taunt.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...r-negating-touchdowns-for-taunting-penalties/
 
You're like some kind of Nostradamus.
 
Only if it's directed at an opposing player like what Golen Tate did..I think that's a lack of respect. But dancing to the EZ not pointing it out is having fun.
 
Angry Ram said:
Only if it's directed at an opposing player like what Golen Tate did..I think that's a lack of respect. But dancing to the EZ not pointing it out is having fun.
Click to expand...
Yeah, taunting - I think - is pretty easily defined. And of course they'd have to define it so that the refs aren't left with yet another thing to interpret.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
I have seen a lot of taunting in my day and I actually like it if the player being taunted had some smack talked his way. Taint's little hand wave was nothing. Penalty? You bet.. decide a game for it because the winning score had a taunt? I wouldn't like that.

Wistrom used to taunt guys like mad. So did Kevin Greene. LawrMac did it one time so bad that I could hear him as an 11 year old in the stands. This is a big boys game, this isn't peewee soccer where the players are all "winners". A player that is known for it will lose the respect of the players around him which is a punishment of its own. Classless yes.. worthy of reversing TDs? Oh hell no..

Now I can't stand Steve Smith. He is a mouth connected to a bad attitude, so when JJ was rumored to have been talking to him I kind of liked it. For all we know, the guys could have been riding Taint pretty hard, when he got one he may have been returning fire. The way the Rams were playing I was just waiting for the big one. Sure enough there was no help anywhere for JJ on that play. When a defense sells out on the line like that they risk getting torched. I am just surprised it didn't happen more. As it turns out, that TD was the winning TD.
 
Hmmm, I'm on the fence about taunting. It's poor sportsmanship for sure but I like it anyway. Football needs bad guys and poor sports. Those guys are fun to hate. I don't go for cheap shots are cheating though.
 
Next thing you know, the players are going to have to curtsy at each other before each play. Welcome to Commandant Goodell's Nat'l Feeble League
 
Stranger said:
Next thing you know, the players are going to have to curtsy at each other before each play. Welcome to Commandant Goodell's Nat'l Feeble League
Click to expand...
And I thought you were old school...
 
Turble stuffed shirt idea, just eject the guy if you want it to be severe, but changing the score?cant go with that
 
Thordaddy said:
Turble stuffed shirt idea, just eject the guy if you want it to be severe, but changing the score?cant go with that
Click to expand...

Why should a penalty 40 yards away from the play change the score?

In my book a penalty is a penalty.
 
What's the Competition Committee gonna do about the refs who willfully choose to ignore blatant taunts?

I'm much more interested/concerned about THAT.
 
PhxRam said:
Why should a penalty 40 yards away from the play change the score?

In my book a penalty is a penalty.
Click to expand...

I get the "penalty is a penalty" generalization is how ya see it but this issue notwithstanding there are currently several categories 5,10,15 yards, automatic first downs etc.
For my part if it didn't involve the performance of the play or violate safety rules, just made someone angry it's not grievous enough to penalize teams for anyway, fines? sure,ejection? yup
I'd rather we avoid using the NCAA as a guide.
 
Thordaddy said:
I get the "penalty is a penalty" generalization is how ya see it but this issue notwithstanding there are currently several categories 5,10,15 yards, automatic first downs etc.
For my part if it didn't involve the performance of the play or violate safety rules, just made someone angry it's not grievous enough to penalize teams for anyway, fines? sure,ejection? yup
I'd rather we avoid using the NCAA as a guide.
Click to expand...

That still doesn't really answer my question. What is the difference between a penalty 40 yards away that had no effect on the overall play?
 
NCAA sucks, but if they went to this rule in the NFL it wouldn't bother me a bit.
our society is all about not accepting personal responsibility for their actions these days. It would be a simple penalty to avoid, so screw anyone who hurts their team by getting it.
Taunting goes against the spirit of competition IMO.
 
The ol' taunting on the way to score. YES cut the goal out & back them up 20 yds. or you could throw the taunter out of the game on top of the rest too. That will stop that shyt in a hurry.
 
It has to be limited to blatantly singling people out and intentionally showing them up (golden tate, steve smith). Honestly speaking if the NFL is not going to take a stand on things like what Tate did, they're inviting fights. Im shocked nobody went after him other than mcleod talking a little trash.
 
I for would like this. It is classless and unprofessional. I dont know if it is a generational thing or "something else" with the way a lot of players behave now. I find it irritating, it distracts from the quality of the game in my opinion and is pretty weak.
Note to JJ, love ya man, stop running your mouth with these guys, just run, cover and deflect passes.
 
I actually don't have a problem with taunting - but in specific moments. celebrating after an injury i think should always be flagged,but as far as what tate did i'm okay with. don't want to see it? don't get burned. back up your trash talk with your play.

however it is a rule, so i get annoyed/angry when i see inconsistent calling by the refs (like the panther game, which was as obvious as tate's)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back