On the Patriots last drive, not on the last play (since game cant end on a defensive penalty) but on a few of their last plays the Giants should have put their entire 53 man roster on the field to play defense in order to milk the clock. Sounds crazy right? But its true. Ive said it all year, it doesnt make any sense how there is no such thing as a a pre-snap too many men on the field penalty on the defense. Its only on the defense once the ball is snapped. To combat this, the best the Patriots can do is snap the ball and spike it which would run 2 seconds off the clock. Do that enough times and you leave the Patriots with 1 play left to score (since game cant end on a defensive penalty). As you saw, this was critical on the Pats last drive. With 17 seconds left, they had a play run 8 seconds off the clock where the Giants have 12 men on the field. 5 Yard penalty on the Giants. But good play for the Giants! Why wouldnt they trade the 5 yards for an 8 second runoff? To combat this loophole, either: A. Make too many men on the field a pre snap penalty on defenses (just like it is on the offense), or B. As my roomate suggested, make too many men on the field penalty in the last 2 minutes of the half, so that the offense should be awarded the yards AND the clock should revert to the amount of time that was left before the play started.
Astute point! That play alone is a reason the pats lost. Lost 8 seconds and couldn't get close enough to take more then 2 shots. Oh well. I'm not exactly crying for the Cheatriots
I was saying the exact same thing as it happened. I'd have thrown 15 men out there and give them 5 yards while the clock bled.
But the 12th man had no affect on the specific play involved. It was Tuck (IIRC) walking off the field that was the 12th guy when the ball was snapped. Is it a loophole that should be closed? Absolutely. Did it cost the Pats the game? Absolutely not.
Personally I think the Defense should take the penalty when the offense has them in bad personnel packages and they are using the no huddle to prevent subs, makes more sense then letting the opponent score or using a timeout.
I agree 100%. The rule should change to 5 yard penalty plus the time lost Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
It can't be yards plus time lost. Because then your not only giving them that, your giving them a absolute free untimed play basically. What's to stop the offenses running around for 2 minutes just trying to gain more then 5 yards? Laterals and stupid stuff like that....no that would ruin it. Keep it how it is. Most of the time to many men doesn't effect the offense, other then giving them a free play, because the 12th man is usually running toward the side line.
The Patriots poor use of a challenge sure didn't help them. Nor their ability to execute(read:catch the ball) when the chips were down. Perhaps I am being realistic?
Except for the fact of this rule. Rule 12-3-2."The defense shall not commit successive or continued fouls to prevent a score." The Pats would have then been given a TD.
But there is not too many men on the field until the ball is snapped. You have until then to get off the filed. On O, it's a penalty for having too many men in the huddle, not too many on the filed.
I started a thread on this (just bumped it) a few months ago. It's called The Polish Goal Line Defense and was first used by Buddy Ryan. Major loophole.
I thought thats was a good challenge...if reversed games pretty much over Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
You're almost guaranteed to kill 8 seconds with it. There's no way in Hell an offense is going to notice that pre-snap and spike the ball. Even if they did notice, they're most likely going to take a shot to get a free play. When there's 20 second left in the game, it's a pretty nice advantage for the defense to have. The only thing that could be done, would be to put the time back on the clock and replay the down. OR give the offense a completely untimed down. Meaning, the clock would not start for next play, at all. Basketball has rules to prevent teams from doing similar things (you can't foul a guy without the ball in the last two minutes, etc.)
You can't commit that foul twice in a row. The 2nd time is a 15 yard penalty and no time run off the clock.
Yea but an 8 second run off when there is 20-30 seconds left is huge. you really dont need a second time.
They could make it a 15 yard personal foul if it occurs within the last minute of a half. Problem solved.
The refs have the right to determine if that strategy is a palpably unfair act, and according to the rules book, a touchdown could have been awarded to the Patriots had the Giants used this Polish Defense
What about that play looked remotely worth challenging? Especially when Bellicheck was standing right in front of the play. Instead of keeping the timeout in his back pocket(which he ended up needing in a bad way), he just wasted it on a play that wasn't even close. Poor management IMO
Yeah but in that situation there would be no way the refs could have gave the patriots a TD even if they were 99% sure the Giants were doing that as strategy. to much backlash if they did. Now with that said, I don't think the Giants were doing that for strategy, but if they did, I don't see a ref awarding the Pats a TD without facing a huge backlash from the NFL and having a * on the Super Bowl
Possession, feet saying in bounds... Looking at the replay, its hard to see if he actually got both feet down, unless you look at it in slow motion. what if you zoom in and see that his feet never touched the ground? What if they see on the replay that the ball was lose on the way down and he never had possession? It's 2nd and 10 and momentum is gone from the Giants. Also momentum is decreased as Pats D had time to adjust themselves and regroup. They have every angle to look at it in replay. [video=youtube;XP0Q5I0vgS4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XP0Q5I0vgS4[/video] Watch from .27 secs in, tell me you don't see movement of the ball, what is an angle shows the ball hitting the ground, come on, you have to challenge that play. That challenge did not cost them this game. Not at all
Yes, I am telling you that was a worthless challenge. Belichick was standing there with the play right in front of him. The referee looked right at the play and didn't hesitate for a second that it was a catch. It was a waste of a timeout.