Neutral Zone Penalty

Robert Mason

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 9, 2015
Messages
713
Reaction score
39
Location
New Jersey
What is the neutral zone ? One yard on either side of the ball ? There were two calls in the Eagles game where the players didn't even look like they were in the neutral zone. Even if they were I thought if they got back before the snap it was no penalty. I guess the reaction by the offensive lineman makes it a penalty ?. I think this rule needs to be revised.
 

RepStar15

"We're going to relentlessly chase perfection."
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
265
Location
Cranston, RI
I agree...What I cannot figure out though is the offsides penalty that they blow dead before Rodgers gets his free play. How come sometimes the play is blown dead and other times it is not?
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,467
Reaction score
599
I imagine Capt will have the info, but my understanding is the "unabated path to the QB" - in other words, if the defender is offsides but not in any position to maim somebody, the play continues.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,795
If you jump into the neutral zone, which is the length of the football, and an offensive lineman across from you moves, it's now a penalty. Has been for a while.

If you jump but get back and nobody moves, there is no penalty. I thought it was called suspect all night. Their offensive line tackles moved repeatedly a step before the ball was snapped.

I thought you had to be in the gap or directly across from the defender to move on offense. For example, NT over center can't come into the neutral zone and have your left tackle move to get the penalty. But that may have changed. I thought we got a lucky on when someone was way outside and one of our linemen came out of his stance.

They seem to be stopping all free plays. I imagine the league just said it's enough. Supposed to have ball snapped when in neutral zone, and no offensive linemen can move prior to the snap or it's just a neutral zone infraction.

I don't think that second penalty on Perry was a good call though. He moved, but I do not think he broke the plane of the ball, therefore it should have been a false start. At least the way I remember it.
 

NYPack

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2016
Messages
21
Reaction score
3
This was one of many foolish rule changes they've implemented over the past 2 decades that make the game worse. It used to be the o-line had to stay still until the ball was snapped regardless of what the defense did. The QB or center could still catch them in the neutral zone by snapping the ball quickly for a free play.

It was harder on offensive lineman but much less ambiguous and you didn't see stupid fake moves from oline men when the dline went into the neutral zone.

I know this doesn't answer the question but I wanted to sound off.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,795
This was one of many foolish rule changes they've implemented over the past 2 decades that make the game worse. It used to be the o-line had to stay still until the ball was snapped regardless of what the defense did. The QB or center could still catch them in the neutral zone by snapping the ball quickly for a free play.

It was harder on offensive lineman but much less ambiguous and you didn't see stupid fake moves from oline men when the dline went into the neutral zone.

I know this doesn't answer the question but I wanted to sound off.
This should be a prime example for all those asking for more rules to clarify things. It only ends up making more mud in the grand scheme of things.

They allowed the offensive linemen to move because defenders could jump and just tee off on a stationary offensive lineman. They felt this was unfair and needed to give the offensive guy a chance to ready himself to absorb some impact. It was unfair to make them sit there like sitting ducks, so they have the option to move. and now they've created all this.
 

NYPack

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2016
Messages
21
Reaction score
3
This should be a prime example for all those asking for more rules to clarify things. It only ends up making more mud in the grand scheme of things.

They allowed the offensive linemen to move because defenders could jump and just tee off on a stationary offensive lineman. They felt this was unfair and needed to give the offensive guy a chance to ready himself to absorb some impact. It was unfair to make them sit there like sitting ducks, so they have the option to move. and now they've created all this.
When I played a million years ago in high school I was o-line/d-line. We never had an issue with it. It was the original mannequin challenge.
 

Royal Pain

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 8, 2013
Messages
323
Reaction score
59
Location
Charlotte NC
If you jump into the neutral zone, which is the length of the football, and an offensive lineman across from you moves, it's now a penalty. Has been for a while.

If you jump but get back and nobody moves, there is no penalty. I thought it was called suspect all night. Their offensive line tackles moved repeatedly a step before the ball was snapped.

I thought you had to be in the gap or directly across from the defender to move on offense. For example, NT over center can't come into the neutral zone and have your left tackle move to get the penalty. But that may have changed. I thought we got a lucky on when someone was way outside and one of our linemen came out of his stance.

They seem to be stopping all free plays. I imagine the league just said it's enough. Supposed to have ball snapped when in neutral zone, and no offensive linemen can move prior to the snap or it's just a neutral zone infraction.

I don't think that second penalty on Perry was a good call though. He moved, but I do not think he broke the plane of the ball, therefore it should have been a false start. At least the way I remember it.


When they showed the replay, it was clear that Perry flinched but did not enter the neutral zone. However the player lined up just inside Perry (couldn't see who it was) did enter the neutral zone, so the refs just misidentified the culprit.

One aspect of the rule that is rarely applied correctly involves the offensive player reacting immediately to the defender jumping offside. The Packers offensive linemen frequently get away delayed reactions, including a particularly egregious example in last nights game.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,969
Reaction score
1,244
It is my understanding that once the O-lineman moves the play is blown dead. If the D lineman comes across and no O-lineman moves the play keeps going unless the D-lineman is unabated to the QB which I presume to mean he has a clear shot with no one to block him and its meant to protect the QB.

I've seen the unabated call when the D lineman was already moving backwards trying to get back on sides. I've seen some pretty delayed reactions by the O-line which resulted in calls against the defense. I've seen plays where no one on the O line flinches and the play is blown dead anyway. I was also under the impression that if the defensive player enters the neutral zone but gets back before anyone on the offense moves or the ball is snapped there would be no foul but I have seen that called as well. Like many rules there is going to be a degree of subjectivity to it.
 

Sky King

158.3
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
2,817
Reaction score
329
Location
Out of the clear blue western skies...
Ambiguous or complicated rules are part of what's testing my mettle as a fan of the NFL. Having witnessed both the Glory and Gory years as a Packer fan (by birthright), I've been tempered. My affection for the team remains solid and always will regardless of their record. But I would be fibbing if I said the NFL game as a whole has gotten more interesting for me to watch. The product been heading downhill for years IMHO and I wonder how much longer the NFL can take the fans' interest for granted. I'm already being challenged on this issue and I sometimes wonder if others have the same concerns.

The rules, replay challenges (last night's challenge for two lousy yards is a good example), and over-the-top hype regurgitated by the talking heads has made watching the game a (worsening) tedious bore. When I hear people suggest even more replay reviews are needed I cringe at the prospect. Four-hour+ games won't be very far behind. Think of all the additional silly insurance, Kay Jewelers, beer and pizza commercials headed your way.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,075
Reaction score
7,893
Location
Madison, WI
I say just let them all (offense and defense) move as much as they want, might even be interesting to see guards and tackles shift as long as they are set for a full second before ball is snapped :) But if you make contact with an opposing player or in the case of the defense, are across the line when the ball is snapped, penalty.

I've grown tired of everyone standing around pointing fingers at guys, offensive players not flinching, but coming out of their stance 2 or more players down from the offending defensive player and getting a penalty called on the defense.

Play the damn game!
 

swhitset

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 28, 2015
Messages
4,350
Reaction score
1,217
Ambiguous or complicated rules are part of what's testing my mettle as a fan of the NFL. Having witnessed both the Glory and Gory years as a Packer fan (by birthright), I've been tempered. My affection for the team remains solid and always will regardless of their record. But I would be fibbing if I said the NFL game as a whole has gotten more interesting for me to watch. The product been heading downhill for years IMHO and I wonder how much longer the NFL can take the fans' interest for granted. I'm already being challenged on this issue and I sometimes wonder if others have the same concerns.

The rules, replay challenges (last night's challenge for two lousy yards is a good example), and over-the-top hype regurgitated by the talking heads has made watching the game a (worsening) tedious bore. When I hear people suggest even more replay reviews are needed I cringe at the prospect. Four-hour+ games won't be very far behind. Think of all the additional silly insurance, Kay Jewelers, beer and pizza commercials headed your way.
I may be in the minority, but replays and long games don't bother me. If the team is winning, I actually enjoy a long game lol.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,075
Reaction score
7,893
Location
Madison, WI
It sure helps cut-through the tedium and is really a blessing when one successfully times the delay so that the game and the recording conclude at about the same time. The "live" game still suffers.

I got hosed last night watching it "taped". I usually start watching a game about 45 minutes in via my DVR to avoid having to watch commercials. Last night it was raining here and I sat down to watch the game, saw the opening kickoff and the rain must have blacked out the signal, missed the whole opening drive! I was like "great, probably the only score of the night for the Packers, just my luck". It turned out just fine :)
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
The 'free play' only occurs if the neutral zone infraction isn't 'unabated' to the QB, (free run at him), and if none of the O linemen move in response.

I agree the rule needs to be changed, but I would not go back to the old school way where the D could jump in as much as they want and it was a false start if any lineman moved.

They could tighten up the enforcement of 'immediate response' by the lineman, which its supposed to be. Or they could call offsetting false start/neutral zone enfractions if the O-lineman jumps back and no one gets rewarded. This would stop rewarding the offensive lineman for jumping in response, without penalizing him. You'd only get the 5 yards if it was a free play or unabated to the QB.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Here's the exact phrasing of the rule that was added to the rule book before the 2012 season partly eliminating free plays:

It is a Neutral Zone Infraction when a defender moves beyond the neutral zone prior to the snap and is parallel to or beyond an offensive lineman, with an unimpeded path to the quarterback or kicker, even though no contact is made by a blocker, officials are to blow their whistles immediately.

In my opinion the referees should allow the play to continue more often.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,075
Reaction score
7,893
Location
Madison, WI
Here's the exact phrasing of the rule that was added to the rule book before the 2012 season partly eliminating free plays:

It is a Neutral Zone Infraction when a defender moves beyond the neutral zone prior to the snap and is parallel to or beyond an offensive lineman, with an unimpeded path to the quarterback or kicker, even though no contact is made by a blocker, officials are to blow their whistles immediately.

In my opinion the referees should allow the play to continue more often.

I thought there was a part in there about blowing the play dead when the defensive player jumps and it causes the offensive player to move, which would mean the only way you get a "free play" is no offensive movement and the defensive players isn't unabated?

None the less, you have to wonder if there was enough complaining from almost every other team but the Packers that "free plays" were being given to liberally to Rodgers and the officials decided to crack down on it?
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I thought there was a part in there about blowing the play dead when the defensive player jumps and it causes the offensive player to move, which would mean the only way you get a "free play" is no offensive movement and the defensive players isn't unabated?

That is included in the next paragraph of the rule.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top