1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Question about the final Hail Mary

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by GoPGo, Dec 29, 2013.

  1. GoPGo

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    1,751
    Ratings:
    +810
    Does anyone else think even if the Hail Mary had worked that it would have been overturned due to an illegal forward pass? I've watched it several times frame by frame and it Cutler's foot was definitely over the LOS and it looked like the ball was still in his hand when it passed through the plane of the LOS.
     
  2. Dagger85

    Dagger85 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2011
    Messages:
    161
    Ratings:
    +153
    I'll have to go back and watch that! I lost track of the line of scrimmage. Whew. It's been over for 7 hours and I still haven't recovered.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Like_That

    Like_That Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2011
    Messages:
    17
    Ratings:
    +9
    No because Cutlers whole body has to cross the LOS.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. GoPGo

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    1,751
    Ratings:
    +810
    So... in reality you DON'T have to throw the ball from behind the LOS. You just have to make sure not to go more than a couple feet beyond it? I'm pretty sure I've seen more than one completed pass overturned with less than the QB's whole body beyond the LOS.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. yooperpackfan

    yooperpackfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    794
    Ratings:
    +355
    I don't believe that is correct.
     
  6. yooperpackfan

    yooperpackfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    794
    Ratings:
    +355
    My son and I both yelled that at the same time but no flags came out.
     
  7. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,843
    Ratings:
    +2,581
    Out of the NFL's rule book:
    It is a forward pass from beyond the line of scrimmage if the passer’s entire body and the ball are beyond the line of scrimmage when the ball is released, whether the passer is airborne or touching the ground. The penalty for a forward pass
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. Zartan

    Zartan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    357
    Ratings:
    +219
    The entire body of the passer has to cross LoS for it to be called an Illgeal Forward Pass.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. Ceodore

    Ceodore Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    Messages:
    475
    Ratings:
    +185
    It wouldn't have been turned over because you can't challenge a penalty (or lack thereof) correct? Since they didn't throw a flag during the play i don't think there's anything they could've done about it.
     
  10. dandbuck

    dandbuck Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2013
    Messages:
    6
    Ratings:
    +1
    anyone else notice the 2 times the closk was still running when it should have stopped. Once when bears receiver ran out of bounds, and the other when they "reviewed" the catch with 1.5 minutes left, we snapped the ball and they blew it stopped, then restarted wayyyy to early after they confirmed the catch.
     
  11. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Ratings:
    +650
    Nope. Whole body must be past the LOS for it to be illegal forward pass.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. Baked

    Baked Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    44
    Ratings:
    +15
    You can straddle the line. That was a legal throw. Which means it was a legitimate interception!
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,843
    Ratings:
    +2,581
    I don´t know about the one when a Bears receiver went out of bounds, but the started the clock absolutely correctly after the Nelson catch (the stoppage occured because a practice ball was on the field).
     
  14. Poppa San

    Poppa San SB I trophy First of four Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    4,421
    Ratings:
    +1,038
    So is this a way to get a clock stoppage when running to the line in hurry up mode? allows the offense to get set? Almost like letting a fan run on to the field to get a time out like happened many years back?
     
  15. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,012
    The booth reviews ALL scoring plays. If it had been caught it would have been a booth review.
     
  16. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,442
    Ratings:
    +2,485
    I've deleted my post agreeing with GoPGo's initial proposition. CaptainWIMM correctly quoted the rules.

    A little Packer history for you youngsters:

    The call used to be predicated on the position of the ball relative to the LOS at the point of release. The rule was changed after Don Majkowski beat the Bears on a controversial call. I thought it was now based on the position of the feet at the time of release. That is incorrect.

    I fail to understand why they changed the rule in this way. The Majkowski play highlighted how difficult it is to note the position of the throw unless the camera is shooting right down the LOS. The current rule makes the call no easier.

    Common sense would dictate it should be based on foot position where there's a better chance of making the right call upon replay. Go figure.
     
  17. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,045
    Ratings:
    +3,127
    I replayed that a couple of times too. Cutler's back foot was clearly behind the LOS. I think the rule should be both feet behind the LOS at the point of release. But that would be a rule helping the D and we don't want to do that!

    They do review scoring plays but I'm not sure if that would be part of what they would review. IMO it should be...
     
  18. GoPGo

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    1,751
    Ratings:
    +810
    You could back in 1989
     
  19. GoPGo

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    1,751
    Ratings:
    +810
    No kidding. If they can use foot position to determine whether a shot is a 3 pointer or 2 pointer, why can't a foot on the LOS be used to determine a legal pass? It would make the rule more objective and concrete that way.
     
  20. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,442
    Ratings:
    +2,485
    Well, they did ditch the "Tuck Rule" this past off season. Long overdue. They must have figured sufficient time had passed so as not to discredit the Patriots' championship. That's small vindication for Charles Woodson; more like opening an old wound. I guess we could say he did not have a good year all the way around.
     
  21. PackMan13x

    PackMan13x Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    307
    Ratings:
    +132
    That was a legal pass but what SHOULD have been called was Jordy getting layed out 9 yards down field on the 4th and 8! Even though it was beautiful and Cobb scored, if he drops it the game is over when Jordy was flattened in plain site in the middle of the field.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  22. I_am_smoked_cheddar

    I_am_smoked_cheddar Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    131230-thedrive710.jpg

    A thing of beauty is a joy forever !
     
  23. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,887
    Ratings:
    +1,424
    Does anyone have any definite confirmation that the rule for illegal forward pass actually changed after 1989? I hear it all the time and I'm not saying its not true but I've never seen anything that confirms it to where I don't wonder if its just urban legend that has grown over time kind of like people thinking that we wouldn't haven't made the playoffs in 2010 without Desean Jackson's punt return beating the Giants.

    Only reason I ask is that if you watch that game ending (YouTube search for Bears Packers replay game 1989), the announcer continuously harps on the back foot being behind the line which would lead one to think that he believed this made it a legal pass.

    I find it odd that a commentator would incorrectly assume this is the rule. If I didn't know that it actually is the rule now I would assume that the entire body, or at least the ball, has to be behind the line.
     
  24. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,843
    Ratings:
    +2,581
    This is from the Wikipedia article of the 1990 season, listing major rule changes before the season:

    • The penalty for an illegal forward pass beyond the line of scrimmage is enforced from the spot where any part of the passer's body is beyond the line when the ball is released.
     
  25. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,887
    Ratings:
    +1,424
    Thanks! That's kind of an odd way how they worded it, though. It makes it sound like its a penalty if any part of the body is past the line, when in fact its opposite and not a penalty if any part of the body is still behind the line.

    Maybe they've been misinterpreting and mis-enforcing the rule all this time. :)
     

Share This Page