Question about the final Hail Mary

GoPGo

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
1,862
Reaction score
150
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.
 

Dagger85

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Messages
262
Reaction score
75
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.
 
OP
OP
GoPGo

GoPGo

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
1,862
Reaction score
150
No because Cutlers whole body has to cross the LOS.
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.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I don't believe that is correct.

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
 

Zartan

Cans.wav
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
2,228
Reaction score
702
The entire body of the passer has to cross LoS for it to be called an Illgeal Forward Pass.
 

Ceodore

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
815
Reaction score
135
Location
Dixon, IL
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.
 

dandbuck

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
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.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
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.

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).
 

Poppa San

* Team Owner *
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
12,821
Reaction score
2,735
Location
20 miles from Lambeau
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).
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?
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
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.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
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...
 
OP
OP
GoPGo

GoPGo

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
1,862
Reaction score
150
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.
You could back in 1989
 
OP
OP
GoPGo

GoPGo

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
1,862
Reaction score
150
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.
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.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
But that would be a rule helping the D and we don't want to do that!

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.
 

PackMan13x

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2009
Messages
310
Reaction score
71
Location
Steubenville, OH
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.
 
I

I_am_smoked_cheddar

Guest
You must be logged in to see this image or video!


A thing of beauty is a joy forever !
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
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.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Does anyone have any definite confirmation that the rule for illegal forward pass actually changed after 1989?

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.
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
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.
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. :)
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Does anyone have any definite confirmation that the rule for illegal forward pass actually changed after 1989?

Short of a copy of the 1989 rule book for comparison to the current wording, I don't know what you would consider definitive. Lacking that old rule book, I would think the following should suffice:

1. From SI: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/news/2001/11/08/bears_packers_rivalry/

"Parkinson ruled that Green Bay quarterback Don Majkowski's hand, moving forward at the time, had not broken the plane of the line of scrimmage before releasing a pass."

2. From the Journal Sentinal: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/57784427.html

"Editor's note: After much debate spearheaded by Bears executives, the NFL changed the rule on passes thrown beyond the line of scrimmage. What matters is where the player's body is, not the ball, when the pass is released."

As for the announcers, they are often mistaken about the rules on their first take. The replay took about 4 minutes, and as I recall they debated the rule as we waited. It took some time before they clarified the rule.

As for the Wikipedia quote in post #24, that's not what the current rule says. That wording would be consistent with the old rule. Since that writing is attributed to 1990, one might conclude it was written before the league ratified the new rule latter that year.

This circumstance is currently covered under a note added under Rule 8, Section 1, Article 2, Item 1, Paragraph (a), which reads as follows:

"Note: 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 thrown from beyond the line is enforced from the spot where the ball is released."

This is not an urban legend.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Members online

Latest posts

Top