Barbershopman
TMF Master
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2006
- Messages
- 821
- Points
- 18
The Green Bay Packers tied the Minnesota Vikings 29-29 Sunday. Both had their chances at the end of the game but that's another story for another time. Now that the catch/not a catch rule has been resolved (HAHA), I'd like to tackle (pun intended) the rule of roughing the passer.
With the Packers up 29-21 in the fourth quarter and time running down, Packers linebacker Clay Matthews split the offensive line and delivered a form-perfect tackle on Kirk Cousins. The resulting interception effectively sealed the game. . . except for the yellow laundry on the field. According to the referee, Matthews drove Cousins into the ground prompting a roughing the passer penalty. The Vikings proceeded to score the tying touchdown and two-point conversion. You know the rest of the story.
Now, the purpose of this thread, let's take a look at the form-perfect tackle. Matthews led with his shoulder (correct), hit Cousins in the mid-section (again correct) and the momentum put Cousins on the ground (correct). Pardon me, but isn't that the intent of the entire game??? The ONLY thing Matthews could have done not to be flagged was to defy Newton's third law of gravity, and levitate above Cousins after the hit. Instead, he let his body succumb to the laws of gravity (BASTARD!) and fall on Cousins, prompting the yellow.
I know they are changing the rules to promote player safety, BUT, unless we can change the scientific laws of gravity and (SPOILER ALERT) WE CAN'T, then we are subject to a plethora of yellow on the field that common sense says we shouldn't be subjected to in the first place. In other words-WE NEED TO GET RID OF THIS STUPID INTERPRETATION OF THE ROUGHING THE PASSER RULE!!!!! Now I'm going to go look at pictures of serene landscapes and take a couple of deep breaths to get myself back to normal.
What are your thoughts on this "interpretation" of the roughing the passer rule?
Barbershopman
With the Packers up 29-21 in the fourth quarter and time running down, Packers linebacker Clay Matthews split the offensive line and delivered a form-perfect tackle on Kirk Cousins. The resulting interception effectively sealed the game. . . except for the yellow laundry on the field. According to the referee, Matthews drove Cousins into the ground prompting a roughing the passer penalty. The Vikings proceeded to score the tying touchdown and two-point conversion. You know the rest of the story.
Now, the purpose of this thread, let's take a look at the form-perfect tackle. Matthews led with his shoulder (correct), hit Cousins in the mid-section (again correct) and the momentum put Cousins on the ground (correct). Pardon me, but isn't that the intent of the entire game??? The ONLY thing Matthews could have done not to be flagged was to defy Newton's third law of gravity, and levitate above Cousins after the hit. Instead, he let his body succumb to the laws of gravity (BASTARD!) and fall on Cousins, prompting the yellow.
I know they are changing the rules to promote player safety, BUT, unless we can change the scientific laws of gravity and (SPOILER ALERT) WE CAN'T, then we are subject to a plethora of yellow on the field that common sense says we shouldn't be subjected to in the first place. In other words-WE NEED TO GET RID OF THIS STUPID INTERPRETATION OF THE ROUGHING THE PASSER RULE!!!!! Now I'm going to go look at pictures of serene landscapes and take a couple of deep breaths to get myself back to normal.
What are your thoughts on this "interpretation" of the roughing the passer rule?
Barbershopman
