Penalty or no?

[DE]

These new motions appear to be the new pick concept.  Instead of an offensive receiver "picking" the defender, the motion creates the defender (in man coverage) to get picked by his own teammate.

Should the wing official have tossed a flag here?

 

[Bobref]

5 minutes ago, DE said:

These new motions appear to be the new pick concept.  Instead of an offensive receiver "picking" the defender, the motion creates the defender (in man coverage) to get picked by his own teammate.

Should the wing official have tossed a flag here?

 

For .... ? Do you think the man in motion turned upfield too soon?

[DE]

21 minutes ago, Bobref said:

For .... ? Do you think the man in motion turned upfield too soon?

Yep

[Bobref]

1 hour ago, DE said:

Yep

I don’t think so. That’s not something to nitpick. The receiver’s advantage did not come from generating forward momentum prior to the snap. It was his lateral speed. Good no call.

[DE]

41 minutes ago, Bobref said:

I don’t think so. That’s not something to nitpick. The receiver’s advantage did not come from generating forward momentum prior to the snap. It was his lateral speed. Good no call.

But, did Adams move forward before the snap?  I think he did  Very close.  

I understand the "nitpick" argument on some calls, but definitely not this one or the others that have transpired since this play has been used.  This was a scoring play in a divisional round game.  

Anyways, I’d call this every time at every level during every game.

 

[Bobref]

14 hours ago, DE said:

But, did Adams move forward before the snap?  I think he did  Very close.  

I understand the "nitpick" argument on some calls, but definitely not this one or the others that have transpired since this play has been used.  This was a scoring play in a divisional round game.  

Anyways, I’d call this every time at every level during every game.

If you have to look at 10 replays, use slo-mo, or even say “I think he did  Very close,” then it’s not a foul. We don’t call fouls because we “think” it was a foul. We fish for whales, not minnows. Go ahead and call it every time ... and every time your crew is observed, they will get downgraded for it.

Edited January 18, 2021 by Bobref

[DE]

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

If you have to look at 10 replays, use slo-mo, or even say “I think he did  Very close,” then it’s not a foul. We don’t call fouls because we “think” it was a foul. We fish for whales, not minnows. Go ahead and call it every time ... and every time your crew is observed, they will get downgraded for it.

Interesting.

Sorry.  Forgot to add.  I didn't have to "look at 10 replays, use slo-mo, or even say “I think he did  Very close,”

Edited January 18, 2021 by DE

[DE]

2 hours ago, Bobref said:

If you have to look at 10 replays, use slo-mo, or even say “I think he did  Very close,” then it’s not a foul. We don’t call fouls because we “think” it was a foul. We fish for whales, not minnows. Go ahead and call it every time ... and every time your crew is observed, they will get downgraded for it.

Why would our crew or any crew, get downgraded for enforcing a penalty correctly, on a scoring play, in the playoffs, in a tight game?

Forgive me if I am missing something.

Thank you.

[Bobref]

7 minutes ago, DE said:

I am missing something.

Correct. It’s not a foul.

[DE]

26 minutes ago, Bobref said:

Correct. It’s not a foul.

Agree to disagree.  Have a great day.

[foxbat]

21 hours ago, DE said:

These new motions appear to be the new pick concept.  Instead of an offensive receiver "picking" the defender, the motion creates the defender (in man coverage) to get picked by his own teammate.

Should the wing official have tossed a flag here?

 

Sounds like a defensive problem, not a foul.  Plenty of ways for defense to avoid the pick without losing coverage as opposed to trying to avoid or getting picked offensively.

18 hours ago, DE said:

But, did Adams move forward before the snap?  I think he did  Very close.  

I understand the "nitpick" argument on some calls, but definitely not this one or the others that have transpired since this play has been used.  This was a scoring play in a divisional round game.  

Anyways, I’d call this every time at every level during every game.

 

 

19 hours ago, Bobref said:

I don’t think so. That’s not something to nitpick. The receiver’s advantage did not come from generating forward momentum prior to the snap. It was his lateral speed. Good no call.

Is this an add-on?  It's not part of the original post question. 

I think @Bobref's call is correct.  The fault in this defensive coverage, which gave the lateral advantage, is 82/32 moving up into 20's path which was clear on the first trip over.  Had 82/32 not stepped up, 20 would have not had to drop back behind him to avoid the collision, thus giving the receiver lateral advantage.

It's a good thing they weren't playing youth league ball because 20 would have been flagged for having that mouthpiece out.

 

[DE]

12 minutes ago, foxbat said:

Sounds like a defensive problem, not a foul.  Plenty of ways for defense to avoid the pick without losing coverage as opposed to trying to avoid or getting picked offensively.

 

Is this an add-on?  It's not part of the original post question. 

I think @Bobref's call is correct.  The fault in this defensive coverage, which gave the lateral advantage, is 82/32 moving up into 20's path which was clear on the first trip over.  Had 82/32 not stepped up, 20 would have not had to drop back behind him to avoid the collision, thus giving the receiver lateral advantage.

It's a good thing they weren't playing youth league ball because 20 would have been flagged for having that mouthpiece out.

 

This has nothing to do w the defender/defense.  It has to do w Adams moving forward before the snap.  Nothing more.  Nothing less.

[foxbat]

5 minutes ago, DE said:

This has nothing to do w the defender/defense.  It has to do w Adams moving forward before the snap.  Nothing more.  Nothing less.

Then why does the initial post not say anything at all about forward motion and focus specifically on the idea of a "new pick concept" and directly mention defense/defenders twice and indirectly at least once?  Wouldn't a clearer post have been something like, "Penalty or not?  Does the offensive player in motion turn upfield too early?" as opposed to two sentences about picks and none about forward motion?

 

 

[DE]

3 minutes ago, foxbat said:

Then why does the initial post not say anything at all about forward motion and focus specifically on the idea of a "new pick concept" and directly mention defense/defenders twice and indirectly at least once?  Wouldn't a clearer post have been something like, "Penalty or not?  Does the offensive player in motion turn upfield too early?" as opposed to two sentences about picks and none about forward motion?

 

 

Sure.  Thank you for the correction.  Please accept my sincere apology.

[DE]

22 hours ago, DE said:

These new motions appear to be the new pick concept.  Instead of an offensive receiver "picking" the defender, the motion creates the defender (in man coverage) to get picked by his own teammate.

Should the wing official have tossed a flag here?

 

Thank you to @foxbatfor his very welcomed help and assistance here.  He wrote this much better than I.

 

"Then why does the initial post not say anything at all about forward motion and focus specifically on the idea of a "new pick concept" and directly mention defense/defenders twice and indirectly at least once?  Wouldn't a clearer post have been something like, "Penalty or not?  Does the offensive player in motion turn upfield too early?" as opposed to two sentences about picks and none about forward motion?"

@foxbatagain, thank you very much.  I appreciate your time.  Please accept my apology.

[bittergymteacher]

4 hours ago, DE said:

Forgive me if I am missing something.

What you're missing = What's the point of asking a question on a public forum if you're going to get Butt Hurt over the answer you receive?  If you know it is illegal forward motion, don't ask to begin with.

 

[DE]

7 minutes ago, bittergymteacher said:

What you're missing = What's the point of asking a question on a public forum if you're going to get Butt Hurt over the answer you receive?  If you know it is illegal forward motion, don't ask to begin with.

 

LOL.  Do not think I am "Butt Hurt" (to quote you).

Thank you for your well articulated response though.

The point of that specific forum is to raise awareness, answer questions and debate.

Have a great day.

[Bobref]

2 hours ago, DE said:

This has nothing to do w the defender/defense.  It has to do w Adams moving forward before the snap.  Nothing more.  Nothing less.

Some free advice, so take it for what it’s worth: Don’t be “that guy.” The last thing you want is a reputation as a “rulebook official.”

[DE]

9 minutes ago, Bobref said:

Some free advice, so take it for what it’s worth: Don’t be “that guy.” The last thing you want is a reputation as a “rulebook official.”

Thank you again.  I always enjoy discussing things with wise officials.

As a newer official, I believe I have a good feel for this ("that guy").  I allow the teams to play.

Maybe b/c I am a wing, I look and focus on my keys while watching the game and that Adams' motion jumped out at me.

[DE]

Thank you Bob and others for challenging me to be a better official.

[oldtimeqb]

13 minutes ago, DE said:

Thank you again.  I always enjoy discussing things with wise officials.

As a newer official, I believe I have a good feel for this ("that guy").  I allow the teams to play.

Maybe b/c I am a wing, I look and focus on my keys while watching the game and that Adams' motion jumped out at me.

And as a wing you can see the advantage gained by Adams "running downhill" prior to the snap.  He is accelerating laterally and upfield at the same time, so he would have forward momentum upon catching the ball.  It can be the difference between a 1 yard gain and a 2 yard gain.  Poor defensive communication/rotation turned it into a TD.

Is he motioning toward the line of scrimmage? Yes.

Did he gain an advantage in doing so?  Yes. 

Were the above so egregious to warrant a flag?  Probably not on this particular play and I can see why there was no flag.  But you are darn right I would talk to the officials about the WR pushing the boundary.  

The Chiefs have crossed the line worse than the Packers did on this play, IMO.   

[DE]

4 minutes ago, oldtimeqb said:

And as a wing you can see the advantage gained by Adams "running downhill" prior to the snap.  He is accelerating laterally and upfield at the same time, so he would have forward momentum upon catching the ball.  It can be the difference between a 1 yard gain and a 2 yard gain.  Poor defensive communication/rotation turned it into a TD.

Is he motioning toward the line of scrimmage? Yes.

Did he gain an advantage in doing so?  Yes. 

Were the above so egregious to warrant a flag?  Probably not on this particular play and I can see why there was no flag.  But you are darn right I would talk to the officials about the WR pushing the boundary.  

The Chiefs have crossed the line worse than the Packers did on this play, IMO.   

Thank you for the analysis.

Appreciate all the good discussion.

[Bobref]

I think we might be disagreeing because we’re answering two different questions. Your question is “did the receiver turn upfield to any extent before the snap?” The question I’m answering is “should that wing official have thrown the flag for illegal motion at the snap?” We might both be right.

[oldtimeqb]

35 minutes ago, Bobref said:

I think we might be disagreeing because we’re answering two different questions. Your question is “did the receiver turn upfield to any extent before the snap?” The question I’m answering is “should that wing official have thrown the flag for illegal motion at the snap?” We might both be right.

Agree on your points. This is about the 3rd time in a row I've tried to like one of your posts Bob and I've run out of reactions for the day.  So this is me liking your comment. 🙂 

[DE]

44 minutes ago, Bobref said:

I think we might be disagreeing because we’re answering two different questions. Your question is “did the receiver turn upfield to any extent before the snap?” The question I’m answering is “should that wing official have thrown the flag for illegal motion at the snap?” We might both be right.

If the answer is yes to the 1st question, then yes should be the answer to the 2nd question.  Correct?

And the same for, if the answer is no to the 1st question, then no should be the answer to the 2nd question.  

[Irishman]

It does seem as though NFL officials let some things go. In this case, Adams advantage gained was from running across the formation. Before he made any move up field (the move in question), it is clear that he had Ramsey beat. 

As far as my first comment, how often do we see offensive tackles make a move that appears to be before the snap? It is the outside leg when they take a kick step back. As Bob said on the first one, I guess it would take watching the film to see when the center actually started any movement for the snap and when the questionable moves occurred.