Cause it really doesn't.
But on the play where the Ravens gave up the safety while running time off the clock, one of the Raven's defenders(lineman, no doubt), very openly and very deliberately held onto a rusher to keep the rusher from getting to the punter.
Years ago this would've been called holding . . . has this been changed?
I'm not even sure, but I don't think a penalty was called.
Is it is still an infraction to thusly hold a kick(?), rusher?
Is it "good enough", for a player to actually, purposely do such a thing(as holding), because there can be no consequences?
After all, the time won't be given back and the penalty would've probably resulted in another foot toward the goal line for an another attempt and another opportunity to take off more time.
Even if the hold was illegal, it was still a complete win-win situation for the Ravens.
Has the sport evolved to where a violation of the rules would be perpetrated just because there are no remedies to the other team because of that infraction?
For that matter . . . was this "holding"?
I saw that also, and it was holding. The Ravens may have had to run the play over and elected to punt away instead, then if the punt was blocked and recovered in the endzone............
> Has the sport evolved to where a violation of the rules would be perpetrated just because there are no remedies to the other team because of that infraction?
>
It actually happens all the time.
just one example: a cornerback that got burned for big yardage, saves a TD by grabbing the facemask, yes it's a penalty, but he just saved a TD by doing it.
If these things are done purposely . . .
Then there's not really much honor in the sport, for the sake of honor.
So, sports has become like any big business where honor, integrity and fairness goes out the door in favor of profit, so to speak.
. . . that's sad . . .
Especially in a case like this, where after is said, it didn't really matter . . .:-(
Prior to the start of the game the officials all got together and decided they would only call flagrant fouls. Anything else was ignored throughout the game.
Holding by the offense in the endzone is an automatic safety. Since the Ravens were taking a safety, the only difference is that a few more seconds ran off the clock before the play was called dead. But I'm not even sure they would have stopped the play had the penalty/safety been called, since they don't normally call a play dead for holding, and award the safety after the play. But yeah, that was perhaps the most blantant hold I've ever seen, so I wouldn't be surprised if they were coached to do it since there was no consquence.
There were many infractions by BOTH teams that were not called.
Multiple instances of blatant pass interference by both teams. On ANY given play, if you watch the linemen, you could call "holding" with great regularity. In all reality there is something in every play by both teams that can be flagged. That's the ref's call to make, not the TV viewer.
In all of the Super Bowls the players have been allowed to play hard. Did you see any flags for "unsportsman like conduct" for thge fights that broke out?
Your team lost because of something you think should have been called?? That can be said for both teams. The Raven's were robbed of a potential touch down by blatent pass interference.
That's football. Your team cannot win all the time. Whining about a "bad call" changes nothing. Snit happens. That too is football.
Yes that was clearly holding.
The three calls that showed me the theme of the day were:
1 The Raven's giveme 1st down that was clearly a yard short. The 49er coach thru out his flag and it was reversed.
2 The pass interference call against the Ravens that prevented a 1st down catch and was only penalized 5yd and playover 3rd down instead of an automatic 1st down and stalled the 49ers drive and led to a FG
3 The ignored pass interference in the endzone that kept the 49ers from scoring and winning the game.
Anyone that has played football or basket ball has fouled to prevent a score. That is smart play.
When the "real" refs simply ignore obvious penalties on key plays they are changing the outcome of the game and they know it.
0.02
This question has absolutely nothing with who won or lost . . . I couldn't care less.
They hold, the scuffle, they interfere, they kick, they hit late, they try to knock heads of, they bite(oops, sorry, this isn't boxing), they spit, they slug, punch and cuss . . .
WHAT I ASKING, is when there are no repercussions . . . nothing to lose . . . no way of "fixing" a penalty to make up for an infraction . . .
. . . has the game gotten to the point where a player will purposely incurre(sp) an infraction?
I don't remember this mode of thinking back 30-40 years ago . . . and this "holding", as obviously purposeful that it was, just galls me.
"Anyone that has played football or basket ball has fouled to prevent a score. That is smart play."
No!
That is not "smart", play, that's an absolute abomination of what rules are all about and I find this kind of thinking rather obscene.
It should be understood that any game . . . baseball, football, tennis, golf, basketball, basket-weaving or chess, is to be played by the rules and that infractions should occur for virtually ANY REASON, other than to get a FAVORABLE edge than can't be remedied.
This, if it's generally accepted, is no better than the SHISTUFF that happens under the color of CAPITALISM.
THIS is like a 99 year-old person who's going to die in 2 days, murdering a whole bunch of 99 year-old people who were going to also die in 2 days, cause there's no remedy . . . nothing anyone can do that can cause a consequence, and besides it(the deaths), was going to happen anyway.
What is generally wrong with playing by the rules, simply because they are the rules?
> I don't remember this mode of thinking back 30-40 years ago . . . and this "holding", as obviously purposeful that it was, just galls me.
If this is the worse thing I witness this year, I will concider myself very lucky.
From the things I witnessed 30-40 years ago; professional athletes, playing by the rules, seems fairly insignificant.
Do you remember when the rule was: NO BLACKS IN PROFESSIONAL SPORTS?
I can't say I like seeing these sorts of infractions getting a pass; but I try to keep it in perspective. This game is about fame and fortune; most who play it will do what ever it takes.
Dougie
If it was holding I think they should have thrown the flag if the game could have ended with the punter scrambling in the endzone i.e. he could have hung out in the endzone until time expired. I don't think you can end play on a penalty so at least they would have had to kick the ball away from the 20.
It's the Super Bowl, let them play. Same is true in the basketball playoffs.
That's a good perspective. I often see football players "horse collared" or dragged down by their facemasks because it was the only way the defender could tackle them to prevent a score. It's 15 yards, but if it happens at the 10 yard line, it's only 5 yards. But when the announcer says, "that was a smart play because the guy was going to score ... " I also disagree. Seems like when I was kid, if you got a 15 yard penalty at the 14 yard line, then the result of the penalty of was touchdown. Maybe they should go back to that rule (if I remember it correctly).
At least in basketball they have remedied this somewhat. If you take a hard penalty when it was obvious the other guy was going to score (like a dunk or lay-up), they call it a "flagrant foul", which I think results in the basket counting (even if it missed) + a free throw + plus your team gets the ball back. It's a pretty severe punishment.
I think it is "can't end on a defense penalty". That is a loop hole favoring the Ravens in this instance and until somebody, like the 49'rs, complains, which they won't, it won't change.
"Has the sport evolved to where a violation of the rules would be perpetrated just because there are no remedies to the other team because of that infraction?"
An interesting question...
Remember the play early in the season that cost Green Bay a win? The blatant foul by Golden Tate? And the referee acknowledging that it occurred, but that it is "never called" in that situation? Curious stuff.
In that case the punter should have taken the tackle and stayed in bounds- game over without a kick.
NFL has become professional wrestling.
After thinking about it better to go out of bounds than risk a fumble.
that's where the one & one came from
too many players understood that a good shooter who was a poor free-thrower could be fouled into a scorer's oblivion.
I understand fouls and penalties. They happen in the heat of the game.
But to purposely commit a penalty is ridiculous.
Next we'll have teams with "special" players who are absolutely huge and fast, but otherwise not really good football players who's only job is to come into a game and neutralize the quarterback . . . for good.
Wouldn't that be a really smart use of the rules? Afterall, the only thing that will happen is that "special", player will get suspended for a while.
There should be an absolute attempt at adhering to the rules. Breaking of rules shouldn't be an "accepted", part of the game . . . breaking the rules should be the "un-accepted", part of the game.
. . . after all, why would we want to be compared to Wall Street Bankers, chemical companies, petroleum companies or garment industry business? In their world ANYTHING GOES to get the prize, as long as money is made and the executives are protected.
Shouldn't we want to be somewhat above that?
