Seriously, the punter should have just laid down and it probably would've killed time.
The instant he would've been touched he'd been down and no fumble could happen.
. . . being a punter, I understand why he ran out of the end zone . . .:-D
I quit watching that stupid S#%^& after I had picked Pacific Life over Taco Bell, by 3, at the half.
Once money gets involved, its a different animal.
Sorry...
But it was a smart play...all within the rules of the game. Of course there was holding. And as others have said, holding in the endzone is an automatic safety the were willing to give up two points in order to take time off the clock. Smart play, good coaching. Of course you are entitled to your opinion though.
I am neither a ravens fan nor a niners fan...but I enjoy sports.
Sorry...
This is probably a rule that could use some tweeking. It does seem a bit unfair (although as you pointed out, entirely within the rules), that a team can intentionally hold for the purpose of gaining a time clock advantage, and have virtually no "penalty" accessed. The NFL instituted a 10-second run-off when it was clear that teams were taking penalties just to stop the clock ... maybe the need a 10-second run-on rule when a team commits a penalty to keep the clock running. That would end this type of play. But what's really perplexing is that ref didn't throw a flag ... even if it was meaningless in that situation.
Here's the play, BTW, you can see a bear-hug, outright tackle (#27 and #37), and another player in the line being held and pulled to the ground ... any one of those is worth a flag.
TSR
I agree on the holding. I believe the holding was intentional. So if the ref thru the flag, it still would not have stopped the game.
You can say the rule needs tweaking (maybe it does) but coaches, are very smart...and will always find wiggle room in the rules....I call it gamesmanship. Kudos to the coach on that one.
all you guys that kudos the play . . .
should be equally happy that the banks created this huge mortgage bubble that eventually busted.
Cause a whole heck of a lot of people made one heck of a whole lot of fast money . . . and isn't this what capitalism really all about, even if it involves breaking rules?
MONEY and nothing else . . . right?
I would never want to raise my children on this premise.
all you guys that kudos the play . . .
Yeah ... the idea of honor has pretty much escaped this country to the point when someone "does the right thing" it's a news worthy event. Sports, politics, wall street, professional ethics, entertainment, etc. Money has corrupted just about everything it can corrupt, and people are haled as geniuses for getting rich the easy way. Heck, I hear a popular YouTube video these days is a guy that goes around farting in people's faces as they sit on park benches ... I wonder how much advertisement money that brings in.
all you guys that kudos the play . . .
Um...bit of a stretch no?
all you guys that kudos the play . . .
No kudos for that kind of play here. Coaches and owners expect it from the players and it happens in every game. The sports announcers have donned it smart play. Players can be benched or traded if they don't stop a score without trying.
I see it as cheating and penalties should be enforced. My problem is when the penalty is less than the possible outcome of the play. Holding, interference and flagrant fouls are not a do over event like offside or illegal formation.
They keep tweaking the system to make play safer more than making it a level playing field.
Sports at that level are nothing but risky, that's why the pay is so much. The safer they make the play, the pay should go down.........
B-)
If they would have called a penalty on the play, it would have only been a half the distance walk off and no time added back to the clock.
Baltimore would then simply run the same play, thus killing the few seconds that remained.
Where San Fancisco screwed up was not fair catching the free kick. At least they would have had a chance to run a "Hail Mary".
In general, the holding no call was consistent with the way the ref's had called the whole game for both sides.
I thought the holding and pass interference no call on San Francisco's last 4th down play was more egregious than the meaningless holding no call on the safety play.
The game was over regardless of whether Baltimore had been called for holding in the endzone...it still would have been a safety and a free kick with only a few seconds left to play.
To me, these no calls are not any different than when you see a defenseive lineman get blocked to the ground in the same zip code with Tom Brady and they get called for roughing the quarterback if one of their fingers makes contact with Brady's shoelace.
NFL officiating sucks, always has...always will.
:good:
you get a lot of things right, Tim, this was one of them....B-)