I didn't think about that. That would be awful. Like that shit call last season where they ruled the Steelers TD invalid because the fumble review showed the ball carrier's helmet came off .001 seconds before the ball crossed the line. Thus ruining the Steelers season and invalidating the Super Bowl.I'm curious about #2 regarding personal foul replays. Does that mean if they're reviewing something else and they see one, that they can call it? Or is this basically just reviewing personal foul calls that have already taken place? I think it's ridiculous that they can look at a replay and see a blatent call and not be able to include it because it was missed originally.
I don't think you guys are reading the PI rule right. Right now you can't have PI at the line of scrimmage or the backfield. The proposal says you can't maul people at the line scrimmage while the ball is in the air. It doesn't have anything to do with the 5 yard rule, and doesn't affect bump and run coverage.
ty law is the reason the current passing game looks like it does.Must be in response to how well the Seahawks press coverage worked last year.
Yeah, a defender chucking a receiver while the ball is in the air is sometimes gonna get called, but that already happens occasionally. It's still PI even if it occurs within 1-5 yards of the line of scrimmage. Changing that from 0-5 is a really minor thing. It makes sense from a rules standpoint because people are actually running 0-1 yard routes now, whereas historically those were all running plays with a toss. Sure it adds another yard of judgment, but either way it's not going to change much of anything.In spirit it doesn't, in practice it will sometimes end up working that way. Clean bump with a ball coming that way will = PI. It adds one more judgment call, and that's almost always a bad thing.
Should really work on your capitalization.
What about now?Glad we now have 2 Harvard alums now on our local pro-sports teams.
At least this now tells us that the Texans are drafting Clowney.