Ok....the lateral????

[Mindsink]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/bcondotta/status/937738484894261251[/tweet]

:snack:

WTF?

"Pete Carroll say son @710ESPNSeattle has calls into Neil deGrasse Tyson"

I'm at a total loss as to what this means. Looks like randomly pieced together words.

"Pete Carroll write daughter @710espnseattle has balls onto Neil Patrick Harris" -- Equally incoherent.

Perhaps you are unaware that Neil deGrasse Tyson is a well respected physicist?

Yup. I had no idea. I thought maybe he was some actor or recording artist.

Still doesn't explain the rest of the sentence though. But now I know it's in reference to the lateral.

 

[johnnyfever]

It was a forward pass, Eagles should have challenged and would have won.

The crazy thing is Russ would have run for the 1st down anyway. If you watch where he lands after he is tackled (because the Eagles defender didn't know Russ had ditched the ball), he still gets past the line to gain because of how he rolls over the defender. So he didn't even need to lateral the ball to get the 1st.

What would they challenge? there was no flag to challenge. I might be wrong, but I don't see how you can throw a red flag for something on the field that happened that wasn't called (holding, PI, unsportsmanlike etc).

They certainly could challenge that play. In fact, you typically can’t challenge the plays you referenced as challengeable.

That was my point, that you CANT challenge the things I listed, and you for sure can't challenge them if no fould was called.

My point is no yellow flag was thrown, so how can anything be challenged if there was no foul called? If they had thrown a flag for a forward pass, then you could challenge that call. But with no flag thrown, you cant throw the red flag and ask them to review the tape to see if they can retroactively throw a flag. Otherwise, coaches could throw a red flag every play if they see a fould commited that wasnt caught by the officials.

If I'm wrong as maybe there is a rule for challenges pertaining to completed passes I'm unaware, please set me straight.

 

[StoneCold]

It was a forward pass, Eagles should have challenged and would have won.

The crazy thing is Russ would have run for the 1st down anyway. If you watch where he lands after he is tackled (because the Eagles defender didn't know Russ had ditched the ball), he still gets past the line to gain because of how he rolls over the defender. So he didn't even need to lateral the ball to get the 1st.

What would they challenge? there was no flag to challenge. I might be wrong, but I don't see how you can throw a red flag for something on the field that happened that wasn't called (holding, PI, unsportsmanlike etc).

They certainly could challenge that play. In fact, you typically can’t challenge the plays you referenced as challengeable.

That was my point, that you CANT challenge the things I listed, and you for sure can't challenge them if no fould was called.

My point is no yellow flag was thrown, so how can anything be challenged if there was no foul called? If they had thrown a flag for a forward pass, then you could challenge that call. But with no flag thrown, you cant throw the red flag and ask them to review the tape to see if they can retroactively throw a flag. Otherwise, coaches could throw a red flag every play if they see a fould commited that wasnt caught by the officials.

If I'm wrong as maybe there is a rule for challenges pertaining to completed passes I'm unaware, please set me straight.

They may have been able to challenge the spot of the ball.

 

[Polaris]

According to Pederson, the Eagles head coach, he could have challenged it, but HE thought it was a legit lateral and by the time he realized it wasn't, Seattle was already running another play. He also admitted he was afraid of losing a T.O. and his last challenge over a play that he thought he would lose.

 

[StoneCold]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/bcondotta/status/937738484894261251[/tweet]

:snack:

WTF?

"Pete Carroll say son @710ESPNSeattle has calls into Neil deGrasse Tyson"

I'm at a total loss as to what this means. Looks like randomly pieced together words.

"Pete Carroll write daughter @710espnseattle has balls onto Neil Patrick Harris" -- Equally incoherent.

Perhaps you are unaware that Neil deGrasse Tyson is a well respected physicist?

Yup. I had no idea. I thought maybe he was some actor or recording artist.

Still doesn't explain the rest of the sentence though. But now I know it's in reference to the lateral.

Bob is saying Pete was serious about asking Neil to explain why it was a legal lateral.

I hope he does as it would be funny as hell to hear him explain it one way or the other. I follow him on Twitter and he's quite the wit.

 

[oldhawkfan]

WTF?

"Pete Carroll say son @710ESPNSeattle has calls into Neil deGrasse Tyson"

I'm at a total loss as to what this means. Looks like randomly pieced together words.

"Pete Carroll write daughter @710espnseattle has balls onto Neil Patrick Harris" -- Equally incoherent.

Perhaps you are unaware that Neil deGrasse Tyson is a well respected physicist?

Yup. I had no idea. I thought maybe he was some actor or recording artist.

Still doesn't explain the rest of the sentence though. But now I know it's in reference to the lateral.

Bob is saying Pete was serious about asking Neil to explain why it was a legal lateral.

I hope he does as it would be funny as hell to hear him explain it one way or the other. I follow him on Twitter and he's quite the wit.

Maybe he will use Schroedingers cat as a reference point. This was the play that was neither a lateral nor a pass yet it was both.

 

[xgeoff]

Hey what about the facemask that wasn't called on PRich? Oh wait he's a SEAHAWK that got screwed over, nevermind.

This is exactly what I was thinking. The Philly Media made a big deal about the lateral but they said nothing...NOTHING about this obvious miss that the refs had when PRich got facemasked on the pass.

Bottom line is that these things happen in a football game. If you lose because one call did not go your way, then you were not good enough to win. Period.

That being said, the lateral was obviously a forward pass, but it's up to the Eagles to challenge it. They didn't, so quit crying. It should be a non-issue.

 

[twisted_steel2]

Hey what about the facemask that wasn't called on PRich? Oh wait he's a SEAHAWK that got screwed over, nevermind.

This is exactly what I was thinking. The Philly Media made a big deal about the lateral but they said nothing...NOTHING about this obvious miss that the refs had when PRich got facemasked on the pass.

Bottom line is that these things happen in a football game. If you lose because one call did not go your way, then you were not good enough to win. Period.

That being said, the lateral was obviously a forward pass, but it's up to the Eagles to challenge it. They didn't, so quit crying. It should be a non-issue.

Just reading some reactions on Twitter and Reddit, these Iggles fans have been having a cake walk of a season so far, if this game and the officiating is causing them to have a meltdown.

This is nothing, that game was a 2 or 3 out of 10 in the realm of being screwed over by the football gods.

 

[253hawk]

Yup. I had no idea. I thought maybe he was some actor or recording artist.

Still doesn't explain the rest of the sentence though. But now I know it's in reference to the lateral.

After the Bengals game here in OT where they kicked the game-winner off the post, he explained the coriolis effect helping by moving about 1/3 of an inch between the time the ball was kicked and when it hit the post. He's also given talks here locally and visited VMAC last year for a practice IIRC. Carroll being the celeb-friendly guy he is probably hit him up to explain what the science is behind the lateral going both forward and backwards at the same time.

 

[MD5eahawks]

https://youtu.be/box08lq9ylg

Rugby did all the research for us. Not saying this is how the rule is written, but this is how I've seen it interpreted in all my years watching and playing, and in my opinion, how it definitely should be defined in American Football as well.

From what I saw in this video I would stand on the legal lateral side. That video hits the mark when it reviews the over the head lateral. But this is America, where we have to have our own spin on rules governed by ancient sports. And you know how the NFL is. I can hear the debate now.

It's ruled relative to the players positions to one another.

No, it's ruled by the balls path relative to the ground.

:snack:

 

[xgeoff]

Hey what about the facemask that wasn't called on PRich? Oh wait he's a SEAHAWK that got screwed over, nevermind.

This is exactly what I was thinking. The Philly Media made a big deal about the lateral but they said nothing...NOTHING about this obvious miss that the refs had when PRich got facemasked on the pass.

Bottom line is that these things happen in a football game. If you lose because one call did not go your way, then you were not good enough to win. Period.

That being said, the lateral was obviously a forward pass, but it's up to the Eagles to challenge it. They didn't, so quit crying. It should be a non-issue.

Just reading some reactions on Twitter and Reddit, these Iggles fans have been having a cake walk of a season so far, if this game and the officiating is causing them to have a meltdown.

This is nothing, that game was a 2 or 3 out of 10 in the realm of being screwed over by the football gods.

Yep. Just about everyone but the Eagles and the Eagles' Fans knew they have had an easy schedule so far. They should view this as a wakeup call that they will need to play better against better teams. They have no idea what being screwed by the refs is really like. Somebody send them some video from Super Bowl XL. Jeez.

 

[rjdriver]

If you examine it carefully you will see that it was clearly back and to the left.

Back and to the left

Back and to the left

Back and to the left

 

[Sox-n-Hawks]

Wow, a close call finally goes the Seahawks way and then everyone loses their minds. How about we look at the holding penalties that were never called Lane Johnson against Michael Bennett. Bottom line if a team tries to pin their loss on one call or non-call they left too many opportunities on the field.

 

[KiwiHawk]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/bcondotta/status/937738484894261251[/tweet]

:snack:

WTF?

"Pete Carroll say son @710ESPNSeattle has calls into Neil deGrasse Tyson"

I'm at a total loss as to what this means. Looks like randomly pieced together words.

"Pete Carroll write daughter @710espnseattle has balls onto Neil Patrick Harris" -- Equally incoherent.

Allow me to translate:

Pete Carroll's son has telephoned famous physicist Neil deGrasse Tyson who may be able to provide an explanation.

 

[hawknation2017]

https://youtu.be/box08lq9ylg

Rugby did all the research for us. Not saying this is how the rule is written, but this is how I've seen it interpreted in all my years watching and playing, and in my opinion, how it definitely should be defined in American Football as well.

Yup. Illegal forward pass is never called in this situation, at least not by any competent referee, when the pass is thrown backward but is carried slightly forward by its momentum. The force that was acted upon the ball was backward to a trailing player.

 

[TransGenderHawkFan]

Why don't we discuss a truly egregious call where Shaq Griffin was called for holding, but the replay showed no holding and the WR striking Griffin in the head near half a dozen times.

 

[rossob]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/bcondotta/status/937738484894261251[/tweet]

:snack:

WTF?

"Pete Carroll say son @710ESPNSeattle has calls into Neil deGrasse Tyson"

I'm at a total loss as to what this means. Looks like randomly pieced together words.

"Pete Carroll write daughter @710espnseattle has balls onto Neil Patrick Harris" -- Equally incoherent.

Allow me to translate:

Pete Carroll's son has telephoned famous physicist Neil deGrasse Tyson who may be able to provide an explanation.

I believe Condotta just misplaced a blank space and it should read "Pete Carroll says on..."

 

[Mad Dog]

NFL is notorious for having rules that defy physics. The lateral is no different. Russ threw the ball behind him. Physics carried it forward. It should be legal but nitpickers will always try to interpret things by the letter of the law rather than the meaning of the law. It's like getting a speeding ticket for going 1 mph over the speed limit.
Or like penalizing KJ Wright for illegal touching on on a ball already going out of bounds in the end zone.

Some things are technically against the rules but should be allowed.

 

[onanygivensunday]

The NFL rule is poorly written and should be changed to better align with the Rugby rule.

When analyzing the motion of objects using the laws of Physics, one must first choose a frame of reference.

The intent of the Rugby rule establishes, in essence, the frame of reference being relative to the position of the two players at the time of the release of the ball... and aligns with the first part of the NFL rule.

The problem arises because the second part of the NFL rule uses a different frame of reference, namely it switches from the Rugby version (relative to the position of the players at release) to the position of the ball when released and when caught relative to the position on the field.

A lot people here have used the words "forward momentum" when explaining their take on what happened. Technically, they should be using the terms "relative and absolute velocity". Yes, the ball has momentum but momentum doesn't explain the Physics involved.

Since Russ is running with the ball, he and the ball together have a relative velocity in the direction of the opponent's goal line (we'll establish that direction to be positive (+) in our frame of reference... the speed is not in question... just the direction of the velocity). And when the ball leaves Russ's hand, the velocity of the ball relative to the players is negative (-), that is, away from the opponent's goal line. That is why the play looks legit.

But... when determining the absolute velocity of the ball, both components of the ball in motion must be mathematically taken into account... the one towards the opponent's goal line (Russ running with the ball at the time of the release) and the one away from it (the flip backs towards Davis who is running behind and to the side of Russ).

The velocity of the ball while in Russ's hand going toward the opponent's goal line is slightly greater than the velocity of the ball tossed backwards towards Davis... that difference in velocity, taking into account how many seconds the ball was in flight, is why the ball travels forward approximately one yard after leaving Russ's hand.

Hope that makes sense.

Signed, retired Boeing engineer with a BS in Mechanical Engineering.

 

[Seymour]

"Easiest" way to fix this is put the entire field on a giant treadmill. When the QB pitches the ball to the runner, turn it on the same speed they are running and now the ball does not move closer to the opposing teams goal when it's lateraled behind the QB.

Just don't forget to turn it off when the RB catches the ball. :mrgreen: