Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The new NFL -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: EL KABONG!!! who wrote (24769)	2/4/2009 2:22:39 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 91313

In the case of Fitzgerald, if he were out of bounds to avoid being legally blocked by a Steeler, then that's a penalty, but it's an official's call, not something that could be reviewed or whatever. A Steeler defender could not legally block Fitzgerald while both were out of bounds, but the Steeler could prevent or hinder Fitzgerald from returning to the field without incurring a penalty. I'm not sure about either of those. I believe it is legal to voluntarily run out of bounds, except when covering punts. And I think it's also legal to block an out of bounds player.

To: EL KABONG!!! who wrote (24769)	2/4/2009 2:52:14 PM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 91313

That sounds familiar, but something doesn't feel right. Say the only way you can stop a long breakaway run on the last play of the half or game is a horse collar, trip, facemask, etc. right before the end zone. By not marking the penalty from the spot of the foul you are essentially rewarding the defense for an illegal act-- i.e. if they decline the penalty the half is over; if they accept, the long run is replaced by a mere 15 yard gain. For reference (but much on this topic): supernfl.com - Jeff