JANUARY 29, 2007
Director of Officiating Mike Pereira stated that the NFL would like to see a taunting penalty called for actions similar to what Reggie Bush did when he pointed back at Brian Urlacher as he was about to score in the NFC Championship game. My question is, if Bush was flagged for taunting, would the touchdown have counted? – Ted K.
I suspect that if the NFL put in a penalty for the "bush" actions by Bush, it would be similar to the present NCAA rule regarding taunting. That rule results in an Unsportsmanlike Conduct foul that is considered a live ball foul assessed as a dead ball foul. If that were the case, the result would be a 15 yard penalty on the PAT or on the ensuing kick-off but the TD would count. Now of course if the NFL Competition Committee wanted to get really tough, they could make it a live ball foul which would result in a penalty from the point where Bush initially taunted Urlacher. In that case, the TD would not have counted. However, personally I do not see the NFL owners having the backbone to do such a thing. The key thing is whether the owners really want to stop this sort of thing or just give lip service to stopping it. Unfortunately, we are seeing the NFL go the way of the NBA and in the end, the results will probably be the same.
My understanding is that Bush earned approximately $8M in 2006 based on salary and signing bonuses. That breaks down to about $500,000 a game (for 16 games). The NFL fined him $5000 for his taunting actions. That is 1/100 of his game check for a game. To put that in perspective, if any of our readers make $100,000 a year, the comparable fine would have been $1,000 or if they make $50,000 a year, the equivalent would be $500. And that is before taxes.
As fines like this can be written off as a business expense and assuming that the individual is in the highest federal bracket and has a state income tax of 5%, the total tax would be about 45%. So the equivalent cost to Bush was either about $550 or $275. For these players, that is the cost of a single cab ride for them and their "posse."
So if anyone thinks that the NFL is serious about ending that kind of taunting, think again. The only thing that will work is if Urlacher had followed him into the end zone and broken his leg. But of course, he probably would have incurred a $5000 fine for doing so. But at least Bush would think twice before doing it again.
JANAURY 15, 2007
A delay of game penalty where the offense is trying to get a penalty to have more room to punt. Can the defense decline that penalty? -- Joe F.
Yes, the yardage for any penalty, including a delay of game on 4th down, can be declined. For some reason, most coaches go right along with what the opponents want and give them the 5 yards. Personally, I have never been able to figure out why they do that.
The Patriots/Chargers game just finished and I have a question about a non-call on the Chargers last drive. Philip Rivers spiked the ball to stop the clock. Just then, one of the Patriots (obviously knowing the play would be to stop the clock) broke through the line unnecessarily and gave Rivers a hearty shove, knocking him backwards. Shouldn't that be called as unnecessary roughness? Or possibly delay of game - as the play clock was running and Rivers was interferred with? I'm not a Chargers fan and think that an unsportsmanlike act like that should warrant a penalty. Thanks for your column as I have learned quite a bit this season reading it. -- Lonnie F.
Thanks for reading and the compliment. As for the play in the Chargers game, the "shove" on Rivers was not as "hearty" as you might suspect. He clearly took an additional step backwards and then just did a flop. The ruling on the field was that the contact did not warrant a flag. Based on what I saw, I agree.
There is no way that it could have been called Delay of Game or anything related. The clock was stopped when Rivers spiked the ball and thus there was no delay or any other infraction. Had the Patriots player followed through on the contact with Rivers and thrown him to the ground or landed on top of him, you might have seen a flag but remember, this was a play-off game and the tendency in the play-offs is to let more go without a flag than occurs during the regular season.
JANAURY 9, 2007
Follow up on my previous question on the dead ball fouls. I follow what was said and I understand however, I was also under the impression that two unsportsmanlike or personal fouls were cause for ejection. Runyan, clearly had two, why no ejection? — Jon V.
There is no limit in the NFL rule book regarding the number of fouls that must result in an ejection. A player may be ejected for any act that is considered "flagrant" by the officials, whether it is the first or the fifth foul that he has incurred. The two Unsportsmanlike Conduct Foul ejection rule is only in the NCAA rule book. There is no limit to the number of Personal Fouls that a player may incur in either the NFL or the NCAA rule books.
JANAURY 8, 2007
I thought I understood the rules concerning who touches the ball after a punt. However, the 'illegal touching' call after the the punt in the Giant game has me confused. Can you explain how the sequence of events on that punt led to that call by the officials? Eric F.
Rule 9-1-4 - No member of the kicking team shall be the first to touch a scrimmage kick beyond the line of scrimmage. The penalty is that the ball is awarded to the receiving team at the spot of "first touching." Once the ball has been touched by the kicking team, it may be advanced by a member of the kicking team with the recognition that whatever happens on the play (i.e., a fumble), other than a penalty, the worst that can happen is that the ball will belong to the receivers at the spot of first touching. Actually, McQuarters made a smart play in that the worst thing that was going to happen was that the Giants would get the ball at the one yard line.
On the penalties involving Jon Runyan and then Barry Cofield; since they were all dead ball fouls why weren't they administered in the order they occurred. Meaning Runyan's fouls would have incurred 30 yards in fouls then, return 15 yards, due to the Cofield penalty. I didn't think that dead ball fouls "offset" each other, only live ball fouls? -- Jon V.
Rule 14-1-8 states: "Dead ball fouls by both teams are offset at the succeeding spot and the down counts ..." This rule was changed a number of years ago to get away from: a) trying to figure who did what to who first; and b) avoid the inequity that occurs when the fouls occur near the goal line. In addition, Rule 3-11-2 (c) indicates that a "Double foul ... includes any multiple foul by either team, including dead ball fouls." As a result, no matter how many fouls one or the other teams have, they all offset even if there is an inequity between the number of fouls by each team. Given all of the above, the call on the field Sunday was correct.
By the way, the rules in the college game were changed a year or two ago to be basically the same as the NFL rules. The only time that you will have the fouls enforced in their order of occurrence is when there is a distinct time lag between fouls.
I have one clarification on the McQuarters punt play. The clarification is that after the first touching, the officials are supposed to "continue to officiate" and, as the ball had been touched by a receiving team player and then recovered by a kicking team player, the result of the play was a recovery by Philadelphia. Thus, the signal for an Eagles recovery/ball. However, once the first touching infraction was enforced, the ball reverted to the receiving team (Giants) as a result of the first touching infraction. |
