Does Belichick Have Trouble With The Rulebook ?

dw49 · October 22, 2013

I'm not a Spy Gate expert but didn't he have some of those rules wrong back then too ? For such a smart guy ... and he is smart.. you would think he know this stuff ?

N.Y. Jets warned refs about Patriots' field-goal tactic

479

By Dan Hanzus
Around the League Writer
Published: Oct. 21, 2013 at 04:02 p.m.
Updated: Oct. 21, 2013 at 07:14 p.m.

Did Rex Ryan pull one over on Bill Belichick?

On NFL Network
NFL Replay
will re-air the New York Jets' 30-27 win over theNew England Patriots from Week 7 on Tuesday, Oct. 22 at 2 p.m. ET.

» NFL Network schedule

NFL Media's Albert Breer reported Monday that Jetscoaches alerted officials to "several things to watch for" when the Patriots were on special teams before Sunday's 30-27 overtime win.

That included Patriots players pushing each other into an offensive formation during field-goal attempts. In other words, exactly the type of push Patriots defensive tackleChris Jones gave a teammate on Nick Folk's first field-goal attempt in overtime on Sunday.

Jones was flagged on the play, and Folk's missed 56-yard attempt was wiped off the books. The Jetswere marched 15 yards deeper into Pats' territory, setting up Folk's 42-yard game-winner four plays later.

Patriots coach Bill Belichick admitted Monday that he misinterpreted the rule and coached his players to make that play. Jets coach Rex Ryan didn't want to focus on the game-changing play during his Monday press conference.

"The focus is going to be wherever you guys want it to be," Ryan said,according to Newsday. "But we outplayed New England -- and that's why we won the game."

Ryan -- perhaps surprisingly -- chose not to confirm whether or not he had spoken with officials about the Patriots' illicit special-teams strategy.

"Let's put it this way, we watch every single play of the opponent," Ryan said. "So you know, we're aware of opponent's tendencies."

Ryan often doesn't play coy, but you can read between the lines here. Score one for Rex.

The "Around The League Podcast" is now available on iTunes! Click here to listen and subscribe.

PREVIOUS ARTICLE NEXT ARTICLE

"Bears moving on?..."

shakedownstreet · October 22, 2013

somewhere belichick is still screaming about the call right now

Flying Elvis · October 22, 2013

patriots+screwed.jpg

jets+GIF.gif

oldunclemark · October 22, 2013

nobody knew that rule....stop

jvan1973 · October 22, 2013

nobody knew that rule....stop

apparently rex did. He alerted the refs about the pats doing it

ReMeDy · October 22, 2013

Oh I'm certain he knows about them, and how couldn't he; he is surrounded by a huge staff of talented personnel. Yet somehow not one of them mentioned, "Uhh Bill, you know we can't push our own guys in the back, right?... Uhh Bill, you know we can't steal plays from the opposing team, right?"

The level of micro-management the Pats do is insane, yet they miss such obvious rule flaws? The Pats consistently find suitors to trade down in the draft and they sign/trade like crazy. I also remember when they cleverly "stole" Jake Ballard from the Giants. Yet somehow in all that micro-management of tiny details, the Patriots never read the rule-book? I don't buy it.

21isSuperman · October 22, 2013

The Pats got hosed. From the camera angle they had on TV, it didn't even look like anyone was pushed. I'm sure Belichick knows the rules, but the players just had a brain lapse. I don't think they coached that. And I don't think it even happened, to be honest

jvan1973 · October 22, 2013

The Pats got hosed. From the camera angle they had on TV, it didn't even look like anyone was pushed. I'm sure Belichick knows the rules, but the players just had a brain lapse. I don't think they coached that. And I don't think it even happened, to be honest

Bill said today that he coaches them to do that

21isSuperman · October 22, 2013

Bill said today that he coaches them to do that

Oh, wow. I didn't know that. That changes things haha

dw49 · October 22, 2013

nobody knew that rule....stop

Are you serious ? They introduce a new rule in 2013 and you think "nobody knows the rule ?" Other words... let me get this right... all of the 32 NFL coaching staffs decided that they didn't need to find out what this new rule was about ? Just take the 15 yard penalty if your team screws it up. OK... I'll "stop."

jvan1973 · October 22, 2013

Oh, wow. I didn't know that. That changes things

Read the article in the op. He may just be saying that to take the heat off of the players. I'm not sure. Seems like a dumb rule to me

BOTT · October 22, 2013

I wish refs would swallow the whistle in those types of situations ..end of game and it didn't affect the play and on a kick he was likely to miss if given multiple attempts.

21isSuperman · October 22, 2013

Read the article in the op. He may just be saying that to take the heat off of the players. I'm not sure. Seems like a dumb rule to me

Oh, yeah, there it is. I was looking for a quote from Belichick and didn't see it, so I missed it

dw49 · October 22, 2013

Read the article in the op. He may just be saying that to take the heat off of the players. I'm not sure. Seems like a dumb rule to me

It's another attempt at making the game safer. I would guess that it was agreed upon that this type thing can cause injury and pushing players into other players does nothing to make the game better. But for sure it seems like a lame way to lose a football game. Crime didn't fit the punishment.

-JJ- · October 22, 2013

I'm not a Spy Gate expert but didn't he have some of those rules wrong back then too ? For such a smart guy ... and he is smart.. you would think he know this stuff ?

Here's the deal on that.

Page 105 of the 2007 NFL Game Operations Manual states, "No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game...All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."

Belichick stated that he believed that if footage so collected was not used during the game, its collection was legal, as the NFL Constitution and Bylaws stipulate that "...any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited...including without limitation...any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game." In a September 2006 memorandum sent out by NFL Vice President of Football Operations Ray Anderson, though, all teams were told that "videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game."

an act deemed by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to be in violation of league rules

The NFL is a very private club. Belichick does not argue with the league. Put this in normal life situations and he maybe could win his argument in court.

I've played a lot of serious board games where reading the rules to use against your opponent was half the battle. Same with construction specifications.The words better be phrased perfectly including a comma in the correct place. There is NO intent.

Does one really think BB would film in front of Mangini just a few blocks from NFL HQ if he was trying to be secret?

On the FG kick rule. eh it doesn't matter. That's a game penalty. You often break a rule on purpose and take the penalty if they catch it. Take a linemen blatantly holding to save his QB from getting crushed. If they see it you get a penalty but at least the QB didn't get crushed.

Pass Interference, how many times have you seen that on purpose to save a TD. If the refs catch it, oh well.

No big deal here.

dw49 · October 22, 2013

Here's the deal on that.
Page 105 of the 2007 NFL Game Operations Manual states, "No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game...All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."
Belichick stated that he believed that if footage so collected was not used during the game, its collection was legal, as the NFL Constitution and Bylaws stipulate that "...any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited...including without limitation...any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game." In a September 2006 memorandum sent out by NFL Vice President of Football Operations Ray Anderson, though, all teams were told that "videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited on the sidelines, in the coaches' booth, in the locker room, or at any other locations accessible to club staff members during the game."

an act deemed by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to be in violation of league rules

The NFL is a very private club. Belichick does not argue with the league. Put this in normal life situations and he maybe could win his argument in court.

I've played a lot of serious board games where reading the rules to use against your opponent was half the battle. Same with construction specifications.The words better be phrased perfectly including a comma in the correct place. There is NO intent.

Does one really think BB would film in front of Mangini just a few blocks from NFL HQ if he was trying to be secret?

On the FG kick rule. eh it doesn't matter. That's a game penalty. You often break a rule on purpose and take the penalty if they catch it. Take a linemen blatantly holding to save his QB from getting crushed. If they see it you get a penalty but at least the QB didn't get crushed.
Pass Interference, how many times have you seen that on purpose to save a TD. If the refs catch it, oh well.

No big deal here.

Thanks , it comes back to me a bit as I read that. I can't say I had a lot of sympathy for the Pats back then as the Colts needed all the help they could get. But yeah... IMO... about as you say.

Poster X · October 22, 2013

Revenge for the tuck rule.

-JJ- · October 22, 2013

Thanks , it comes back to me a bit as I read that. I can't say I had a lot of sympathy for the Pats back then as the Colts needed all the help they could get. But yeah... IMO... about as you say.

hehe wouldn't expect sympathy back then

I just wish people get it straight. But they'd rather not cus' then their ammunition is gone, duds, kaput

Synthetic · October 22, 2013

Pats got screwed for the first time in god knows how long. Enjoy it while it lasts cause it will not happen again

http://boston.barstoolsports.com/m/random-thoughts/nfl-changed-the-push-rule-after-they-called-it/

dw49 · October 22, 2013

Pats got screwed for the first time in god knows how long. Enjoy it while it lasts cause it will not happen again

http://boston.barstoolsports.com/m/random-thoughts/nfl-changed-the-push-rule-after-they-called-it/

That Boston barstool is about as accurate as "the Onion." While they are correct on the rule they post , they leave out the additional one the Pats were penalized for. They probably could have just worded one rule to cover pushing on the second level and pushing on the line of scrimmage but fact is there are rules that cover both. The only thing that was incorrect is what they called the penalty unsportsmanlike conduct and should have called it unnecessary roughness.

http://www.ibtimes.com/push-rule-conspiracy-theory-nfl-did-not-alter-controversial-rule-after-jets-patriots-game-despite

Here's a bit of the explanation...

Despite the accusations of alleged misdeeds by the NFL, Deadspin's Barry Petchesky points out that the league never altered the wording of the rule in the one place where the wording actually matters -- the NFL rulebook. According to the rulebook, the push rule, also known as rule 9.1.3(b)(2), reads as follows:

(b) When Team A presents a field-goal or Try Kick formation:

(2) Team B players cannot push teammates on the line of scrimmage into the offensive formation.

In other words, the NFL.com article’s inclusion of the phrase “second level” -- which refers to the group of players directly behind the line of scrimmage -- was purely an editorial decision on the part of the website’s editors, and has nothing to do with the official NFL rule.

Yehoodi · October 22, 2013

I guess ultimately the team is responsible for reading the rule book on such matter and new rules . . . and none of us will ever know what the ultimate intent of the rule was and legislative intent is important in understanding rules and why they were in place . . . I have heard and read that the rule was in place to prevent injuries and this pushing was common place before . . . I have also heard that the rule was put in place to specifically stop the practice of LBs and DBs (i.e. players from the "second level") getting a 2-4 step running start and crashing into the line and push the pile, getting a running start as opposed to start your push flat footed (i.e linemen doing it). . .

from the NFL website (which was changed btw after the incident) and an audio from a video of the VP of officiating, the NFL was clear that the rule only prohibited pushing from a second level player . . . one does not know what was written in any letters to the teams . . . but if the letters had similar language, and the history of the second level pushing was known and was going to be eliminated (i.e. legislative intent of the rule), it would be understandable that a coach given the three sources of the rule citing second level, would not find it necessary to then read the rule book . . .

ones does not know if they were warned as there were conflicting stories between the two teams if they were or were not warned . . . and even if they were warned it would be understandable not to heed the warning if all of your other contacts with the NFL was that it only dealt with 2nd level players, and as such, the refs would be viewed as being incorrect . . . kind of like a ref warning a coach to watch the grabbing at the LOS, know full well that it can happen up to 5 yards, then get a flag for a grab at 4 yards and fine out after the game the NFL had changed to rule to 3 yards . . .

my guess is that they warned them, but given the confusion between the NFL public stance and position of the VP of officiating and the actual rule, to call it for the first time in over 400 tries this year, in OT on a critical 56 yard attempt is harsh in my view . . .

I'm not a Spy Gate expert but didn't he have some of those rules wrong back then too ? For such a smart guy ... and he is smart.. you would think he know this stuff ?

dw49 · October 22, 2013

I guess ultimately the team is responsible for reading the rule book on such matter and new rules . . . and none of us will ever know what the ultimate intent of the rule was and legislative intent is important in understanding rules and why they were in place . . . I have heard and read that the rule was in place to prevent injuries and this pushing was common place before . . . I have also heard that the rule was put in place to specifically stop the practice of LBs and DBs (i.e. players from the "second level") getting a 2-4 step running start and crashing into the line and push the pile, getting a running start as opposed to start your push flat footed (i.e linemen doing it). . .

from the NFL website (which was changed btw after the incident) and an audio from a video of the VP of officiating, the NFL was clear that the rule only prohibited pushing from a second level player . . . one does not know what was written in any letters to the teams . . . but if the letters had similar language, and the history of the second level pushing was known and was going to be eliminated (i.e. legislative intent of the rule), it would be understandable that a coach given the three sources of the rule citing second level, would not find it necessary to then read the rule book . . .

ones does not know if they were warned as there were conflicting stories between the two teams if they were or were not warned . . . and even if they were warned it would be understandable not to heed the warning if all of your other contacts with the NFL was that it only dealt with 2nd level players, and as such, the refs would be viewed as being incorrect . . . kind of like a ref warning a coach to watch the grabbing at the LOS, know full well that it can happen up to 5 yards, then get a flag for a grab at 4 yards and fine out after the game the NFL had changed to rule to 3 yards . . .

my guess is that they warned them, but given the confusion between the NFL public stance and position of the VP of officiating and the actual rule, to call it for the first time in over 400 tries this year, in OT on a critical 56 yard attempt is harsh in my view . . .

What I have posted disputes your claim of .....

from the NFL website (which was changed btw after the incident) and an audio from a video of the VP of officiating, the NFL was clear that the rule only prohibited pushing from a second level player

Did you read any of it ? It states that there is additional language that prohibits pushing on the line of scrimmage. If so what is your source that the NFL went in and doctored the rule book after that call ? I really don't believe for a minute what you have is correct.

amfootball · October 22, 2013

I still can't believe the Sox are in the World Series...again!! Just so improbable. Love this team. Just love it.

Pats will come more into focus in about two weeks. Still 5-2 and in first. Pretty much where I thought the team would be at this point but am wondering if all the injuries will come home to roost. Just so much to overcome this year ....

OffensivelyPC · October 22, 2013

I still can't believe the Sox are in the World Series...again!! Just so improbable. Love this team. Just love it.

Pats will come more into focus in about two weeks. Still 5-2 and in first. Pretty much where I thought the team would be at this point but am wondering if all the injuries will come home to roost. Just so much to overcome this year ....

You think you've got injury issues...I'm amazed we're at 5-2. No one, including myself, would have dreamed we woudl be 5-2 at this point in the season. I believed and had faith in our team, but being as objective as possible, the odds weren't in our favor. I thought AT BEST 4-3, but probably 3-4 as I didn'tk now how much we were ready to compete with SF. And with all the injuries we've been dealing with, simply amazing.

As for the WS, I think you guys got a good shot. Not really rooting for anyone in particular, but expect a good series.

amfootball · October 22, 2013

You think you've got injury issues...I'm amazed we're at 5-2. No one, including myself, would have dreamed we woudl be 5-2 at this point in the season. I believed and had faith in our team, but being as objective as possible, the odds weren't in our favor. I thought AT BEST 4-3, but probably 3-4 as I didn'tk now how much we were ready to compete with SF. And with all the injuries we've been dealing with, simply amazing.

As for the WS, I think you guys got a good shot. Not really rooting for anyone in particular, but expect a good series.

The Colts are having an impressive season. No question. I think the wins are as surprising as the losses. I think for a young team you are playing to the level of your competition a bit. Once you start to play like the team you are against the lesser teams then the losses will be even fewer.

The injuries stink. I believe the Pats would be 7-0 without the injuries but many teams could probably make that claim. In the end, it is about players 23-53 for every team which is why I love Bill. He always prepares for the injuries but just so many kep guys gone for the season this year that I wonder if the Pats may have hit the tipping point. You may have too with the loss of Reggie. I guess we will find out soon enough ...

I am excited to the World Series. I have to admit that I am not nearly as knowledgable about baseball as football but it seems like the Cardnals are a carbon copy of the Sox which makes me nervous. I knew Detroit had a lousy bullpen and poor defense so I was confident Sox would win but Cardnals will be tough. Very happy the Sox have home field. That may end up being the difference in a series that I think will go 7.

Yehoodi · October 22, 2013

What I have posted disputes your claim of .....

from the NFL website (which was changed btw after the incident) and an audio from a video of the VP of officiating, the NFL was clear that the rule only prohibited pushing from a second level player

Did you read any of it ? It states that there is additional language that prohibits pushing on the line of scrimmage. If so what is your source that the NFL went in and doctored the rule book after that call ? I really don't believe for a minute what you have is correct.

here is a link to the NFL website that has language and audio which differs from the rule book . . . the individual in the video is Dean Blandino, VP of Officials in the NFL . . . although this page has been edited it does not look like it was edited in a substantive matter . . . but regardless . . . this page is the following

1) a page from the NFL website

2) posted at the start of the season

3) has a video of the VP of officials describing the new rule

4) and text explaining the rule . . .

consequently, this is the NFL's position on the rule at the start of this season, mistaken or not, in compliance with its Rules Book or not, but is one source of the NFL's position on the rule . . . no one knows which position was conveyed to the teams, the one in the link (which would mean what the pats did was not a penalty) or the one in the rule book, which would be a penalty . . .

as you can see from the video the VP of officials (the one that typically handles public and team interaction) describes the rule as only prohibiting pushing from players from the "second" level and this is supported by the text which only prohibits players who are "not on the line of scrimmage at the snap" . . . that is the "second" level . . .

so if the refs in the NE=Jets game were using this link to the NFL website, they would not have called the penalty . . .

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000237712/article/new-nfl-rules-overloading-line-restriction-will-protect-linemen

EDIT: Sorry do not have a link to my point about the pats players, I watched it last night on around the league where a boston and ny reporter were on the the former indicated that pats players told him that they were not warned . . . either way given the difference in the link I cited and the rule book you can see the potential for confusion

TAPLOOK · October 22, 2013

somewhere belichick is still screaming about the call right now

No he isn't.

Miami is what he's thinking about.

TAPLOOK · October 22, 2013

What's the big deal? The Patriots lost on a call. A ref never wants to be the deciding factor in a game but it has happened before and will happen again.

amfootball · October 22, 2013

What's the big deal? The Patriots lost on a call. A ref never wants to be the deciding factor in a game but it has happened before and will happen again.

It's a HUGE deal. That was the Super Bowl for the Jets. ;)

Yehoodi · October 22, 2013

What I have posted disputes your claim of .....

from the NFL website (which was changed btw after the incident) and an audio from a video of the VP of officiating, the NFL was clear that the rule only prohibited pushing from a second level player

Did you read any of it ? It states that there is additional language that prohibits pushing on the line of scrimmage. If so what is your source that the NFL went in and doctored the rule book after that call ? I really don't believe for a minute what you have is correct.

oh btw, just for your reference, the change has now taken effect, gone from the text now is the language "not on the line of scrimmage" and now the text reads just like the rule . . . if you clicked on the link this morning, you would of seen a update date of sept. 4, the next day, must of been some minor change . . . but like I referenced the major change in question had not be in effect . . . now you can see the update as being Oct. 20 at 6:32 pm, which is this past Sunday night . . . and the substantive change has been made to the portion of the article it cite above . . . they have yet to change the video . . .

I don't really care what happens or opinions, but at a minimum a person can see there are mixed signals coming from the NFL regarding a new rule . . . this was my only point . . .

dw49 · October 22, 2013

oh btw, just for your reference, the change has now taken effect, gone from the text now is the language "not on the line of scrimmage" and now the text reads just like the rule . . . if you clicked on the link this morning, you would of seen a update date of sept. 4, the next day, must of been some minor change . . . but like I referenced the major change in question had not be in effect . . . now you can see the update as being Oct. 20 at 6:32 pm, which is this past Sunday night . . . and the substantive change has been made to the portion of the article it cite above . . . they have yet to change the video . . .

I don't really care what happens or opinions, but at a minimum a person can see there are mixed signals coming from the NFL regarding a new rule . . . this was my only point . . .

Sure , no problem. I just think that since no NFL coach , GM , owner .. anyone who would have had access to the new rule does not say they (NFL) stepped in and changed the rule in the middle of the night .. it probably didn't happen. But who am I to say ..?and your doing all the research , so rather than me start doing what you are doing , I'm just going to take a pass at this point in time. God , those are some terrible sentences that I constructed. Anyway , I do think that a guy like Jerry Jones would have no issue coming out and saying the NFL is playing those kinds of games. For that reason , I think they would just own up to a mistake rather than change rules after the fact and lie about it.

Yehoodi · October 23, 2013

Sure , no problem. I just think that since no NFL coach , GM , owner .. anyone who would have had access to the new rule does not say they (NFL) stepped in and changed the rule in the middle of the night .. it probably didn't happen. But who am I to say ..?and your doing all the research , so rather than me start doing what you are doing , I'm just going to take a pass at this point in time. God , those are some terrible sentences that I constructed. Anyway , I do think that a guy like Jerry Jones would have no issue coming out and saying the NFL is playing those kinds of games. For that reason , I think they would just own up to a mistake rather than change rules after the fact and lie about it.

Actually I do not think there was a cover-up or things were changed in the rule book, just that the website was changed to comply with the rule book . . . I just think they got their signals crossed . .. the rule book is clear on the matter . . . I heard on the radio this morning that when the rule was proposed in Feb. it was as the VP of officials indicated, only the second level players were prohibited . . . then when the competition committee met in March they decided to have it applied to all defensive players . . . so it is likely they had two drafts lying around . . . which normally is not a problem . . . but sometimes if you don't tell everyone, you got two stories coming from the same entity . . . this is what I think happened . . .

. . . surely one can require that the coach read the rule book (especially just the section on new rules), which has the rule as administered, but maybe sometimes one is lazy and just goes with what they are told . . . just looked at my copy there are 7 new rules and the table of contents in the rule book just references what the new rule do and does not go into get detail, so one would have to go to each rule to read it . . . which might take some time, but not a great deal . . . perhaps some would just rather go with what they are told . . . we will never know what BB was told, was he told as the VP mentioned (initial proposal) or as it was in the rule book (final draft) . . . I can understand to a degree a coach taking what he is told and going with it . . .

I also heard rumors today that two weeks ago Miami did the exact same thing and it was brought to the league who then sent out letters to all of the teams indicating this is prohibited . . . who knows how it was worded . . . regardless, we have the NFL with two different proposed versions and we have a possibility that BB knew which one was the one the NFL wanted to use . . . . BB in his radio gig yesterday said he was wrong . . .

dw49 · October 23, 2013

Actually I do not think there was a cover-up or things were changed in the rule book, just that the website was changed to comply with the rule book . . . I just think they got their signals crossed . .. the rule book is clear on the matter . . . I heard on the radio this morning that when the rule was proposed in Feb. it was as the VP of officials indicated, only the second level players were prohibited . . . then when the competition committee met in March they decided to have it applied to all defensive players . . . so it is likely they had two drafts lying around . . . which normally is not a problem . . . but sometimes if you don't tell everyone, you got two stories coming from the same entity . . . this is what I think happened . . .

. . . surely one can require that the coach read the rule book (especially just the section on new rules), which has the rule as administered, but maybe sometimes one is lazy and just goes with what they are told . . . just looked at my copy there are 7 new rules and the table of contents in the rule book just references what the new rule do and does not go into get detail, so one would have to go to each rule to read it . . . which might take some time, but not a great deal . . . perhaps some would just rather go with what they are told . . . we will never know what BB was told, was he told as the VP mentioned (initial proposal) or as it was in the rule book (final draft) . . . I can understand to a degree a coach taking what he is told and going with it . . .

I also heard rumors today that two weeks ago Miami did the exact same thing and it was brought to the league who then sent out letters to all of the teams indicating this is prohibited . . . who knows how it was worded . . . regardless, we have the NFL with two different proposed versions and we have a possibility that BB knew which one was the one the NFL wanted to use . . . . BB in his radio gig yesterday said he was wrong . . .

In any event , pretty bad beat to lose a game the way that one came down. One thing if happened in the middle of a game but really is a lousy way to have a game end.

Yehoodi · October 23, 2013

In any event , pretty bad beat to lose a game the way that one came down. One thing if happened in the middle of a game but really is a lousy way to have a game end.

yes you are correct . . . however my only two cents on this might be if they were indeed warned during the game and as some point if the ref warns you and you keep doing it, you can not always complain . . . also too as it was a long FG, the angle of the kick would be lower thereby making the push all that more critical on the play . . . indeed, the player that got the closest to the ball was the one that was push and he only missed the ball by a hand length . . . . so it does not bother me too much as the offending play happened right at the point of attack if you will . .. like a hold right as the RB runs by you as opposed to a hold away from the play . . .

I just hope moving forward they start to call this . . . if not then that would be a bummer . ..

southwest1 · October 23, 2013

"We'll take it. We don't care how people look at us as long as our fans know that we're gonna be competing everyday." --HC Rex Ryan press conference after beating the NE Patriots

You should care Rex. The Patriots usually beat you & this victory was not for a Wildcard Playoffs spot. NE has earned my respect. You haven't. You know defense Rex, but NE usually wins Playoffs games. Stop gloating about a remote rule you benefited from very few fans, including myself, were not even aware of. Grow up please. Thank you.

http://www.newyorkjets.com/photos-and-videos/videos/Jets_Postgame_Press_Conference/6248fdc0-10aa-4077-9a13-69e24f40c1bd

southwest1 · October 23, 2013

Slightly off topic: It was nice to see Gronk finally play on game day. He will be perfectly fine in a week or 2 once Brady & Gronk find their rhythm again. I love watching him play actually except when he faces my Colts. Just Kidding!

Okay, back on topic again...

dw49 · October 23, 2013

Slightly off topic: It was nice to see Gronk finally play on game day. He will be perfectly fine in a week or 2 once Brady & Gronk find their rhythm again. I love watching him play actually except when he faces my Colts. Just Kidding!

Okay, back on topic again...

No problem... I think we were done anyway.

southwest1 · October 23, 2013

Actually I do not think there was a cover-up or things were changed in the rule book, just that the website was changed to comply with the rule book . . . I just think they got their signals crossed . .. the rule book is clear on the matter . . . I heard on the radio this morning that when the rule was proposed in Feb. it was as the VP of officials indicated, only the second level players were prohibited . . . then when the competition committee met in March they decided to have it applied to all defensive players . . . so it is likely they had two drafts lying around . . . which normally is not a problem . . . but sometimes if you don't tell everyone, you got two stories coming from the same entity . . . this is what I think happened . . .

. . . surely one can require that the coach read the rule book (especially just the section on new rules), which has the rule as administered, but maybe sometimes one is lazy and just goes with what they are told . . . just looked at my copy there are 7 new rules and the table of contents in the rule book just references what the new rule do and does not go into get detail, so one would have to go to each rule to read it . . . which might take some time, but not a great deal . . . perhaps some would just rather go with what they are told . . . we will never know what BB was told, was he told as the VP mentioned (initial proposal) or as it was in the rule book (final draft) . . . I can understand to a degree a coach taking what he is told and going with it . . .

I also heard rumors today that two weeks ago Miami did the exact same thing and it was brought to the league who then sent out letters to all of the teams indicating this is prohibited . . . who knows how it was worded . . . regardless, we have the NFL with two different proposed versions and we have a possibility that BB knew which one was the one the NFL wanted to use . . . . BB in his radio gig yesterday said he was wrong . . .

I wish more people would pay attention to your last sentence Yehoodi. A lot of people, due to their frustration over NE winning so many games year in; year out seem to take pleasure in painting BB as a evil Darth Vader character who can never admit he made a mistake. Too bad you didn't have the radio link to that interview. It would strengthen your case. Is it on the official website? I'd like to hear what BB said myself. I will do some searching myself.

Look, people can still hate the Pats if they want to, but when a person admits they made a mistake, they deserve credit for that humility. I have always believed that. I live by that principle myself.

southwest1 · October 23, 2013

I wish more people would pay attention to your last sentence Yehoodi. A lot of people, due to their frustration over NE winning so many games year in; year out seem to take pleasure in painting BB as a evil Darth Vader character who can never admit he made a mistake. Too bad you didn't have the radio link to that interview. It would strengthen your case. Is it on the official website? I'd like to hear what BB said myself. I will do some searching myself.

Look, people can still hate the Pats if they want to, but when a person admits they made a mistake, they deserve credit for that humility. I have always believed that. I live by that principle myself.

Based on this link from the Patriots website, BB seems to be deflecting the question or passing the buck to the NFL Rules Committee Yehoodi. Perhaps, you heard a different Q & A session that SW1 is not aware of...I'm trying to be objective & fair here...

http://www.patriots.com/media-center/audio/Bill_Belichick_on_WEEI_10212013/0c810bfa-27b7-4c4a-91da-1f881e430a94

-JJ- · October 23, 2013

Based on this link from the Patriots website, BB seems to be deflecting the question or passing the buck to the NFL Rules Committee Yehoodi. Perhaps, you heard a different Q & A session that SW1 is not aware of...I'm trying to be objective & fair here...

http://www.patriots.com/media-center/audio/Bill_Belichick_on_WEEI_10212013/0c810bfa-27b7-4c4a-91da-1f881e430a94

Looks like Jets did it on our FG to tie but no call

http://itiswhatitis.weei.com/sports/newengland/football/patriots/2013/10/22/bill-belichick-jets-were-using-the-play-themselves-on-field-goal-attempt/

Sign In

Does Belichick Have Trouble With The Rulebook ?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites