Did the Packers get screwed out of a win on Sunday?

[TheKilo]

TMQ:

 

On one Vikings safety, the sprinting-backwards Rodgers was falling down in the end zone and underhand-flipped a pass in the general direction of a Packers' receiver. Referee Alberto Riveron called a safety, announcing to the crowd that the penalty was "illegal forward pass." But illegal forward pass is a 5-yard penalty, and only major penalties committed in the end zone are safeties. Plus, Rodgers' pass was not illegal, it's perfectly legal to throw underhanded. An illegal forward pass is called when someone throws forward after crossing the line of scrimmage, which obviously was not the case here. If the call had been intentional grounding from the end zone, that's a safety. What happened did not appear to be intentional grounding, considering the pass came near an eligible Green Bay receiver.

 

Now add this: The league's Game Book, the official account of the contest, describes the down thusly: "A. Rodgers, Intentional Grounding, 10 yards, enforced in End Zone, SAFETY." So even though the referee announced the penalty as illegal forward pass, the Game Book says the referee called intentional grounding. Was the record altered to avoid evidence of another NFL officiating blunder? All officials make occasional judgment errors; the judgment error cannot be eliminated. But Riveron seems to have made a knowledge-of-the-rules error, inexcusable for a highly paid pro official -- and not the first knowledge-of-the-rules blunder this season by an NFL zebra. Bonus zebra blunder: Officials failed to notice "Cheerio, Chaps" Jauron threw his challenge flag after a long completion credited to the Patriots, but on which receiver Wes Welker was clearly out of bounds. The judgment mistake of not seeing a foot out of bounds is human error; refusing to acknowledge a challenge flag is inexcusable.

[msubulldogs21]

I was watching the Packers game when that happened and was a little confused at the time too. I thought something was wrong.

 

I'm still a little surprised Crosby missed the FG at the end.

[Cocos Disciples]

That sucks. But so it goes.

[See Red]

I honestly don't know, it's hard to say. I think it's fairly obvious he was just throwing the ball away, and it didn't go past the line of scrimmage.

 

It's definetely not an Illegal Forward pass, so a mistake was made there, but in my opinion, as per the NFL rulebook, a safety should've been called as Intentional Grounding is defined as:

 

Intentional Grounding of Forward Pass

Intentional grounding of a forward pass is a foul: loss of down and 10 yards from previous spot if passer is in the field of play or loss of down at the spot of the foul if it occurs more than 10 yards behind the line or safety if passer is in his own end zone when ball is released.

 

Intentional grounding will be called when a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage due to pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion.

 

Intentional grounding will not be called when a passer, while out of the pocket and facing an imminent loss of yardage, throws a pass that lands at or beyond the line of scrimmage, even if no offensive player(s) have a realistic chance to catch the ball (including if the ball lands out of bounds over the sideline or end line).

[TheKilo]

The ball landed at his receiver's feet, though. Can't say it wasn't a realistic chance of completion.

[See Red]

The ball landed at his receiver's feet' date=' though. Can't say it wasn't a realistic chance of completion.[/quote']

 

Well, landed about five yards away, so the receiver didn't have a prayer at catching the ball. In my opinion it wasn't an attempt at completing a pass as much as it was an attempt to avoid the safety, and my interpretation of the rule is that the right call was made.

 

It could go either way, really. I wouldn't say that got screwed, though.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgs5xw6ghKM

[TheKilo]

I guess the next question is was he out of the pocket...

[See Red]

I guess the next question is was he out of the pocket...

 

Didn't go past the line of scrimmage so it doesn't matter. The LOS was just past the 10 yardline, ball hit at about the 9.

 

Intentional grounding bothers me, sometimes. I think the realistic chance of completion part should be emphasized, personally. I hate seeing QB's intentionally throw the ball two behind a RB who's not even looking his way and not getting flagged for it because there was a "receiver in the area."

 

I'll admit, though, that while I think it was the right call, the way intentional grounding is usually called provides a reasonable point for those who think the Packers may have gotten screwed.

[ARod2212]

That shouldn't have been intentional grounding. I've seen passes thrown further from receivers not get whistled. The fact that he got it that close is impressive.

[mtbykr]

I saw that and couldn't figure out what the refs were doing. I understand the intentional grounding rule; however we see plays every week where a QB is getting sacked and throws it at a receivers feet behind the line of scrimmage and there is no penalty. If you want to go by the letter of the law then it's probably intentional grounding.....but not the way it is normally called, and probably wouldn't be if he weren't in the endzone.

[BSN07]

GB screwed themselves when they traded Favre instead of bringing him back 1 more year. I know both had their own faults in the matter.

 

But they where 13-3 last season and 1 play from the SB. Now there hoovering around .500

[TheKilo]

GB screwed themselves when they traded Favre instead of bringing him back 1 more year. I know both had their own faults in the matter.

 

But they where 13-3 last season and 1 play from the SB. Now there hoovering around .500

 

ur dum

[mtbykr]

GB screwed themselves when they traded Favre instead of bringing him back 1 more year. I know both had their own faults in the matter.

 

But they where 13-3 last season and 1 play from the SB. Now there hoovering around .500

 

That's a valid argument, but has nothing to do with this thread.

[TheKilo]

It really isn't though. Rodgers hasn't been the problem.

[redsoxrules]

GB screwed themselves when they traded Favre instead of bringing him back 1 more year. I know both had their own faults in the matter.

 

But they where 13-3 last season and 1 play from the SB. Now there hoovering around .500

 

Aaron Rodgers is having a better year than Favre at this point

[mtbykr]

It really isn't though. Rodgers hasn't been the problem.

 

I personally think the pack did the right thing, just maybe could have done it smoother. My comment was just that he can make that argument, but no reason to do it here.

[See Red]

As I said before, it's clear he threw for the sole purpose of getting rid of the ball, which is fine when it's within a few yards of the WR, or hits at their feet, that ball was five yards away, there was zero percent chance of that pass being completed. In the second replay, you can't even see the Packers WR in the screen -- as per the NFL rules it was intentional grounding. I've seen balls closer to a WR than that one called Intentional Grounding before.