Tebow's game winning throw may have been illegal

Srgt. Hulka · 01-12-2012, 09:53 AM

"Update: NFL spokesman Greg Aiello says the formation was legal. "This is a legal formation," he told NFL.com. "This should not have been flagged." It's not exactly an in-depth rules explanation, but it's definitive."

niteadept · 01-12-2012, 10:17 AM

Originally Posted by Srgt. Hulka

"Update: NFL spokesman Greg Aiello says the formation was legal. "This is a legal formation," he told NFL.com. "This should not have been flagged." It's not exactly an in-depth rules explanation, but it's definitive."

God said so

SaintsBro · 01-12-2012, 12:57 PM

While I agree that if the league says it's not a flag, then it's not a flag. But just wait a while and watch when somebody else on a different less media-popular team gets flagged for that exact same type formation. Just sayin'.

Danno · 01-12-2012, 07:40 PM

Originally Posted by WhoDat!656

That penalty is called a fair amount; I believe it is called illegal formation

That formation isn't called illegal formation a fair amount as well.

SloMotion · 01-12-2012, 07:51 PM

Originally Posted by saintfan

Pereira has spoken. Yea though verily it has been deemed, um, kosher. Let he who challenges the all mighty Pereira be pulled out of his or her one-bunk Hilton and cast down with the Sodomites...

"Welcome to Shawshank ... " LOL!

go Saints.

dsrdsrdsr · 01-14-2012, 07:10 AM

I've never quite paid enough attention to this illegal formation thing. But looking at that photo, if you told me there should be 6 men on the line of scrimmage and there were actually 7, I'd say it's marginal. Too close to overturn if it was reviewable. And if you told me there should be 7 and there were actual 6, I'd say the same. So it's very ticky-tacky to call it.

Which is it, by the way? Should there be 6 or 7?

(And after the lateral-fumble called forward, that cost Denver immediate field goal range and continued a TD drive for Pittsburgh, they couldn't for shame complain about this call!)

Danno · 01-14-2012, 10:25 AM

Not illegal, his feet are lined up with everyone elses. The OT is leaning forward in a 3-point stance, the end doesn't have his hand on the ground, so his upper body (and head) is further back.

01-12-2012, 10:17 AM	#12
niteadept Site Donor Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 520 Blog Entries: 1	Originally Posted by Srgt. Hulka "Update: NFL spokesman Greg Aiello says the formation was legal. "This is a legal formation," he told NFL.com. "This should not have been flagged." It's not exactly an in-depth rules explanation, but it's definitive." God said so neugey and OldMaid like this.

01-12-2012, 12:57 PM	#13
SaintsBro Site Donor Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: in line with my ridiculous CLEAR PLASTIC BAG Posts: 3,650 Blog Entries: 3	While I agree that if the league says it's not a flag, then it's not a flag. But just wait a while and watch when somebody else on a different less media-popular team gets flagged for that exact same type formation. Just sayin'. OldMaid likes this.

01-12-2012, 07:40 PM	#14
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	Originally Posted by WhoDat!656 That penalty is called a fair amount; I believe it is called illegal formation That formation isn't called illegal formation a fair amount as well.

01-12-2012, 07:51 PM	#15
SloMotion 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 6,776 Blog Entries: 15	Originally Posted by saintfan Pereira has spoken. Yea though verily it has been deemed, um, kosher. Let he who challenges the all mighty Pereira be pulled out of his or her one-bunk Hilton and cast down with the Sodomites... "Welcome to Shawshank ... " LOL! go Saints.

01-14-2012, 07:10 AM	#16
dsrdsrdsr Registered Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 34	I've never quite paid enough attention to this illegal formation thing. But looking at that photo, if you told me there should be 6 men on the line of scrimmage and there were actually 7, I'd say it's marginal. Too close to overturn if it was reviewable. And if you told me there should be 7 and there were actual 6, I'd say the same. So it's very ticky-tacky to call it. Which is it, by the way? Should there be 6 or 7? (And after the lateral-fumble called forward, that cost Denver immediate field goal range and continued a TD drive for Pittsburgh, they couldn't for shame complain about this call!)
dsrdsrdsr Registered Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 34

01-12-2012, 09:53 AM	#11
Srgt. Hulka 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Shreveport, LA Posts: 4,417	"Update: NFL spokesman Greg Aiello says the formation was legal. "This is a legal formation," he told NFL.com. "This should not have been flagged." It's not exactly an in-depth rules explanation, but it's definitive."

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

01-14-2012, 10:25 AM	#17
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	Not illegal, his feet are lined up with everyone elses. The OT is leaning forward in a 3-point stance, the end doesn't have his hand on the ground, so his upper body (and head) is further back.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/nfl/40233-tebows-game-winning-throw-may-have-been-illegal.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
Tebow's game winning throw may have been illegal	This thread	Refback	01-12-2012 06:41 AM	3