Rule Changes for 2008

[GSPODS]

The NFL has voted on the following:

Defensive Player In-Helmet Headsets

Video Review of Field Goals

Elimination of 5 Yard Facemask penalty

Elimination of Sideline "Force-Out" rule.

Center snaps on a false start will now be a fumble.

[BnGhog]

Center snaps on a false start will now be a fumble.

I didn't know that one. I have seen many times, they snap the ball and the QB makes no effort to get it. There could be a lot of these called.


It kind of don't make sense to me either.

I mean, they have always said that was a pre-snap penalty. Therefore, if the D went off-sides that don't matter because the play never happened. So, it seems unfair to me for Offense, that if they make a mistake, it could be a fumble but if the D make a mistake, it don't matter because it was a false start or Pre-snap penalty.

[yupchagee]

The NFL has voted on the following:

Defensive Player In-Helmet Headsets

Video Review of Field Goals

Elimination of 5 Yard Facemask penalty

Elimination of Sideline "Force-Out" rule.

Center snaps on a false start will now be a fumble.

Fox sports doesn't have the center snap rule but does have the option of defering after winning the coin toss. I saw nothing about it on NFL.com. Do you have a source?

[TincoSkin]

the weirdest part about this is no one is talking about the elimination of a 5 yard faemask penalty. at first i thought this was insane! how could they want to get rid of a rule that protects against neck injuries. but then i thought, this makes every facemask a 15 yarder. i like it. at first i was aghast but now i see the light.

as f no force out rule. this is going to completely change the game. thats the real 'patriiots' rule, not the radio thing. if brady cant get those extra completions along the side line its gonna slow down the best passing offenses. it makes the running game more importannt.

[GSPODS]

A proposal by the competition committee to create a five- to seven-day window before the opening of the free agent market each year in which players eligible for free agency could negotiate with all teams is to be considered by the owners at their next meeting in May.

Dan Snyder Heaven. I see him doing the "Risky Business" underwear dance already.

[PulpExposure]

as f no force out rule. this is going to completely change the game. thats the real 'patriiots' rule, not the radio thing. if brady cant get those extra completions along the side line its gonna slow down the best passing offenses. it makes the running game more importannt.

Agreed, that's a big change.

[yupchagee]

as f no force out rule. this is going to completely change the game. thats the real 'patriiots' rule, not the radio thing. if brady cant get those extra completions along the side line its gonna slow down the best passing offenses. it makes the running game more importannt.

Agreed, that's a big change.

How often did you see that called? My recollection is <1/game. That's not a big change.

[TincoSkin]

one or two i agree but those are often when you need to sqeeze that thrid and long pass in there for the first and they are playing tight coverage you know... its like getting a pass interfearence when you throw it down field. you didnt actually make the play but the rules allow for the yards. getting rid of the force out rule is a big deal. it take one of many avenues that an offense can get lucky with in a final drive or the end of a half. dig? its a major perameter for one of those game changing plays

[GSPODS]

The NFL got along fine before the force-out rule, and the NFL will get along fine with the rule repealed. Most of the best receivers in NFL history played without the force-out rule.

[NC43Hog]

Most of the best receivers in NFL history played without the force-out rule.

Yeah, but they were forced out!

[Countertrey]

as f no force out rule. this is going to completely change the game. thats the real 'patriiots' rule, not the radio thing. if brady cant get those extra completions along the side line its gonna slow down the best passing offenses. it makes the running game more importannt.

Agreed, that's a big change.

How often did you see that called? My recollection is <1/game. That's not a big change.

According to ESPN, it directly effected the outcome of 15 games last season (no link... I heard it). That does not count all the other drives that were extended because the receiver was declared pushed out.

It's about time this rule was dumped, and it's about time there be a revision that plays to the D's advantage.

[GSPODS]

Most of the best receivers in NFL history played without the force-out rule.

Yeah, but they were forced out!

[yupchagee]

as f no force out rule. this is going to completely change the game. thats the real 'patriiots' rule, not the radio thing. if brady cant get those extra completions along the side line its gonna slow down the best passing offenses. it makes the running game more importannt.

Agreed, that's a big change.

How often did you see that called? My recollection is <1/game. That's not a big change.

According to ESPN, it directly effected the outcome of 15 games last season (no link... I heard it). That does not count all the other drives that were extended because the receiver was declared pushed out.

It's about time this rule was dumped, and it's about time there be a revision that plays to the D's advantage.

That seems high to me. Or maybe my memory is failing. Or maybe my memory is failing. I've always thought the force out rule was stupid, I just don't think it will have a very big impact.

[Countertrey]

as f no force out rule. this is going to completely change the game. thats the real 'patriiots' rule, not the radio thing. if brady cant get those extra completions along the side line its gonna slow down the best passing offenses. it makes the running game more importannt.

Agreed, that's a big change.

How often did you see that called? My recollection is <1/game. That's not a big change.

According to ESPN, it directly effected the outcome of 15 games last season (no link... I heard it). That does not count all the other drives that were extended because the receiver was declared pushed out.

It's about time this rule was dumped, and it's about time there be a revision that plays to the D's advantage.

That seems high to me. Or maybe my memory is failing. Or maybe my memory is failing. I've always thought the force out rule was stupid, I just don't think it will have a very big impact.

High? 15 games is less than 1% of games played... You still think that's high?
This was 15 games that were decided on a referee's judgment. 1 game decided that way is too many.

This rule fixes that.

[yupchagee]

as f no force out rule. this is going to completely change the game. thats the real 'patriiots' rule, not the radio thing. if brady cant get those extra completions along the side line its gonna slow down the best passing offenses. it makes the running game more importannt.

Agreed, that's a big change.

How often did you see that called? My recollection is <1/game. That's not a big change.

According to ESPN, it directly effected the outcome of 15 games last season (no link... I heard it). That does not count all the other drives that were extended because the receiver was declared pushed out.

It's about time this rule was dumped, and it's about time there be a revision that plays to the D's advantage.

That seems high to me. Or maybe my memory is failing. Or maybe my memory is failing. I've always thought the force out rule was stupid, I just don't think it will have a very big impact.

High? 15 games is less than 1% of games played... You still think that's high?
This was 15 games that were decided on a referee's judgment. 1 game decided that way is too many.

This rule fixes that.

There are 256 games in the regular season. 15/256=5.86%
There will ALWAYS be games decided by officials judgement in all sports. That's just reality.

[Countertrey]

There will ALWAYS be games decided by officials judgement in all sports. That's just reality.

True... but it won't be based on whether, in an officials opinion, the receiver would have come down in bounds had he not been pushed...

[GSPODS]

There will ALWAYS be games decided by officials judgement in all sports. That's just reality.

True... but it won't be based on whether, in an officials opinion, the receiver would have come down in bounds had he not been pushed...

Now it will be based on the invisible pass interference calls instead.
Or the offensive pass interference not called.
I wish they had done something to change that rule at the meeting.
Or at least something to enforce the offensive pass interference rule.

Pass Interference
There shall be no interference with a forward pass thrown from behind the line. The restriction for the passing team starts with the snap. The restriction on the defensive team starts when the ball leaves the passer’s hand. Both restrictions end when the ball is touched by anyone.
The penalty for defensive pass interference is an automatic first down at the spot of the foul. If interference is in the end zone, it is first down for the offense on the defense’s 1-yard line. If previous spot was inside the defense’s 1-yard line, penalty is half the distance to the goal line.
The penalty for offensive pass interference is 10 yards from the previous spot.
It is pass interference by either team when any player movement beyond the line of scrimmage significantly hinders the progress of an eligible player of such player’s opportunity to catch the ball. Offensive pass interference rules apply from the time the ball is snapped until the ball is touched. Defensive pass interference rules apply from the time the ball is thrown until the ball is touched.

Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to:

(a) Contact by a defender who is not playing the ball and such contact restricts the receiver’s opportunity to make the catch.

(b) Playing through the back of a receiver in an attempt to make a play on the ball.

(c) Grabbing a receiver’s arm(s) in such a manner that restricts his opportunity to catch a pass.

(d) Extending an arm across the body of a receiver thus restricting his ability to catch a pass, regardless of whether the defender is playing the ball.

(e) Cutting off the path of a receiver by making contact with him without playing the ball.

(f) Hooking a receiver in an attempt to get to the ball in such a manner that it causes the receiver’s body to turn prior to the ball arriving.

Actions that do not constitute pass interference include but are not limited to:

(a) Incidental contact by a defender’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball, or neither player is looking for the ball. If there is any question whether contact is incidental, the ruling shall be no interference.

(b) Inadvertent tangling of feet when both players are playing the ball or neither player is playing the ball.

(c) Contact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the pass is clearly uncatchable by the involved players.

(d) Laying a hand on a receiver that does not restrict the receiver in an attempt to make a play on the ball.

(e) Contact by a defender who has gained position on a receiver in an attempt to catch the ball.

Actions that constitute offensive pass interference include but are not limited to:

(a) Blocking downfield by an offensive player prior to the ball being touched.

(b) Initiating contact with a defender by shoving or pushing off thus creating a separation in an attempt to catch a pass.

(c) Driving through a defender who has established a position on the field.

Actions that do not constitute offensive pass interference include but are not limited to:

(a) Incidental contact by a receiver’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball or neither player is looking for the ball.

(b) Inadvertent touching of feet when both players are playing the ball or neither player is playing the ball.

(c) Contact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the ball is clearly uncatchable by involved players.

Note 1: If there is any question whether player contact is incidental, the ruling should be no interference.

Note 2: Defensive players have as much right to the path of the ball as eligible offensive players.

Note 3: Pass interference for both teams ends when the pass is touched.

Note 4: There can be no pass interference at or behind the line of scrimmage, but defensive actions such as tackling a receiver can still result in a 5-yard penalty for defensive holding, if accepted.

Note 5: Whenever a team presents an apparent punting formation, defensive pass interference is not to be called for action on the end man on the line of scrimmage, or an eligible receiver behind the line of scrimmage who is aligned or in motion more than one yard outside the end man on the line. Defensive holding, such as tackling a receiver, still can be called and result in a 5-yard penalty and automatic first down from the previous spot, if accepted. Offensive pass interference rules still apply.

[Countertrey]

Now it will be based on the invisible pass interference calls instead.
Or the offensive pass interference not called.
I wish they had done something to change that rule at the meeting.
Or at least something to enforce the offensive pass interference rule.

The problem isn't the rule... it's the selective interpretation of the rule to the advantage of the offense. The competition committee can change that with no rule change required... all they need to do is say "enforce as written".

[skinsfan#33]

as f no force out rule. this is going to completely change the game. thats the real 'patriiots' rule, not the radio thing. if brady cant get those extra completions along the side line its gonna slow down the best passing offenses. it makes the running game more importannt.

Agreed, that's a big change.

How often did you see that called? My recollection is <1/game. That's not a big change.

According to ESPN, it directly effected the outcome of 15 games last season (no link... I heard it). That does not count all the other drives that were extended because the receiver was declared pushed out.

It's about time this rule was dumped, and it's about time there be a revision that plays to the D's advantage.

That seems high to me. Or maybe my memory is failing. Or maybe my memory is failing. I've always thought the force out rule was stupid, I just don't think it will have a very big impact.

High? 15 games is less than 1% of games played... You still think that's high?
This was 15 games that were decided on a referee's judgment. 1 game decided that way is too many.

This rule fixes that.

I don't think you understand how big this change is. It is not about the players that were ruled "forced out" it is about all those side line catches that will now not happen because all the DB has to do is push the WR out before he has a chance to get both feet down.

Think about how many catches WRs make near the side line, they better be ready to get jacked-up because now they can be forced out and it not called.

Say a WR goes up for a pass the DB could even catch the WR and carry him out of bounds and that wouldn't be a reception.

Finally a rule that favors the D and in a huge way.

[VetSkinsFan]

as f no force out rule. this is going to completely change the game. thats the real 'patriiots' rule, not the radio thing. if brady cant get those extra completions along the side line its gonna slow down the best passing offenses. it makes the running game more importannt.

Agreed, that's a big change.

How often did you see that called? My recollection is <1/game. That's not a big change.

According to ESPN, it directly effected the outcome of 15 games last season (no link... I heard it). That does not count all the other drives that were extended because the receiver was declared pushed out.

It's about time this rule was dumped, and it's about time there be a revision that plays to the D's advantage.

That seems high to me. Or maybe my memory is failing. Or maybe my memory is failing. I've always thought the force out rule was stupid, I just don't think it will have a very big impact.

High? 15 games is less than 1% of games played... You still think that's high?
This was 15 games that were decided on a referee's judgment. 1 game decided that way is too many.

This rule fixes that.

I don't think you understand how big this change is. It is not about the players that were ruled "forced out" it is about all those side line catches that will now not happen because all the DB has to do is push the WR out before he has a chance to get both feet down.

Think about how many catches WRs make near the side line, they better be ready to get jacked-up because now they can be forced out and it not called.

Say a WR goes up for a pass the DB could even catch the WR and carry him out of bounds and that wouldn't be a reception.

Finally a rule that favors the D and in a huge way.

Don't skirt the sidelines and everything will be okay....

[yupchagee]

as f no force out rule. this is going to completely change the game. thats the real 'patriiots' rule, not the radio thing. if brady cant get those extra completions along the side line its gonna slow down the best passing offenses. it makes the running game more importannt.

Agreed, that's a big change.

How often did you see that called? My recollection is <1/game. That's not a big change.

According to ESPN, it directly effected the outcome of 15 games last season (no link... I heard it). That does not count all the other drives that were extended because the receiver was declared pushed out.

It's about time this rule was dumped, and it's about time there be a revision that plays to the D's advantage.

That seems high to me. Or maybe my memory is failing. Or maybe my memory is failing. I've always thought the force out rule was stupid, I just don't think it will have a very big impact.

High? 15 games is less than 1% of games played... You still think that's high?
This was 15 games that were decided on a referee's judgment. 1 game decided that way is too many.

This rule fixes that.

I don't think you understand how big this change is. It is not about the players that were ruled "forced out" it is about all those side line catches that will now not happen because all the DB has to do is push the WR out before he has a chance to get both feet down.

Think about how many catches WRs make near the side line, they better be ready to get jacked-up because now they can be forced out and it not called.

Say a WR goes up for a pass the DB could even catch the WR and carry him out of bounds and that wouldn't be a reception.

Finally a rule that favors the D and in a huge way.

The rule change specifically does not allow the DB to carry the receiver out of bounds.

[SkinsJock]

The rule is a significant change in that it is a rule change that is not a change that favors the offense. Most rule changes that affect the WR and DB recently have been in the offense's favor. This is a good change IMO as it technically allows the DB to use the sideline more.

Actually, I think that the WR's have gotten away with way too much leeway over the past few years. Not all has been via the rules per se but the refs have allowed a lot more interference by the WR and in my view have been a lot more likely to call defensive interference than offensive pass interference. Part of that is because of the rules changes whose intent it seems is to encourage more offense but the application I think has resulted in more calls against the defense.

So I see this as a positive. I would also like to see a better balance in the refs' calls as they apply to the passing game and the amount of leeway given the WR over the DB.