If you watched the Broncos/Raiders game during week 2 of this season, the Raiders/Browns game the following week, or Monday Night's Cowboys/Bills game, then you saw a team kick a late field goal to supposedly win the game. The kick went through the uprights and fans cheered or booed as their team won or lost.
After experiencing all the emotion of the team pulling out the victory, or the agony of the loss, you realize they have to kick it all over again, because the opposing coach called a timeout just before the potential game winning feild goal kick occured. In the Cowboys/Bills game, the kicker was able to make the kick again and this tactic failed, but both previous times the team's kicker missed the second kick, and the team lost the game.
"Icing" the kicker by calling a timeout just before the kick attempt is something that has been done for decades, and teams today expect the opposition to call a timeout if they have any remaining in that situation. There is nothing wrong with that at all. It's just considered part of the game.
But, There is a big difference between calling a timeout a couple seconds before a feild goal attempt in order to "Ice" the kicker, and the tactic Shanahan, Kiffin, and now #### Jauron have used.
The issue is not the act of using the "Icing" tactic, its about WHEN they are doing it . The method they are using is to call the timeout just as the deep snapper raises his head a split second before releasing the ball for the attempt. The play is theoretically already in motion , but if the ball hasn't been snapped yet, the timeout is allowed and the play has to be tried over again. For now, they say its perfectly legal, although nobody from the NFL has clarified why it is allowed and isn't considered an unsportmanlike attempt to gain advantage over another team.
Should it be legal?
The NFL rulebook has examples of similar plays where an unsportmanlike play is not allowed and the action results in a penalty.
First is the rule that states a defensive player can not induce an offensive player to false start by flinching, jumping back and forth into the neutral zone, or simulating the snap count with grunts,chants, etc.. in an attempt to get the offensive player to move before the snap. This "neutral zone infraction" results in a 5 yard penalty to the defensive team.
"Delay of game" is another example. If a play ends,the whistle blows, and the opposing team does something such as spiking the ball or laying on the offensive player so he can't make a reasonable effort to get in place for the next play, the defense is given a delay of game and 5 yard penalty.
Even excessive crowd noise by the defensive team, although very rarely enforced, is a 5 yard penalty and considered one of those "unsportmanlike" plays by NFL rules.
"Unsportsmanlike" plays such as these that are deemed an un-fair advantage to the defense, are considered penalties and illegal in football. I don't see how calling a timeout just as the snapper lifts his head to snap the ball to the holder should be considered fair, or good sportsmanship relating to the nature of the game.
Sure it's legal for now , but it's nothing more than a ticky-tac attempt to gain an unfair advantage, just as the neutral zone infraction and delay of game are, yet neither of those are allowed.
We will probably see this several more times this year now that every coach in the league watched the Monday night game . Hopefully, the Superbowl doesn't come down to a field goal attempt, or the whole world will have to go through the emotional roller coaster twice, as fans of the Broncos,Raiders,Browns,Bills, and Cowboys already have.
Personally I think its a cheap tactic, and the way Shanahan and others have used it this year takes away from the efforts and fair play that other coaches/teams preach as part of building a respectable team.
This tactic is not in line with the spirit of the game or competition. I find it disgusting and unsportsman-like. I cede that it is technically "legal" - but that alone does not make it right.
I'm glad someone brought this up - it think it's very cheap. It's sad that the Broncos only win so far this year came by icing the Raiders. While I don't blame the Raiders for doing the same to the Browns the following week - it shouldn't happen period.
Kicking teams are going to have to account for this "tactic" in the future. It is likely to be seen only at the end of halves and games where the spending of a timeout is not critical. However, perhaps a rule change where once the official becomes aware the coach intends to call a timeout (as in the Buffalo-Dallas game) the timeout can be called immediately as the clock was not going to be a factor...or, the official simply "does not hear" the time out and after a few times of that the "tactic" goes away...
Last edited by JulianGrendel on October 10th at 5:24 AM.
Just stop the coach "whispering" and it will return to normal. Any timeout in the last twenty seconds of a half MUST come from an active player on the field. The timeout would be in full view of everyone and stop this BS.
YEA ITS LEGAL FOR NOW BUT IT WONT BE FOR LONG. TO ME IT IS JUST A LEGAL WAY TO CHEAT. IF CHEATING IS COSIDERD BELOWING ANY SPORT, TO TAKE THIS TYPE IN THE NFL SHOULD NOT BE LEGAL.
Here's what Dallas coach Wade Phillips said last night on Cowboys.Com about it (Mickey Spagnola report)
Phillips stuck to his postgame guns, saying he still does not like the rule which allows the head coach to call timeout from the sideline without the play being stopped and said he voiced his objection to the NFL office.
"I talked to them today," Phillips said. "I don't think it's fair . . . it's unfair to the kicker."
When asked if he'd do the same thing to freeze another team's kicker at the last second, Phillips said, "I don't know why you wouldn't," but went on to say even though he'd do the same thing "it's still unfair
Now, to me Phillips is a pretty well respected Coach. For the only coach that has come out of this thing on the good side to say its unfair means a majority of others probably feel the same way.
I'd imagine Cromell was on the phone to the league bright and early Tuesday morning.
Last edited by Texascudaguy on October 10th at 8:15 AM.
The timeout before the snap is going to bite some team in the a_ _ one day. Let's say a team kicks a field goal and misses, but wait! There was a time out CALLED! Now he has another chance to win the game! He kicks the 2nd attempt and makes that one! It will happen. I recommend that there be no time outs called within the last 5 seconds of the playclock while under the 2 minute mark.
I don't think anyone should have a problem calling a legal timeout if you have time outs left. I believe they should more concerned with "spiking" the ball when a team has exhausted all its time outs. How can that not be intentional grounding. That seems to be a direct violation of the rules and there should be some penalty attached.
First of all, proof read your article, half of it doesn't make sense. Second, you are just a Dallas fan who watched his team get beat by an inferior Buffalo team for 59 minutes and about 57 seconds so you rant and rave about it. Why not write about the real issue and how poorly your golden boy played? Finally, it is no different from calling a timeout when you notice you have too many men on the field, you realize you have the wrong personell, you want to avoid a delay of game penalty...the list goes on and on. I just don't see what's 'unfair' about calling a timeout.
I think the rule needs to go. Calling a timeout as soon as the teams line up is one thing. But calling it to the point where you dont even hear a whistle blow, like Monday night, is over the top.
Nobody heard the whistle blow in that Dallas/Buffalo game on that play I think it is a bad rule. And it should be like a 20 yard penalty to do it that way. Just make the penalty for it so outragous that it disenfranchises teams from doing it altogether.
I mean Dallas had what 5 INTs in that game and all Buffalo could muster was 24 points? Most of which came from defensive play? Buffalo should have walked away with this game with the amount of turnovers in it. So Jauron resports to this tactic to try and win it for his team.
I dont like the rule as it is being applied now. Call time out as they lineup that is fine, but not as the center hikes it.
Almost forgot, in this game when Dallas scored to make it 22-24, Romo threw a ball to Owens for a 2-point conversion right? On replay and real time, the Buffalo defender had his back to the play and his hands all over Owens. How was that not pass interference again?????????????? I saw this and was like huh?????????????????
13thick and single47- both good ideas. The coach being allowed to call timeouts from the sideline is relatively new, correct? Having the players on the field be the only ones able to call a timeout in say, the last 2 minutes of a half, and timeouts allowed only until a certain limit of the playclock in kicking situations would make a huge difference.
gablesguru- I don't claim to be a writer, but thanks for spreading your infinite wisdom across the blogworld. We would be lost without you. This has nothing to do with the Cowboys. If you had a clue, you would recognize that. Have a nice day.
Last edited by Texascudaguy on October 10th at 6:56 AM.
i think it is very bad sportsmanship. if they want to ice the kicker, call the time out before everyone is set. just another #### move by the biggest #### coach in the game-shanahan
I don't think it matters who you are a fan of, this is a dumb rule. The coach should not be able to call a timeout from the sidelines in this situation. I thought it was garbage in the Raiders/Broncos game (though it was funny when Kiffin did it to the Browns). Also, what does spiking the ball have to do with this? Should the QB have to run out of the pocket and throw it out of bounds to stop the clock? I don't get your logic on that one. It makes sense that they can forfeit a down to stop the clock.
You keep hearing you want the game decided on the field but you let a coach on the sidelines call timeouts. Change it back to where only players on the field call TO. It is fine if a player on the field calls the TO prior to the snap but they have to do it while concentrating on the play. When you see the coaches getting ready to call the TO they are talking with the ref then they say TO. Sure the ref knows they want to call the TO but what if it comes after the snap? That now puts the ref in a position where they have to give the TO even if late. The effects from not giving the TO would be seen on tv replays and talked about for a long time. Players play and coaches coach the players to play in the game.
This tactic is little league and has no place in Profession football...and as someone already mentioned what happens if he missed the first and makes the second to beat your ####???? You look like a complete fool and you have beaten your team... it makes no sense to me...come on guys...lets change this now before we begin to look like a circus.....
I think it's just plain wrong! My stomach was in knots Monday for the entire game and even though the Cowboys walked away with that win I think it was a cheap shot by the Bills. Good try but just like the 6 turn-overs you weren't able to capatilize on it!!
Saturn01 - The "spiking the ball" i'm referring to is when a player gets a first down and spikes the ball or tosses it away, instead of giving it to the refere. This year they are calling that a delay of game penalty. It can be a defensive or offensive player. Sorry I didn't clarify that very well.
Last edited by Texascudaguy on October 10th at 7:20 AM.
It should be legal. There is no reason it shouldn't be. If the kicker misses the kick because he has to wait a few extra seconds than he shouldn't be kicking in the NFL. If you were a NFL coach you would do anything in your power to get your team the win, and that's what coaches are doing. The Cowboys kicker had no problem with the Bills stategic move to call a timeout, neither do I.
Last edited by maldj37 on October 10th at 7:38 AM.
I think it it will be gone after the next owners' meeting. I mean, what I saw in the 'Boys-Bills game was just over the top. Something like this shouldn't be allowed. Another thing, the penalty on TO for "spiking the ball"? Gimme a break! Fuzz
I am waiting for the game in which a coach has all three of his time outs left at the end. The coach could call 3 time outs in a row if he wanted.
The Raiders beat Denver, why not just change the rules to a team having to make 2 or 3 kicks running in order to win. Lets take it a step further and make the QB make a second pass completion in order to have his first one count.
Lets face it the NFL over the years has changed a once great game into a joke. I have to put up with having a bunch of mediocre football being played and now I get to watch As The World Turns as part of the game.
When it was the Raiders who cared, now that it is being used on a weekly basis people do not like it.
Last edited by sonnyjj on October 10th at 7:54 AM.
Yes, it's wrong and it will be done away with. All they have to do is make it so that it's too late to call a time out AFTER the ball has been snapped. Simple! Otherwise, it's fine if a coach wants to burn time outs to try to "ice" a kicker by making him think about it more. But, in effect, having to make a kick not once but multiple times to win a game is simply wrong.
fuzz.- I would expect in the interest of fairplay, they would have to at least ammend the rule somehow.
In response to your other point, in T.O.'s case, his history with certain refs probably played a factor. He doesn't get the benefit of the doubt regardless of his efforts become a good citizen and teammate in Dallas, but he and the Cowboys know that already.
LSU - same as fuzz. Its T.O. He won't get the call in any of those situations.
Last edited by Texascudaguy on October 10th at 8:03 AM.
Your absolutely right Texascudaguy. I would submit also the face guarding noncall in the endzone and the very plain pushout noncall, a different receiver would get both those calls.It was funny to see the Bills special teams duped on the snap count being changed from on 2 to 3 of the second kick. Had the kicker missed he would have had a 3rd kick from 5 yards closer.Teams should always change the snap count on the second kick to regain the advantage.
My view on the whole thing is that it was simply a cheap shot move by a bottom feeder team that couldn't put a team away when they were given every opportunity. And Nick Folk shoved their last second timeout right up their ####.....twice.
The rule needs to be changed.Last two minutes only a player calls a timeout.
I am an avid Football Fan, the rule stinks, you should NOT be able to call time out on field goal after the play has infact already started.They had already called one time out on the Dallas Game Monday night. I believe it is scare tactic and shiould not be allowed
Before the spike, the QB would whiz the ball into the stands (technically at his WR but 15ft too high). The NFL must have thought that looked ridiculous.
That late-icing is bush-league. Oh, I long for the days of no QB radios, Patriot cameras and games that didn't go over three hours due to TV timouts.
I don't see anything wrong with this. Teams are given three timeouts to use as they please at anytime during the half. Now people want the NFL to specify certain instances where a team cannot use a timeout? What happens when the defense wants to use one for a reason other than icing the kicker in that situation? What if the coach decides he wants to change who he has rushing the kicker? Then it's going to be up to the refs to make a judgement decision on when a timeout is legal or not. They would need to make it specific, such as, you cannot call a timeout once the play clock is ten seconds or less...or once the kicker is set, which is still subject to the refs own judgement. All this will do is cause more problems. Will an illegal timeout call be subject to challenge? This is ridiculous. Kickers who are not affected by the "icing" timeout are the professional athletes who don't choke. This is what seperates the men from the boys folks. Just let them play!
It's very easy to stop (or slow down) this ploy by the coaches. Get your guys used to being in the "hurry up" mode for the field goal, so that there is plenty of time on the play clock. If the coaches are looking for the "head to come up" of the center... then have the center make that initial motion a few times, just like a snap count... and the opposing coach won't know which "head movement" is going to be the one to actually signal the snap of the ball. He may still call his timeout... and he may even occasionally guess right and call it right as the ball is being snapped, but it will happen much less, and wouldn't be any different than the defense guessing the snap count of the offense correctly, and blasting by the guard before he can block effectively.
Why dont we turn it into the national flag football league. Who cares its a tactic, use it. these a very well paid kickers, thats their job to kick the ball, its not like you can even touch the kicker.
But thats what you get when you throw 6 interceptions against a 1-4 team, You Go, you 5-0 cowboys. to bad they have not played against anybody good so far.
Texascudaguy
Professional , gentlemanly or ungentlemanly conduct call it what you will. But it's not against the rules as far as the NFL is concerned. They're the ones who dictates what's indeed good and above board. They've known all along about teams basically stealing signals and using cameras. But chose to ignore it until it was raised by someone. So what'd do you expect 'em to do with regard to this situation ? It's already prevalant within the college game. And has been repeated on numerous occasions without recourse.
SONNVII It is against the rules for a team to call back to back time outs...they are penalized if they do, so that theory of calling all three time outs doesn't work.
I am NOT a Raider fan, but in watching the game when Shanahan did it, I thought it was a dirty shot, and VERY unsportsmanlike...and the next week when Kifin did it, I actually thought it was funny that he figured if it was done to me I will do it to someone else......I don't like it and here is one of the times it did not work for the Bills, there is NO way the Cowboys deseved that win,
LSUFANand the call in the end zone was clean...he may not havwe been looking back at the quarterback but his hands went for the ball the minute he saw it in TO's arms and he made a brilliant play in the heat of battle to strip TO of the ball...................perfectly clean play...........if the ball had NOT come to TO then yes it would have been interference.
This was also used in a college game. I forget which one it was, though.. but it was used. AND same result too, the kicker made both field goals to win the game.
I think that this will be used until a rule is put in place to stop its use. It's just icing the kicker on a different level. Kicker's will adjust and if I was a kicker it wouldn't matter. If you kicked it through one time you know how you want to kick it to make it the second time.. no prob..
I think it is cheap to call a timeout as referred to in this article. However I do find it very hilarious when the kicker makes the field goal twice to win the game. Ask Urban Meyer from Florida about that.
Some very interesting views of this so far. Too many to respond to everyone. Looks as though a majority of the people commenting feel it's not a fair play. Thanks for your opinions.
Fox now has a story on this in the Rumors section.
Wade Phiilips quote from the story in an interview with the San Antonio News.
"I can't blame (coaches) for doing it because they are getting away with it, but I don't think its fair," Phillips said. "I didn't think its fair in the other two games when it happened when the guys missed it, and I didn't think it was fair in our game
http://msn.foxsports.com/rumors/nfl #7
Last edited by Texascudaguy on October 10th at 9:51 AM.
tophat- Yes it is legal now,but that doesn't change the fact that it's not a "gentlemanly" act in regard to a level playing field for both teams.
A few people here commented about adjusting the rule where the timeout is only called by a player on the field. ammending the rule to something similar to that would do wonders for the way coaches use it in one of these situations.
Appreciate your view. Always welcome.
Last edited by Texascudaguy on October 10th at 9:50 AM.
There's a fine line between gamesmanship and poor sportsmanship. Calling timeout AS the ball is snapped is bush league. The replays of Jauron showed the lowlife mentality on this type of time out.
Because a field goal is high profile, we notice the result of the time out. When a QB rolls back to pass after a time out, we say, "No biggie."
1) No calling timeout from the sideline.
2) Gee, consider snapping the ball with 7 seconds on the clock instead of 3.
3) If the coach is looking for a center's head bob, snap the ball sooner to avoid the time out.
Well you guys should not be surprised the Ref.did not call pass inteference on Bills CB, they wanted Bills to win the game, stupid refs, same cheating for Stealers first TD. in their so-called won SB.what else is new Coach spying on other teams play-calling with DVD-R, and not suspended but a coach with Diabetic supplies getting 5 game susp, face it, it's not a fair game anymore, the fun in football has been taken away, no end-zone TD celebration, you get 10yds penalty...it's all S hi tty now.
Last edited by fresh40 on October 10th at 9:52 AM.
In a time when you can't celebrate a TD without getting a flag and you can't hit the QB without getting a flag, how can this bit an acceptable aspect of the game?
This is a Kicker with all of the pressure of the game on him having to concentrate on what is at hand. Then go through the act of kicking just to get prepared to do it all over again.
That's not strategy, it's unfair.
BS on many accounts!!!
fresh40...Are you still whining about SBXL? Even after the embarassing arsewhooping the Seagulls took last week to a team without it's 2 starting WR's and 3 starting defensive players. BTW, 3 of the 5 are PRO BOWLERS. SHUTOUT with 144 total yards in a game while being considered as one of the top tier teams in the NFC is what should have your panties in a ####...
"Don't cry because it's OVER, be happy that it happened." Dr Seuss
Last edited by StlrsfanDink on October 10th at 11:57 AM.
Its all fair and there is nothing wrong with it. Teams and fans are just getting made because the Broncos are the only ones who can pull it off and work in their favor.
YOu guys crack me up............... How is it any different than when they ice the basketball player at the free throw line at the end o####ame? Some genius explain that one to me.........What a bunch of cry babies. Its done ALL THE TIME IN BASKETBALL. Ever hear any of them crying?
Just an average sports fan. Enjoy in order of favorites: NFL, NASCAR, College Football, MLB, College Basketball.
NBA, and NHL are currently on my "Overrated, Overpaid, and Overhyped" list.
Classic Car enthusiast
Blog topics --
Big fan of humour, but will occasionally chime in on serious subjects as well.
Appreciate quality writing and grammar, and commend it, but will not hold it against those who don't excel in those areas.(I'm definitely nowhere close to perfect either.)
Please stop by anytime if the subject intrigues you. Your opinion is always appreciated.
< /a>
<
