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.

    What do you think?