The "No Play"

[IHATEDALLAS'82'87'91]

I was watching Joe Gibbs post game press conference, and they talked about that 4th&2 play where the D jumped offsides but they called the penalty on us. Gibbs said that he went to the refs before the game and told them they had a play called the "no play", where we shift, then reshift, and if they don't go offsides, then we call timeout. Then, when we decide to run this play, they call it on us and Gibbs said they told him that someone moved too quickly.

Thoughts?

[shally]

I was watching Joe Gibbs post game press conference, and they talked about that 4th&2 play where the D jumped offsides but they called the penalty on us. Gibbs said that he went to the refs before the game and told them they had a play called the "no play", where we shift, then reshift, and if they don't go offsides, then we call timeout. Then, when we decide to run this play, they call it on us and Gibbs said they told him that someone moved too quickly.

Thoughts?

gibbs even spoke how it was designed to draw a team offsides.. that said, they did have 2 players moving at the same time and maybe that is what the refs alluded to ? although they said that yoder moved too fast to be considered a shift .. how they would decide that is beyond me..
so gibbs will sent it off to the league and probably get an apology

[BandWagon]

the call was "simulating the snap". I guess that means it was a too aggressive move to motion. I can see that, but boy what a grey area...how fast is too fast...total judgement call. Also, thought that PI call was questionable...but they threw us a make up call the very next play. Hmmm.

[firehawk157]

the call was "simulating the snap". I guess that means it was a too aggressive move to motion. I can see that, but boy what a grey area...how fast is too fast...total judgement call. Also, thought that PI call was questionable...but they threw us a make up call the very next play. Hmmm.
Yeah, I don't think that's a real penalty. We really got effed on that play. And the Rogers pass interference but at the same hand, I don't know why Jason Taylor got called on the unnecessary roughness penalty

[guess88]

i think every team has a "no play". I know I've seen Peyton do it a few times.. anytime there's a 4&1. It's smart, but of course you need competant refs.

[redskin_rich]

I guess we will need to try every trick we can, as long as we play the sissy brand of football that was on display today.

[BandWagon]

Yeah, I don't think that's a real penalty. We really got effed on that play. And the Rogers pass interference but at the same hand, I don't know why Jason Taylor got called on the unnecessary roughness penalty

Well it's definitely "really" in the books...whether or not it's a good rule is a different question.

[Syllable]

I guess we will need to try every trick we can, as long as we play the sissy brand of football that was on display today.

You mean the sissy brand of 400 yards? No matter how we got those yardage, we still did. Not to mention, "sissy teams" don't run through a defense in OT.

[redskin_rich]

You mean the sissy brand of 400 yards? No matter how we got those yardage, we still did. Not to mention, "sissy teams" don't run through a defense in OT.

Long FG attempt on 1st down = sissy.

Thank God we made that kick.

[Syllable]

On the play, They said it was an "Abrupt Movement" by the TE. I don't know if that is even a rule considering you usually want motion pretty quickly to catch the defense off guard. btw, the TE was pretty much set when Sellers started going in motion. The TE only moved like a couple steps to the side.

[nicefellow31]

Long FG attempt on 1st down = sissy.

Thank God we made that kick.

Did you hear Coach Gibbs say why he elected the FG on 1st down? Think San Diego game 2005.

[smoak]

Long FG attempt on 1st down = sissy.

Thank God we made that kick.

It wouldn't have been my call, but not sure where you get sissy??? Suisham was drilling it today and his kicks would have been good from much further out. I'm am one of the biggest smash mouth guys you'll ever meet, but apparently Suisham has really impressed...

Would it be sissy if Dungy did it with Adam V???

[Biggie]

Did you hear Coach Gibbs say why he elected the FG on 1st down? Think San Diego game 2005.

That was still a ridiculous call. Missing it would have basically been throwing away three downs.

[smoak]

Regarding the play to draw the Dolphins offside, every team in the league has that in their package so I have no issue with it.

[skinsfaninva]

That was still a ridiculous call. Missing it would have basically been throwing away three downs.

No it is not!! How many times have you seen a fumble when a team is trying to get a couple of yards closer? On top of that, think to the Cowboys playoff game last year. Had they tried the FG on any down but 4th Romo could have just spiked the ball or for that matter just fallen on the ball and they would have gotten another chance at the kick. Going for the FG on 1st down gives a lot of "wiggle" room for mistakes.

[skinsfaninva]

I don't know why Jason Taylor got called on the unnecessary roughness penalty

The commentators on CBS corrected the ref by saying that Taylor was called for taunting not unnecessary roughness.

[CarMike]

Long FG attempt on 1st down = sissy.

Thank God we made that kick.

I have to disagree with ya Rich. That took some brass ones in my book. We miss it and Miami wins the game....Gibbs would have a lot of explaining to do.

I didn't like it at the time, but it worked our for us so i'm glad we kicked it there...

[smoak]

No it is not!! How many times have you seen a fumble when a team is trying to get a couple of yards closer? On top of that, think to the Cowboys playoff game last year. Had they tried the FG on any down but 4th Romo could have just spiked the ball or for that matter just fallen on the ball and they would have gotten another chance at the kick. Going for the FG on 1st down gives a lot of "wiggle" room for mistakes.

Agreed. Gibbs is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. I would have run it again a couple times (kick on third), but I am not around Suisham in practice every day... The kid seems to have a leg.

[skinsfaninva]

On the play, They said it was an "Abrupt Movement" by the TE. I don't know if that is even a rule considering you usually want motion pretty quickly to catch the defense off guard. btw, the TE was pretty much set when Sellers started going in motion. The TE only moved like a couple steps to the side.

I don't know about the "abrupt movement" rule, but I do know that 2 men can be in motion/shifts as long as they reset (stop) for one second before the snap.

[CarMike]

That was still a ridiculous call. Missing it would have basically been throwing away three downs.

Yeah, but Gibbs has confidence in his players. Something we need to do as well.

Everybody wants to give "props" to Cam for going for the TD at half. But our coach shows some confidence in one of our players, it's a bad call by our coaching staff.

I'll have to side with coach on this one.

[whistleandthumb]

I guess we will need to try every trick we can, as long as we play the sissy brand of football that was on display today.
Wow, Rich. Usually, I'm right with ya, but I can't see where you get "sissy" from. From where I was standing, we played some pretty tough football today - defense stopped the run, and was aggressive. Offense rushed the ball well, and did it with a lot of between the Tackle runs.

And then Gibbs decides, as opposed to risking the game by continuing to push forward, to kick a FG on first down, and now our play today gets blanketed with "sissy"? You must've missed Suisham hit about 10 straight from beyond 50yds in warmups today. Or missed those 3 Super Bowl rings that Gibbs has for making the kind of tough calls he had to make today.

I mean, if he pounds the rock again, and we get a holding penalty, and it knocks us out of FG range, everyone crucifies Gibbs for not taking a shot when we had the chance to. Or, God forbid, there's a turnover.

Bottom line - Gibbs made a tough call, it was the right call, we're 1-0, and that's more than the Iggles can say. All around - I'd say it's pretty far from "sissy."

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Wow, Rich. Usually, I'm right with ya, but I can't see where you get "sissy" from. From where I was standing, we played some pretty tough football today - defense stopped the run, and was aggressive. Offense rushed the ball well, and did it with a lot of between the Tackle runs.

And then Gibbs decides, as opposed to risking the game by continuing to push forward, to kick a FG on first down, and now our play today gets blanketed with "sissy"? You must've missed Suisham hit about 10 straight from beyond 50yds in warmups today. Or missed those 3 Super Bowl rings that Gibbs has for making the kind of tough calls he had to make today.

I mean, if he pounds the rock again, and we get a holding penalty, and it knocks us out of FG range, everyone crucifies Gibbs for not taking a shot when we had the chance to. Or, God forbid, there's a turnover.

Bottom line - Gibbs made a tough call, it was the right call, we're 1-0, and that's more than the Iggles can say. All around - I'd say it's pretty far from "sissy."

I agree. I didn't agree with the call to kick on first down, but that does not detract from the fact that we committed to the run and stopping the run. That, IMO, is the definition of smash mouth football.

[RedskinRyan]

Would it be sissy if Dungy did it with Adam V???

maybe it is "sissy", but who's to judge when it wins ball games?

[GreenspanDan]

jeez talk about sissies. never have i seen so much second-guessing after a WIN!!

[guess88]

shhh... i'm just glad we have a kicker Gibbs believes in. When's the last time that's happened?

[whistleandthumb]

maybe it is "sissy", but who's to judge when it wins ball games?
Wait - doesn't the term "sissy" generally refer to one who is cowardly, lacks courage, etc.?

Well, in my book, it takes a lot more onions to go for it on fourth down, go for the 2 point conversion, try for a touchdown instead of kicking a FG at the end of a half...


...or foregoing 3 downs in order to win a football game by kicking a FG on first down.

Anyone can kick a FG on 3rd or 4th down. It takes a real man to say, "That's far enough. I have confidence in my kicker to win this game. Let's not prance around like a bunch of (ahem) sissies for 3 more downs - let's win this thing NOW!"

But that's just me.

[Agrawog]

There are two things that burn me about the "non play". First, the reported infraction was simulating the snap by moving too fast. Now he did not move forward only sideways. So now people going in motion have to move at a certain speed? Huh? That was a useless call. Second we ran that play in the preseason and it worked and it was legal. Bunch of loser refs.

Second - on the kick. So Gibbs decided to kick a 40 yard fg with a 2nd year kicker rather than run at least two more times? What is that? Run it twice. if you don't get a first down kick on 3rd (that way if something happens you can still kick again on 4th). then kick. Why on 1st? that just seems panicky to me. We need to show some confidence in our offense. For all the trouble Campbell had today he maintained his poise and finished the game well.

Heck - if Smoot doesn't drop the interception we don't go to overtime anyway. (Well for that matter if the Dolphins could catch we would have lost alltogether).

[redskin_rich]

Too conservative for me and I equate it too sissy ball. Those of you that disagree with me were probably big fans of Marty Ball. I'm not talking about the physicality of it, I'm referring to the strategy. Sissy.

[whitskins]

That was still a ridiculous call. Missing it would have basically been throwing away three downs.

And a holding call, like we got against SD in 05, would have ended the drive and potentially cost us the game.

Tough call either way and it sure made me nervous, but Gibbs had confidence in Suisham and for good reason. That kick would have been good through arena league uprights. It was perfect.

[shally]

Wow, Rich. Usually, I'm right with ya, but I can't see where you get "sissy" from. From where I was standing, we played some pretty tough football today - defense stopped the run, and was aggressive. Offense rushed the ball well, and did it with a lot of between the Tackle runs.

And then Gibbs decides, as opposed to risking the game by continuing to push forward, to kick a FG on first down, and now our play today gets blanketed with "sissy"? You must've missed Suisham hit about 10 straight from beyond 50yds in warmups today. Or missed those 3 Super Bowl rings that Gibbs has for making the kind of tough calls he had to make today.

I mean, if he pounds the rock again, and we get a holding penalty, and it knocks us out of FG range, everyone crucifies Gibbs for not taking a shot when we had the chance to. Or, God forbid, there's a turnover.

Bottom line - Gibbs made a tough call, it was the right call, we're 1-0, and that's more than the Iggles can say. All around - I'd say it's pretty far from "sissy."

i liked the call very much.. it gave us a chance to win the game and took the turnover, sack or penalty out of the equation.

if you have a solid kicker, that is what you do..

[Farmer Ted]

No it is not!! How many times have you seen a fumble when a team is trying to get a couple of yards closer? On top of that, think to the Cowboys playoff game last year. Had they tried the FG on any down but 4th Romo could have just spiked the ball or for that matter just fallen on the ball and they would have gotten another chance at the kick. Going for the FG on 1st down gives a lot of "wiggle" room for mistakes.

Or, think about Marty-Ball 2004, when the Chargers were playing the Jets at home in the first round of the playoffs. The Chargers had the ball in a similar area, and ran a few running plays, only to lose maybe 5 yards, and then need a ~47 yarder to tie (or maybe win). Predictably, they missed it. You know the Dolphins are going to stack the line to stop the run, and you also know the Skins will run in that situation, so going ahead and kicking isn't a terrible idea.

[Hr fan]

the call was "simulating the snap". I guess that means it was a too aggressive move to motion. I can see that, but boy what a grey area...how fast is too fast...total judgement call. Also, thought that PI call was questionable...but they threw us a make up call the very next play. Hmmm.

This was pure hubris. There was ample time to pick up the flag or for the referee to overrule. Pure bush league by referees that think their opinion trumps the rulebook. I expect Gibbs to file a protest and for the referees involved to get their hand slapped, though we will probably never hear of it. Totally inexcusable since they were advised ahead of time and did not say what the limits on abruptness were (probably because the are no such restrictions).

[chrisbcbu]

Too conservative for me and I equate it too sissy ball. Those of you that disagree with me were probably big fans of Marty Ball. I'm not talking about the physicality of it, I'm referring to the strategy. Sissy.

Wow! Risking the entire game for over a 40 yard field goal is sissy? Seriously?? That took major cajones to make that call.

But hey those disagreeing with me were probably big fans of Fun and gun. ;)

[vabeach_skinsfan]

After the TE went in motion, Sellers moved before the TE stopped.

[InsomniaKiller]

After the TE went in motion, Sellers moved before the TE stopped.

But that is not a penalty, no matter what the announcers said.

[chrisbcbu]

After the TE went in motion, Sellers moved before the TE stopped.

You can have more than 1 person in motion. They have to come to a complete stop for at least 1 second before the snap.

However the penalty was that Yoder jumped up to fast while going in motion. So they are saying he was simulating the snap but moving soo fast.

[swheeler]

But hey those disagreeing with me were probably big fans of Fun and gun. ;)

:funpost:

[RedHokieSkin]

After the TE went in motion, Sellers moved before the TE stopped.

The idiot commentators said something about this, not the refs. They were wrong, ignorant, or just didn't bother to look at it that closely. Two men can be moving at the same time so long as they are set for a second before the snap, as others have mentioned. The refs said that Yoder moved too quickly.

I could see this call going the way it did if Yoder had quickly stood up, paused, and then proceeded to shift. This would be as if he was trying to draw them offsides....i.e. by jerking his body.

Although he did move quickly, he moved smoothly and there was no hesitation. It was bad call.

[smoak]

maybe it is "sissy", but who's to judge when it wins ball games?

Nothing that is within the rules is "sissy" IMO. I'm sure there are some that think trick plays or even the forward pass are sissy plays???

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Too conservative for me and I equate it too sissy ball. Those of you that disagree with me were probably big fans of Marty Ball. I'm not talking about the physicality of it, I'm referring to the strategy. Sissy.
I adopt this post as my own, especially the bolded part. It would be very interesting to re-read some comments made here after a few SD or NY Jets games a few years back.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Or, think about Marty-Ball 2004, when the Chargers were playing the Jets at home in the first round of the playoffs. The Chargers had the ball in a similar area, and ran a few running plays, only to lose maybe 5 yards, and then need a ~47 yarder to tie (or maybe win). Predictably, they missed it. You know the Dolphins are going to stack the line to stop the run, and you also know the Skins will run in that situation, so going ahead and kicking isn't a terrible idea.
This is false.

[Syllable]

It wouldn't have been my call, but not sure where you get sissy??? Suisham was drilling it today and his kicks would have been good from much further out. I'm am one of the biggest smash mouth guys you'll ever meet, but apparently Suisham has really impressed...

Would it be sissy if Dungy did it with Adam V???

Dungy getting criticized, I have to see it to believe it.