L'échiquier vert (©Oleo) - Questions sur les règles du jeu

Double C a écrit:

Je suis assez sceptique quant à l'efficacité de guards plus légers. Peut-être qu'ils parviendront à mieux contenir les LBs blitzeurs mais ça risque de faciliter la tache des gros Nose Tackles en face.

Surtout que les 3-4 restent minoritaires, même si quelques équipes sont en train d'adopter cette stratégie (combien la garderont?)

D'une semaine à l'autre, les OL devraient perdre ou gagner 5 kilos en fonction de l'adversaire...

Intéressant tableau paru sur nfl.com, sur le pourcentage de jeux joués par les attaquants (on ne compte pas les linemen et le QB, présents dans quasi 100% des jeux). C'est trop tôt pour que je sorte mon propre commentaire , alors je copie-colle.
Le tableau est plus clair sur le site
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9473554

Citation :

Let's take a look at how much playing time players get during a season to back up just how much coaches are rolling through personnel groups. The Steelers are often perceived as a very conservative, "old-fashioned" offense, but offensive coordinator Ken Whisenhunt stresses opponents with personnel as well as any coach in the league. Pittsburgh used 11 offensive packages last season to mix-and-match and find ways to create advantages. You might be amazed to see that not one player in this group played more than 81 percent of the offensive plays.


Player % of offensive plays # of plays Position
Hines Ward 81% 820 WR
Heath Miller 77% 783 TE
Antwaan Randle El 70% 712 WR
Dan Kreider 57% 573 FB
Cedrick Wilson 51% 518 WR
Willie Parker 50% 506 RB
Jerame Tuman 40% 408 TE
Verron Haynes 24% 239 RB
Jerome Bettis 19% 191 RB
Quincy Morgan 14% 146 WR
Duce Staley 8% 83 RB



As you can see, second tight end Jerame Tuman played 40 percent of the plays, which means there were a significant number of plays with two tight ends (since Heath Miller played 77 percent of the snaps). Cedrick Wilson is the No. 3 wide receiver, and he played more than Willie Parker, so you know Pittsburgh was doing things with personnel to find matchups on certain downs and distances.

Here's a look at the people who played for the Seahawks, and the way Mike Holmgren played his "chess" match in 2005.


Player % of offensive plays number of plays Position
Shaun Alexander 74% 786 RB
Joe Jurevicius 70% 750 WR
Mack Strong 65% 686 FB
Bobby Engram 64% 679 WR
Jerramy Stevens 59% 633 TE
D.J. Hackett 39% 418 WR
Ryan Hannam 33% 351 TE
Darrell Jackson 30% 323 WR
Peter Warrick 21% 222 WR
Maurice Morris 17% 177 RB
Leonard Weaver 11% 116 FB
Itula Mili 4% 37 TE



The first thing I notice when I look at the percentage of plays from the Seahawks is Shaun Alexander and Maurice Morris accounting for 91 percent of the plays that a running back was in the game, but that also means there were 9 percent of the plays with no running back in the game. Some of them might have been taking a knee at the end of a game, or a "Hail Mary" pass, but 9 percent is about 80 plays. It is important to identify all the personnel groupings used by Holmgren.

An interesting comparison for both teams is the use of the second tight end and the fullback.

In Pittsburgh, Tuman was on the field for 408 plays, while in Seattle, Ryan Hannam and Itula Mili combined for 388 plays. That's very similar use of the two-tight-end personnel groupings. As for the fullbacks, most people might guess that the Steelers would use a fullback more than the Seahawks, but the truth is Seattle had 229 more plays with a fullback than the Steelers. That is an average of 14 more fullback plays per game for Seattle than Pittsburgh.

It is still to be determined if those plays resulted in more runs than passes, but for a defensive coordinator playing these two teams, he has to be ready for everything.

On trouve tout de même quelques "experts" qui font leur boulot un peu plus consciencieusement. C'est rassurant. Et ça nous change des sempiternels power rankings ou autre prévisions sur les prochains participants au SB 6 mois avant le début de la saison.

Double C a écrit:

On trouve tout de même quelques "experts" qui font leur boulot un peu plus consciencieusement. C'est rassurant. Et ça nous change des sempiternels power rankings ou autre prévisions sur les prochains participants au SB 6 mois avant le début de la saison.

Oui, comme Peter King d'Espn, qui nous prédit un Cowboys-Patriots au SB XLI. Le pire, c'est que dans son article, il admet lui-même que le superbowl est loin, et qu'il peut se raviser d'ici là. Le gars il écrit un article et explique lui-même que ça ne veut rien dire

Double C a écrit:

De Sports Illustrated. Sinon, effectivement, il doit être l'un des pires... et l'un des plus lus.

Exact, ma langue a fourssée.

Comme je vois qu'il y en a certains qui prêtent un oeil sur les vidéos d'NFL.com, j'en profite pour vous inciter à visionner les vidéos consacrées à Mike Pereira, ancien "Director of officiating" de la NFL (il est passé Vice-président maintenant) intitulées "Pereira's official review". Chaque semaine durant la saison, ils refont le point sur les actions les plus litigieuses de la journée. C'a recommencé avec le match du Hall of Fame.

Ca tourne depuis la refonte du site avec les vidéos, donc ils sont rôdés maintenant et c'est aussi instructif que les Q/A à l'arbitre qu'on voit sur ce topic.

http://www.armchairgm.com/mwiki/index.php?title=TE_and_H-Back_sets_-_the_future_of_the_NFL_offense%3F

Article intéressant.

Séchez vos larmes, consolez votre voisin. Votre calvaire est enfin terminé.


Le Q&A de Jerry Markbreit est de retour!

Citation :

Ask Jerry Markbreit
The former NFL referee is back to answer your questions about the rules of football

September 13, 2006, 11:34 AM CDT


In the Bears-Packers game on Sunday, Chicago QB Rex Grossman was called for illegal touching after he caught a pass from Thomas Jones. The referee stated that the QB is an ineligible receiver in the T-Formation. Are there other formations in which the QB is ruled ineligible to receive the ball? --Ryan Miller, Boise, Idaho

The T-formation quarterback who takes his stance behind the center, and receives a hand-to-hand snap from the center is an ineligible receiver by rule. In order to be an eligible receiver, the quarterback must be one or more yards behind the line of scrimmage at the snap. This means that the shotgun quarterback is an eligible receiver who can go downfield and catch a forward pass. The T-formation is the only situation where the quarterback is not an eligible receiver.

Jerry, what is with the new hip referee shirts this season? Any reason behind it? --Patrick Flynn, Hadley, Mass.

The new shirts worn this year by NFL officials are newly designed for two reasons. The material is self-absorbent and keeps the perspiration away from the official's body. The second reason is strictly aesthetic. The new modern-designed stripes are very attractive and streamlined. I am glad that you noticed the change. This is the first change in officials' shirts in over fifty years.

Assuming a ball carrier is in-bounds, does the clock stop for a first down in the NFL? Has this rule changed in the last 2-3 years? --Kevin, Brookfield, Wis.

Under collegiate rules, the clock stops on all first downs and is started again with the referees ready-for-play signal, providing the clock was running when the first down was made. The NFL has no such rule. The clock continues to run when a first down is made, providing it was running at the conclusion of the play. This rule has not changed and has been in effect for as long as I can remember. I believe that it is one of the original timing rules of professional football.

I was at a high school football game last night when on a third down the offense threw an interception that the defense returned 25 yards behind the initial line of scrimmage. At the end of the run the defense (team who intercepted the ball) fumbled and the original offense recovered the ball. The ruling on the field was the recovering team was given a first down even though it was third-and-10 when they threw the interception. I realize I haven't played in a while but this did not seem right to me. Was the call that possession had changed and then changed again on the same play correct? --Charlie Denno, Stafford, Va.

The call that you refer to is absolutely correct. A new series, first-and-10, is awarded when the ball is dead in the field of play in either team's possession after having been in the other team's possession in the same down. When the defense intercepted the ball, thus gaining possession, the previous line of scrimmage was eliminated, so when the original offensive team recovered the fumble by the interceptor, they had no line to gain and thus were awarded first-and-10. This is one of the basic rules in all levels of football, from grade school to professional.

The purpose of a no-huddle-style offense is to give your opponents less, or, no time to prepare for your next play. Obviously this would also effect the officiating crew as well. How does an officiating crew work around a no-huddle offense? --Bill Vollmer, Steger, Ill.

The no-huddle offense is handled with an increased pace by the NFL officials. They rush to get the ball placed and ready for play as quickly as possible. However, the hurry-up offense, which generally occurs during the last two minutes of the second or fourth quarter, requires that no ball change be involved by the officials in order to save time. The no-huddle offense does not require the same speed and the ball can be changed.

I am a clock operator for high school games. When does the clock stop on a field goal attempt at the high school level? What about other levels? I'm not sure whether it is when the ball crosses the back of the end zone, when the signal is made or what determines the stoppage of the clock. Thanks and I enjoy reading your weekly answers. --Matt Flagg, New Carlisle, Ind.

The clock operator in high school and college ball should stop the clock when the field goal attempt strikes something beyond the goal posts: either the ground, a net or the stands. The NFL has a special rule: No field-goal attempt can take more than five seconds off the clock, regardless of when it strikes something. If there are six seconds remaining in the game and a long field goal is attempted, there will be one second left on the clock by rule. I am glad that you enjoy the column, and it is good to be back.

Buffalo-New England on Sunday, Buffalo intercepts a Tom Brady pass and returns it for an apparent touchdown. But wait, an official blew the play dead at some point during the return. Now, there was an illegal block on the return, so the early whistle didn't matter, but what would have happened with no flag? On the replay, you can see the official running down the sideline and stopping where the other player stepped out. The ball carrier never comes within five yards of the sideline. If there was no penalty, would the ball have been spotted at the point the referee blew the whistle or would Buffalo been given the TD? --Dave Kopp, Lisle, Ill.

If an official inadvertently sounds his whistle during a play, the ball becomes dead immediately. If the ball is in player possession, the team in possession may elect to put the ball in play, where it has been declared dead or to replay the down. If the ball is a loose ball resulting from a fumble, backward pass or illegal pass, the team last in possession may elect to put the ball in play at the spot where possession was lost or to replay the down. If the ball is loose resulting from a legal forward pass, a free kick or a scrimmage kick, the ball is returned to the previous spot and the down is replayed. If there is a foul by either team in any of these situations, penalty enforcement is as usual during a run, forward pass, kick, fumble and backward pass. Inadvertent whistles occur very infrequently but because they do exist, the above rule covers all situations.

Bon à savoir cette histoire de T Formation et de QB éligible en Formation de Shotgun...

ENTOMBED a écrit:

Bon à savoir cette histoire de T Formation et de QB éligible en Formation de Shotgun...

D'ailleurs, je me disais en lisant ça que je suis à peu près certain que personne ne le sait en France...

Busforever a écrit:

ENTOMBED a écrit:

Bon à savoir cette histoire de T Formation et de QB éligible en Formation de Shotgun...

D'ailleurs, je me disais en lisant ça que je suis à peu près certain que personne ne le sait en France...

Pas même George Eddy ?

surtout lui !!

Non, mais ça va se ressentir chez Entombed lorsqu'il sifflera un "QB inéligible" et qu'il sera obligé d'expliquer tout ça à 5 linemen énervés.

Busforever a écrit:

Non, mais ça va se ressentir chez Entombed lorsqu'il sifflera un "QB inéligible" et qu'il sera obligé d'expliquer tout ça à 5 linemen énervés.

3 on joue à 9 en France, ah non j'avais oublié que les marsupiaux sont montés en D2 grâce à leurs résultats je ne sais pas quoi.

Busforever a écrit:

Non, mais ça va se ressentir chez Entombed lorsqu'il sifflera un "QB inéligible" et qu'il sera obligé d'expliquer tout ça à 5 linemen énervés.

Je vais mettre des annexes à mon bouquin de règles qui me suit pour les matches : des impressions des pages du Forum !
"Bon, je sais que t'es pas content, tu viens de réussir un catch sur un Trick Play, mais tu vois, c'est Double C qui l'atteste : "pas en Formation T", mon pote !"

Citation :

Ask Jerry Markbreit
The former NFL referee answers questions about Week 2 in the NFL, high school football and his popular colleague Ed Hochuli

September 19, 2006, 4:01 PM CDT


When did the NFL allow offensive players to move a fumbled ball beyond the point of the fumble? It seems to me that the rule has always been that when the offense recovers its own fumble, they cannot advance the ball. Thanks Jerry. --Eric, Lakemoor, Ill.

Any player of either team may recover or catch and advance a fumble: before the fumble strikes the ground or after the fumble strikes the ground. The exception to this rule involves a fourth down fumble, a fumble during a try-for-point, or a fumble during the last two minutes of either half. Under these circumstances, only the fumbler may recover the ball and advance. If a teammate recovers, the play is ruled dead and the ball is returned to the spot of the fumble, unless the recovery spot was behind the spot of the fumble.

In the third quarter of the Bears-Lions game, Lions receiver Roy Williams fumbled and the officials ruled that his forward progress was stopped. Also in the third quarter, Bears receiver Bernard Berrian was tackled and stripped of the ball as he was going down. The questions are: When is forward progress stopped and if a ball carrier is going backward as well as down should the call be forward progress and stopped as well? Also under the new rule is forward progress reviewable just as down by contact? --Ron Gubrud, Dallas

Forward progress is ruled on the field when the covering official decides that the ball carrier, while in possession, has been substantially stopped by defenders. If the ball carrier is being driven backwards, forward progress is also ruled and even though the ball carrier goes down behind the spot where progress was ruled, he is given the foremost point of the play. The new rule concerns down-by-contact and not forward progress. Forward progress can be reviewed, providing it concerns a possible first down. All other progress points are not reviewable.

As a follow-up question regarding an inadvertent whistle, if a penalty occurs after the whistle (other than unsportsmanlike conduct) is the penalty not enforced? --Jim, Chicago

If there is a foul by either team during a play that involves an inadvertent whistle, penalty enforcement is as usual during a run, forward pass, kick, fumble and backward pass. The fact that the inadvertent whistle has blown does not negate fouls.

During my son's high school game this weekend, there was a penalty on the punting team after the ball was fielded by the receiving team. Instead of marking off the penalty at the point of infraction or at the end of the return, the referee returned the ball to the original line of scrimmage and marked the penalty off from there. The down was replayed and the punting team kicked again. I have never seen this before. Was it correct? Thanks, I love your column. --Mike Bloom, Lafayette, Calif.

I must confess that I am not an expert on the high school rules, so I called Jeff Stern, senior editor of Referee magazine, who is a high school and college official. The following is Jeff's ruling: The penalty infraction in your son's game must have occurred before possession changed, which is why the enforcement was at the previous spot. Under high school rules, once possession physically changes the penalty will be enforced from the end of the run. I am very glad that you enjoy the column.

Jerry, what are some of the new rule changes this season? --Pete Thome, Chicago

A brief summary of new NFL rules begins with:

• Personal or unsportsmanlike conduct fouls committed between halves will now be enforced on the opening kickoff of the second half.
  
  
• During kickoffs, at least four players of the kicking team must be on each side of the kicker when the ball is kicked. This is a college rule, but before this year, the NFL allowed teams to stack all of their players on one side of the kicker.
  
  
• Fouls committed on any kick play by the kicking team before possession changes can be enforced either from the previous spot (the spot of the kick) or can be added on to the end of the return by the receiving team. If a touchback is ruled, the enforcement is from the 20-yard line.
  
  
• Players are prohibited from grabbing the collar of the jersey, as well as the shoulder pad of the runner in an attempt to make a tackle. This action has to be immediate and is called "a horse collar."
  
  
• A rushing defender is prohibited from hitting in the knee area or below a passer who has one or both feet on the ground, even if the initial contact is above the knee. It is not a foul if the defender is blocked into the passer and has no opportunity to avoid him.
  
  
• Individual players involved in prolonged or excessive celebration is a foul for taunting. Players are prohibited from engaging in any celebration while on the ground. A celebration shall be deemed excessive or prolonged if a player continues to celebrate after a warning from an official.

I saw in the Arizona-San Francisco game during Week 1 that a new rule governing onside kicks has been put into place. The kicking team must have at least four players on each side of the kicker. What is the justification for this rule change? --Robert Schroeder, Ithaca, N.Y.

The justification for this new rule requiring four players on either side of the kicker is done for safety reasons. When a team stacks most or all of its players on the side of the field where an onside kick is headed, it creates a tremendous clashing of players and, apparently, the powers that be in the National Football League feel that it will be safer for all with this new rule. The NCAA has had this same rule for many years.

The hit on Trent Green has brought up some debates about the QB slide rule. Can you provide more details on this rule? --Daniel Tibbs, Missouri City, Texas

Whenever a runner, including the quarterback, declares himself down by sliding feet first on the ground, the play is ruled dead at the spot of the ball at the instant the runner so touches the ground. Defenders are prohibited from hitting the sliding runner or quarterback unless the defender had committed himself prior to the slide. This is exactly what happened in the Kansas City game to Trent Green. The hit by the defender was perfectly legal and correctly ruled by the officials.

My roommates and I are huge Ed Hochuli fans! We'd like to know where he is each week (the Hochu-watch). Is the assignment schedule for referees open to the public? How exactly does the scheduling work? --Chris Diya, Chicago

I am sure that Ed will be glad to hear that he has so many fans watching his games each week. You will have to search the games on Direct TV to find Ed because the schedules of officials are not published. Generally, an official sees a team no more than twice during the season with at least five weeks between these games.

Regarding an answer you gave in your Sept. 13 column, I never knew about the five-second rule of field goal attempts. But what would happen in a situation like the one that occurred last season when the Bears' Nathan Vasher returned a missed field goal for a for a touchdown? I know that play usually only happens at the very end of the first half or the game, but let's say it happened with 15 seconds left in the half. By the time the return man waited for the ball, caught it, and returned it for a touchdown, much more than five seconds would elapse. --Bob Parlapiano, Eastchester, N.Y.

The five-second rule on field goals only comes into effect on a successful field goal or an unsuccessful one that is not advanced. In your play situation, the play never ended and the clock would continue to run. I hope that this clears the five-second rule up. I knew when I wrote this last week that it would cause some confusion. So, I thank you for allowing me to clear it up.

Des fans d'un Arbitre !
J'suis déjà pas énormément populaire à Cenon...

J'ai du chemin à faire. OU PAS

ENTOMBED a écrit:

Des fans d'un Arbitre !
J'suis déjà pas énormément populaire à Cenon...

J'ai du chemin à faire. OU PAS

Mais si tu es populaire t'en fais pas

"Une gene de passe avant consiste en un contact au delà de la zone neutre par un joueur de l'équipe de défense dont l'intention de gener un adversaire éligible est évidente"

ça sort de mon bouquin de règles valables en France. Mais j'vois pas de différence sur ce coup-là avec la NFL.

CONTACT, même pas plaquage.

Sur un tacle, le contact est déjà bien appuyé...

Là, une "poussette" du bras suffit