The trick is if you get 12 men in the huddle it gets blown dead before the snap. You have to be somewhat secretive about it for it to work, it's not like you could put 52 players out there and expect them to run 10 seconds off with a play

If the Giants did this on purpose, I, as a Patriots fan, salute Tom Coughlin for it. No, seriously. It's a brilliant and perfectly cromulent tactic.

But, on the other hand, I couldn't help thinking at the time that the tactic doesn't seem fair in the slightest. Trading an 8 - 10 second run off the clock for 5 yards seems pretty unreasonable when the other team needs a TD.

ZAZ: since Justin Tuck was running off the field

A few seasons ago the Patriots had a trick play where a man pretended to run off the field but stopped before the sideline, lined up, and ran downfield before the defense could get a man on him.

The 49ers did it this season against the Rams on the fake field goal. Where Crabtree scored.

All they need to do to fix this situation is make sure the clock resets on this particular penalty, otherwise why wouldn't you do it? I'm not saying the Giants did it on purpose I'm just saying why wouldn't you? If Harbaugh had done it and it had won the game I would have been just fine with it.

Why not just have a rule where you put time back on the clock if there's a defensive penalty with, say, under a minute to go? I'm not sure about the NFL but in college an offensive penalty near the end of the game results in a 10 second run-off (same concept but for the other side of the ball).

"Cheat within the rules"?

There's a lot of butthurt n that phrase.

Donnchadha: How was this strategy supposed to work, exactly?

NE needed yardage and time to score a TD. The Giants didn't play the snap with 12 men, they just didn't get a sub off the field before the snap -- who then left the field and didn't participate or interfere with the play. NY didn't have a numerical advantage in pass coverage with an extra Justin Tuck running off the field, helmet in hands, therefore the play was going to be as "fair" as it ever was going to be. NE is now guaranteed 5 yards and a clock stoppage due to the penalty. Had they achieved more than 5 yards on the play, they'd have declined the penalty to take the greater yardage and still had the clock stoppage.

So, how does this benefit the Giants at all?

At that point in the game the time was more valuable to the Patriots than the five yards.

carej: Jeez, haven't we covered this enough? Tuck was running off the field HOLDING HIS FARKING HELMET IN HIS FARKING HAND! He's almost to the sideline when the ball is snapped. If they were really trying to run a Polish goalline why was he running off the field with his helmet off? Why not actually stay in & have the extra man for the entire play?

/ your blog suck subby

They might have wanted plausable deniability. That is to say, they didn't want anybody to know they were doing this on purpose, since it is the Super Bowl and somewhat "unsportsmanlike". So, they intentionally made it so that he wasn't completely off the field in time. If no penalty was called, no big deal, play proceeds as normal and he finishes leaving the field of play. If a penalty was called, they could go "Did I do that? Whoopsie! My bad!" and not have it be a blatant "cheating within the rules".

Geotpf: carej: Jeez, haven't we covered this enough? Tuck was running off the field HOLDING HIS FARKING HELMET IN HIS FARKING HAND! He's almost to the sideline when the ball is snapped. If they were really trying to run a Polish goalline why was he running off the field with his helmet off? Why not actually stay in & have the extra man for the entire play?

/ your blog suck subby

They might have wanted plausable deniability. That is to say, they didn't want anybody to know they were doing this on purpose, since it is the Super Bowl and somewhat "unsportsmanlike". So, they intentionally made it so that he wasn't completely off the field in time. If no penalty was called, no big deal, play proceeds as normal and he finishes leaving the field of play. If a penalty was called, they could go "Did I do that? Whoopsie! My bad!" and not have it be a blatant "cheating within the rules".

How would that have benefited the defense? "Oh look, we had an extra guy out there for a fraction of a second, and even though he was in no position to affect the play in any way, we sure got one over on them!"

Did the Giants cheat within the rules by running 12 men on the field to run time off the clock?

Short answer is no.
Long answer is also no.

Isn't cheating within the rules kind of oxymoronic? If the punitive measures able to be given weren't enough, or it was vague on time specific penalties, then that is on the rules. NFL made it that the game can't end on a defensive penalty for this reason. They should have extended it to cover more ground than the last play. I am not a Giants fan, but if they did is what they are accused of, they exploited a loophole in the rules, much like I did on my net football league when a 6-1-4 defensive scheme keying pass with a DL dropping into coverage became almost impossible to move against. Wasn'y my fault the rules (of the sim) were vague. Now they aren't vague and no one runs a 6-1-4 anymore.

Yes...I just compared net football to real football.

Geotpf: carej: Jeez, haven't we covered this enough? Tuck was running off the field HOLDING HIS FARKING HELMET IN HIS FARKING HAND! He's almost to the sideline when the ball is snapped. If they were really trying to run a Polish goalline why was he running off the field with his helmet off? Why not actually stay in & have the extra man for the entire play?

/ your blog suck subby

They might have wanted plausable deniability. That is to say, they didn't want anybody to know they were doing this on purpose, since it is the Super Bowl and somewhat "unsportsmanlike". So, they intentionally made it so that he wasn't completely off the field in time. If no penalty was called, no big deal, play proceeds as normal and he finishes leaving the field of play. If a penalty was called, they could go "Did I do that? Whoopsie! My bad!" and not have it be a blatant "cheating within the rules".

But the fact remains that they gain nothing by having a player almost off the field, drawing a penalty. he's not increasing the chances they stop the play because he's not actually playing. All it does is give the Patriots the choice between 5 yards and the result of the play.

ZAZ: Seriously, there's nothing in the rules that gives the officials the right to blow the play dead in the instance that the Giants put the entire team on defense for a play like that.

The rules allow the referee to award a touchdown in the case of blatant misconduct if, in the his judgment, the offense would have scored. The rules also say the play is dead if the whistle blows. Oops, we had 20 men on the field. Oops, we mistakenly blew the play dead 1 second after the snap.

I don't think the Giants wanted a Super Bowl victory that could not be seen under the giant mound of asterisks.

What you're referring to is the "Palpably Unfair Act" found here: http://quirkyresearch.blogspot.com/2009/12/blogging-nfl-rule-book-palp ably-unfair.html

"Rule 12-3-3: A player or substitute shall not interfere with play by any act which is palpably unfair. Penalty: For a palpably unfair act: Offender may be disqualified. The Referee, after consulting his crew, enforces any such distance penalty as they consider equitable and irrespective of any other specified code penalty. The Referee could award a score."

Bill Barnwell covered this point in his Grantland article Monday (http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7545771/the-patriots-giants-super -bowl-rematch-disappoint). Skip to the last 6 paragraphs where he describes this and touches on the Buddy Ryan point as well.

The Giants only had 11 men on the field during the play. I mean the penalty was correct, Tuck hadn't made it off before the snap, but he still went off the field.

So basically, the Patriots got a free down + clock stoppage out of it and the Giants got nothing.

Super Chronic: Geotpf: carej: Jeez, haven't we covered this enough? Tuck was running off the field HOLDING HIS FARKING HELMET IN HIS FARKING HAND! He's almost to the sideline when the ball is snapped. If they were really trying to run a Polish goalline why was he running off the field with his helmet off? Why not actually stay in & have the extra man for the entire play?

/ your blog suck subby

They might have wanted plausable deniability. That is to say, they didn't want anybody to know they were doing this on purpose, since it is the Super Bowl and somewhat "unsportsmanlike". So, they intentionally made it so that he wasn't completely off the field in time. If no penalty was called, no big deal, play proceeds as normal and he finishes leaving the field of play. If a penalty was called, they could go "Did I do that? Whoopsie! My bad!" and not have it be a blatant "cheating within the rules".

How would that have benefited the defense? "Oh look, we had an extra guy out there for a fraction of a second, and even though he was in no position to affect the play in any way, we sure got one over on them!"

It took a play's worth of time off the clock.

the idea of the extra man defense isn't new. hell ryan (no, not that one) had it in his playbook, it's called the polish defense. the nfl needs to change the rule so that the offense can choose yards or clock.



/over 13 on the field gives the officials discretion to do something more.

Geotpf: Super Chronic: Geotpf: carej: Jeez, haven't we covered this enough? Tuck was running off the field HOLDING HIS FARKING HELMET IN HIS FARKING HAND! He's almost to the sideline when the ball is snapped. If they were really trying to run a Polish goalline why was he running off the field with his helmet off? Why not actually stay in & have the extra man for the entire play?

/ your blog suck subby

They might have wanted plausable deniability. That is to say, they didn't want anybody to know they were doing this on purpose, since it is the Super Bowl and somewhat "unsportsmanlike". So, they intentionally made it so that he wasn't completely off the field in time. If no penalty was called, no big deal, play proceeds as normal and he finishes leaving the field of play. If a penalty was called, they could go "Did I do that? Whoopsie! My bad!" and not have it be a blatant "cheating within the rules".

How would that have benefited the defense? "Oh look, we had an extra guy out there for a fraction of a second, and even though he was in no position to affect the play in any way, we sure got one over on them!"

It took a play's worth of time off the clock.

No, the play took a play's worth of time off the clock. Do you think the clock would magically have not been running during that play?

C'mon man!

A Fark Handle: the idea of the extra man defense isn't new. hell ryan (no, not that one) had it in his playbook, it's called the polish defense. the nfl needs to change the rule so that the offense can choose yards or clock.

[smartfootball.com image 640x603]

/over 13 on the field gives the officials discretion to do something more.

The Polish Defense involves using an extra man. Not having one running off the field when the ball is snapped.

Hey Subby.........

Wise_Guy: Donnchadha: How was this strategy supposed to work, exactly?

NE needed yardage and time to score a TD. The Giants didn't play the snap with 12 men, they just didn't get a sub off the field before the snap -- who then left the field and didn't participate or interfere with the play. NY didn't have a numerical advantage in pass coverage with an extra Justin Tuck running off the field, helmet in hands, therefore the play was going to be as "fair" as it ever was going to be. NE is now guaranteed 5 yards and a clock stoppage due to the penalty. Had they achieved more than 5 yards on the play, they'd have declined the penalty to take the greater yardage and still had the clock stoppage.

So, how does this benefit the Giants at all?

At that point in the game the time was more valuable to the Patriots than the five yards.

Maybe they should have videotaped the Giants' practices. They would have known about this strategy and could have prepared for it

netweavr: A Fark Handle: the idea of the extra man defense isn't new. hell ryan (no, not that one) had it in his playbook, it's called the polish defense. the nfl needs to change the rule so that the offense can choose yards or clock.

[smartfootball.com image 640x603]

/over 13 on the field gives the officials discretion to do something more.

The Polish Defense involves using an extra man. Not having one running off the field when the ball is snapped.

agreed. the giants weren't cheating. however, the rule as written allows for cheating.

carej: Jeez, haven't we covered this enough? Tuck was running off the field HOLDING HIS FARKING HELMET IN HIS FARKING HAND! He's almost to the sideline when the ball is snapped. If they were really trying to run a Polish goalline why was he running off the field with his helmet off? Why not actually stay in & have the extra man for the entire play?

/ your blog suck subby

If anything, the officials screwed up by not dinging the Giants for 15 yards for Tuck having his helmet off during a play.

A Fark Handle: netweavr: A Fark Handle: the idea of the extra man defense isn't new. hell ryan (no, not that one) had it in his playbook, it's called the polish defense. the nfl needs to change the rule so that the offense can choose yards or clock.

[smartfootball.com image 640x603]

/over 13 on the field gives the officials discretion to do something more.

The Polish Defense involves using an extra man. Not having one running off the field when the ball is snapped.

agreed. the giants weren't cheating. however, the rule as written allows for cheating.

Exactly, and I expect that to be corrected this off-season.

PowerSlacker: carej: Jeez, haven't we covered this enough? Tuck was running off the field HOLDING HIS FARKING HELMET IN HIS FARKING HAND! He's almost to the sideline when the ball is snapped. If they were really trying to run a Polish goalline why was he running off the field with his helmet off? Why not actually stay in & have the extra man for the entire play?

/ your blog suck subby

If anything, the officials screwed up by not dinging the Giants for 15 yards for Tuck having his helmet off during a play.

They could have, but they were running a "let them play" style of reffing all game.

Calling it a strategy implied intent. Clearly there was none here. In another case, maybe it's an issue to discuss. But in this instance it's just grabbing at straws.

ZAZ: Seriously, there's nothing in the rules that gives the officials the right to blow the play dead in the instance that the Giants put the entire team on defense for a play like that.

The rules allow the referee to award a touchdown in the case of blatant misconduct if, in the his judgment, the offense would have scored. The rules also say the play is dead if the whistle blows. Oops, we had 20 men on the field. Oops, we mistakenly blew the play dead 1 second after the snap.

I don't think the Giants wanted a Super Bowl victory that could not be seen under the giant mound of asterisks.

Is that true? I can't even imagine the Soccer level riot that would cause at a football game.

The thing no one talks about is those 5 yards (from the penalty) effectively put them into Brady's Hail Mary range.

I_C_Weener: For the same reason that the game cannot end on a defensive penalty, the clock should not run on any play in the last 2 minutes that ends with a defensive penalty.

They already get a clock stoppage while the penalty is assessed. The NFL isn't going to get in to the business of adding time on the clock.

netweavr: A Fark Handle: netweavr: A Fark Handle: the idea of the extra man defense isn't new. hell ryan (no, not that one) had it in his playbook, it's called the polish defense. the nfl needs to change the rule so that the offense can choose yards or clock.

[smartfootball.com image 640x603]

/over 13 on the field gives the officials discretion to do something more.

The Polish Defense involves using an extra man. Not having one running off the field when the ball is snapped.

agreed. the giants weren't cheating. however, the rule as written allows for cheating.

Exactly, and I expect that to be corrected this off-season.

I don't. It's a free play. Most QBs recognize a free play and make an endzone bomb out of it. The game can't end on a defensive penalty and the clock stops regardless of whether it's accepted or not, so it's a net benefit play and will not change. Otherwise you'd have to change every defensive call like defensive offsides that results in a free play

netweavr: No, the play took a play's worth of time off the clock. Do you think the clock would magically have not been running during that play?

C'mon man!


This. The Polish Defense only works if the extra men on the field help to stop the big play, be it getting big yardage on a hail mary or scoring in a goalline situation. The whole idea is to give up a 5 yard penalty in order to more easily prevent a touchdown.

Tuck ran off the field and the play went ahead 11-11. The Giants get no advantage on defense, and the Pats get the penalty and a guaranteed clock stoppage.

Daniels: I_C_Weener: For the same reason that the game cannot end on a defensive penalty, the clock should not run on any play in the last 2 minutes that ends with a defensive penalty.

They already get a clock stoppage while the penalty is assessed. The NFL isn't going to get in to the business of adding time on the clock.

They do that all the time. If a fumble call is overturned you'll hear the ref say "please reset the game clock to ..." to account for the clock runoff that occurred during the runback. It happens probably at least once a week.

Gee I don't know, subby, did Vince Wilfork "cheat" when he took a dive to draw a BS holding call when the Giants were driving towards a 16-3 lead in the 2nd quarter? Because he admitted as much on the field, as shown on NFL SoundFX last night.