What the F*&k is a Seahawk? Game Day Thread Seattle at Detroit 9/30/24

[El Axe]

I just noticed that this referee signalled the touchdown on the ARSB catch. The ref up the sideline did not signal and got some flak for it, but maybe it wasn't his call? I don't know the protocall for it

image.png

[Iron Lion]

Metcalf is a big boy with some incredible strength for a receiver. He doesn't put the ball on the turf very often.

They said he leads the league in fumbles since such and such date.

[Iron Lion]

The refs are really putting in work to keep Seattle in this game.

Hutch kneels down, the refs declare he's an injured player, and force the Lions to take a timeout.

And why was Hutch forced to come out for a play if we are charged a timeout?

[Topweasel]

And why was Hutch forced to come out for a play if we are charged a timeout?

Because of the when it happened. After the two minutes an injury must use a time out. Except if there are no timeouts left, there is a buffer injury timeout or two (or was, use the 09 browns game as an example) then a 10s run off and a running clock after that.

It was on purpose. Hutch was running off I think maybe because he noticed to many players and when he thinks he won't make it off in time he goes to his knee really quickly to force the timeout.

[Dan V]

El Axe,
I went and reviewed the play and the guy who was supposed to make the call just stared and nodded his head like “yep it’s good” . He was supposed to signal TD . The other guy signaled it like we all saw.
The protocol as far as I know is the official closest to the play is responsible for the signal unless his view is blocked or he is knocked over, etc.

[Iron Lion]

Because of the when it happened. After the two minutes an injury must use a time out. Except if there are no timeouts left, there is a buffer injury timeout or two (or was, use the 09 browns game as an example) then a 10s run off and a running clock after that.

It was on purpose. Hutch was running off I think maybe because he noticed to many players and when he thinks he won't make it off in time he goes to his knee really quickly to force the timeout.

Well, two things.

1. We had all 3 timeouts when this happened. So I still do not understand why he cannot go back in if a timeout is used.

2. In the Browns game, Cleveland called a timeout to argue about the PI call. It wasn't a 4th timeout charged for injury.

[Mainevent]

If play is stopped due to an injury, that player has to come off the field. If the Lions had called the timeout themselves they can do whatever, but when the ref stops the game for an injured player they have to come off the field. The charging of a timeout to the team is a way to disincentivize teams from faking injuries to stop the game.

[Iron Lion]

If play is stopped due to an injury, that player has to come off the field. If the Lions had called the timeout themselves they can do whatever, but when the ref stops the game for an injured player they have to come off the field. The charging of a timeout to the team is a way to disincentivize teams from faking injuries to stop the game.

So you're saying if the Lions called the TO themselves, then Hutch could come back in, but if the refs charged them the TO, then Hutch cannot come back in? If true, isn't that a stupid rule?

[Mainevent]

The refs stopped play (and the clock) because they identified a player was injured. That’s the distinguishing factor here. If the Lions voluntarily call their own timeout before the refs do, then it’s just a timeout and not an injury stoppage. The refs aren’t interjecting in the game on an injured players behalf. It’s pretty straightforward.

[Iron Lion]

The refs stopped play (and the clock) because they identified a player was injured. That’s the distinguishing factor here. If the Lions voluntarily call their own timeout before the refs do, then it’s just a timeout and not an injury stoppage. The refs aren’t interjecting in the game on an injured players behalf. It’s pretty straightforward.

Sure it's straightforward. I can comprehend the rule and think it's a stupid rule.

I remember Deb getting super mad at Mike Pereira, it was week 1 at Tampa in 2011. We picked off a pass, there was an offensive penalty that we declined. But also after the play, two Lions, Delmas and whoever else, were celebrating together in a way that was technically unsportsmanlike conduct. Pereira pointed out during the broadcast that by rule rule - a fuckin' stupid rule - the dead ball foul would've offset the live ball foul. So if the refs would've (correctly) flagged the INT celebration, then the Bucs get the ball back... yet if the celebration was (correctly) flagged, and the Bucs penalty (holding or whatever) had been missed by the refs, then the Lions would keep the ball, minus 15 yards. It was absolutely bananas how stupid that rule was. I get that a false start negating a missed FG or INT can be frustrating for the defense, and they want to decline it but can't, but the issue there is that the play is DEAD before it starts. This rule Pereira described is just beyond stupid.

Now, this timeout thing with Hutch vs Seattle isn't as stupid, but it is a stupid rule. The refs can be correct, and the rule can be dumb. We've seen tons of that shit at the end of games, such as Calvin @CHI and Tate vs Atlanta, and on and on. There are stupid rules on the books. If you disagree, ok that's fine, you're an intelligent person and I like your posts, but I just disagree on this. If a team is charged an actual timeout, not a fake 4th injury timeout, then the injured guy should get to come back in. Because outside of 2 minutes, if a guy is hurt and takes all day on the field, and we get a double triple quadruple double header of commercials while waiting, the team technically could call timeout and he'd come back in. So the spirit of the injury rule isn't about how long the game is delayed, but about whether a timeout is charged.

[chemiclord]

As the guy who started this chain of discussion; if Hutch did this intentionally to slow the play down for his team... okay. An odd decision (considering the Lions had all three timeouts) but fine.

But at the time, damn if it didn't seem like the refs pulling another obscure rule out of their ass that somehow happened to screw the Lions yet again.

[Cody_Russell]

Do you think it’s possible that Hutchinson was trying to be sneaky there? Blend in with the sidelines. The possibility that Geno wouldn’t recognize someone over there for another Hutch INT opportunity in his career. Hutch has been oddly lined up in that position before, but not kneeling down. Recalling his INT vs Justin Fields

Whatever it was… he was laughing on the sidelines after being pulled out of the game on the next play.

[Mainevent]

It’s not that obscure of a rule. They literally announce that the team gets charged a ttimeout rule because it’s under two minutes, you’ll see/hear it every weekend.

[Mainevent]

Do you think it’s possible that Hutchinson was trying to be sneaky there? Blend in with the sidelines. The possibility that Geno wouldn’t recognize someone over there for another Hutch INT opportunity in his career. Hutch has been oddly lined up in that position before, but not kneeling down. Recalling his INT vs Justin Fields

Whatever it was… he was laughing on the sidelines after being pulled out of the game on the next play.

yeah, it was definitely odd, so it does make you think he was trying to pull something sneaky and it sort of backfired.

[El Axe]

Picture of Seahawk sideline taken immediately after Witherspoon bounces off Monty

image.png