Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:07 pm EST
On a key 3rd down late in the 3rd quarter of the Giants-Eagles game, Eli Manning was flagged for a penalty for throwing the ball after having crossed the line of scrimmage. The first down completion was overturned and the Giants appeared to have been forced to kick a field goal that would have cut the Eagles lead to one point.
Tom Coughlin challenged the play though, a decision that earned catcalls from both the NBC announcing crew and the group I was watching the game with. Replays clearly showed the ball was well over the line of scrimmage.

Imagine everyone's surprise, then, when referee Walt Coleman announced that the call was overturned. The rule, apparently, dictates that every part of the quarterback's body has to be over the line of scrimmage for a penalty to be called. Since Eli's right foot was still on the line, he is considered behind the line of scrimmage and the pass is legal. To which I say, "WHAT?!"
This makes the tuck rule look like logical. Every spot ruling in football is based on the position of the ball. On a touchdown, the ball only needs to cross the plane of the endzone. The ball carrier can have his toe on the two yard line and it wouldn't matter so long as the any part of the ball is touching the end zone.
Each individual play in a game is also spotted wherever the ball is located when a player is ruled down. And this threshold isn't only subjected to the football. When a player steps out of bounds, he's considered out at the instant one foot touches the line. It doesn't matter where the rest of the body is, all that matter is that if one bit of the toe touches the OB line, that player is out.
But the line of scrimmage rule is written so that quarterbacks have to entirely cross over into another plane in order to be over the line of scrimmage? Compared to the other rules, this one is a complete outlier. It's completely ridiculous.
Shutdown Corner is an NFL blog edited by Matthew J. Darnell. Email him, and follow him on Twitter.

Posted Nov 24 2009
NFL: Struggling teams - Who's to blame?
Posted Nov 24 2009
Patriots CB Hands Out Turkeys In South Fla.
Posted Nov 24 2009
Edited by MJD
Edited by 'Duk
Edited by J.E. Skeets
Edited by Greg Wyshynski
Edited by Matt Hinton
Edited by E. Brennan
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Steve Cofield
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Andy Behrens
106 Comments
1 - 25 of 106
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
But even accepting the rule as it stands, I thought this play was an incorrect call. Manning should have been penalized.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
even so.. if you judge from the line ALONE... anyone without glasses can see his heal on the line...
as far as the rule...
football has a TON of tarded rules...
try the tuck one for example...
and im NO fan that DBs can force recievers out of bounds to keep the completion from taking place.
Report Abuse
The rule is pretty dumb though, i guess they meant the feet have to be under the line.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
The rule may be (and is) stupid, like you said, but the call was still correct, no matter how much the Eagles fans commenting here wish it wasn't. Like someone else said above, the NFL just has a bunch of weird rules... there are probably a handful of them that can afford rewrites.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
I've seen many of bad calls...if the Giants got lucky so what. I've seen calls go the other way for teams that don't deserve it! Giants won it fair and square!
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Also, we need to stop becoming so dependant on inaccurate Television Graphics that are NOT seen on the field in REAL LIFE!!!! There would have been no controversy if this game took place 20 years ago before all the annoying CGI the NFL insists on bombarding us with on Game Day.
Report Abuse
1 - 25 of 106