Analyzing Matthew Stafford’s incomplete pass vs. Minnesota Vikings | Pro Football Talk | NFL on NBC

I too thought it would at least be grounding, but Nacua was in the area. And Stafford is known for the "no look" pass.

Trying to find something to nitpick on why the Vikings lost. Rams punted the ball away, so it was a non-factor. The refs in this game were actually atrocious against the Rams. They were doing everything they could to keep the Vikings in the game

In every sport officials are often deciding games and it leads to cynicism and devalues the entertainment value--this fan is sick of it.

Wrist flicking shouldn't qualify as a "pass". It simply a live ball at that point.

This is why NFL football sucks. Why waste your time on it. Real football ended in the early 90s.

It was grounding. But it wasent according to the rules. Stafford knew exactly what he was doing manipulating the language of the rule. In no way is it a fumble.

The most ridiculous way the intentional grounding rule is not enforced are all the throws OB and nowhere near a receiver. Maybe 10 feet over his head, but obviously the best way to avoid a sack without risking an interception, and never an attempt to complete a pass.

NFL really screwed up penalties this year, face masks & common sense reviews!!! BALL TOUCHING GROUND. ON CATCHES IS RIDICULOUS!!!

I agree with your analysis of the rule, and that it needs to change. You could also make the argument that he was clearly in the grasp, and if he gets lit up by a defender while he’s trying to make that play, I find it hard to believe that they would not throw a flagfor unnecessary roughness or roughing the passer

Steelers fan here, that was a pass, I don't understand this discussion... worst case scenario we are talking about intentional grounding, but fumble?? C'mon...

see the replay, He could have tucked it in but he threw it so it is not a FUMBLE

Stafford was curled up half into a ball and couldn't even see where he was "throwing" the ball. That's as intentional a grounding as can be.

I think Stafford was flailing his arm while he was getting sacked and fumbling. It “looked” like a pass in slow motion.

Please Bill and this guy wanna talk about quaterbacks being saved. And there no help for the defense. They werent saying anything about that tuck rule for Brady that sent them to the superbowl.

Florio irritates me but in this case he's absolutely correct. He described it perfectly - Stafford gamed a weird rule (can't blame the guy) and got away with it. If that's not intentional grounding there's no such thing as intentional grounding.

Fumble

The problem i have with this is that delay of game has become a judgement call. the clock reaching 0 has become... well, its up to the ref. but intentional grounding is ruled completely without any judgement of intent by the ref on if the qb was trying to actually get the ball to a receiver. his arm was going forward and a eligible receiver was in the area ...incomplete pass, lets move on. a clock OBVIOUSLY reaching 0 and no call.

he was not looking

Only Ram fans agree with the call, absolutely terrible

I’m a lions fan and I feel for the Vikings fan base. Both Goff and Staford should get of been attentional grounding.

For a league the prioritize offense, offenses the past few weeks sucked.

It’s obviously a pass based off Stanford’s reaction right after the play. He obviously was trying to throw the ball.

Im surprised this is not being done more often. Loophole in the rule

He knows the play, he knew Puka was right there. Flicked it forward in his direction

That was a scoop and score.

If anyone's ever seen the movie Baseketball, The creator's Trey Parker and Matt Stone called this s*** back in 1998. Football is making a downward spiral with these b***** rules.

I watched the game with my family and once we say the replay we all agreed it was an incomplete pass. Not because it seemed like one but because it fit one by the definition in the NFL rules. His arm was going forward so it's a pass. It landed within range of an eligible receiver so it was not intentional grounding. That seems silly but it's consistent with the NFL's way of interpreting such things. Quarterbacks will heave a ball 10 feet over their receivers heads out-of-bounds if no one is open so as to not lose yards. Do we regard that as a cheap play when our favourite team's QB does that? I notice the really lousy quarterbacks tend to not do that so it does involve good decision making on the part of the player.

How often has this specific situation occurred? This is the first time I've ever seen it so unless it becomes a common problem I don't see any reason to tinker with the rules. This isn't even the key play of a close game. The game was a blowout. No one got screwed out of a playoff win because Stafford gamed the system. So I say leave things alone for now. I'm much more scared about refs having a more subjective call to make and that influencing the game. Do you want a Superbowl controversy based on "well was he actually trying to pass to that guy?" Intentional grounding is pretty easy to figure out right now.

That was ridiculous regardless of the outcome

Watch the play! Puca Nacua was in the area.

Second time in two weeks vikings opponent got away with an intentional grounding to me that was a fumble

Puka was right there so there you have it.

I’m fine if you wanna call it a pass, but then it should be intentional grounding.

Sam Darnold is not getting the benefit of the doubt if he did that

What a crybaby Mike is! Boo-Hoo, the Vikings lost. Whaaaa...Whaaa!

....common sense. There needs to be a small group, a 100% non-biasd team incentived with the purpose of inventing any and every option or consideration that gives originality, uniqueness and non-obscure options.

I actually agree with Florio. But Stafford just put all QB in danger. Why wouldn't the line men now tee off on every QB so that can't do the flip.

Same exact thing happened in Detroit game, except in the end zone, goff hit a lineman even. NFL refs hate the Vikings

The games are fixed.

They're fixed for:
(a) your entertainment;
(b) political interests/initiatives; and
(c) gambling considerations.

If these NFL officials had any integrity at all, New York replay would have ruled the review inconclusive.....screw 'em I'm done with the NFL!

That was 100% a fumble. Rediculous

Stafford = Prima Donna

Is Florio also advocating for when a screen play is well defended and the QB throws it at the targets feet it is called grounding?
Also can we get a highligh reel of QBs failing at this as there are a lot of picks and near picks on QBs attempting this.

It was a smart play by a veteran QB to avoid a sack. Taking advantage of the rules is winning football.

Worst case scenario it’s intentional grounding. Not a fumble. Rams ended up punting that drive.

the game was fixed the first time we played the rams and now fixed again , HOW DID WHEN IT WENT TO NEW YORK FOR REVIEW IT DID NOT EVEN TAKE 2 SECONDS TO COME TOO THERE CROOKED DECISION

That is why the NFL is bull shi well you know that was BS

Hi I am Tom and I think the NFL is rigged or fixed if you like, as it looks to me as far as I can see it rigged and at this point I would be asking myself, if I would put money down on my team and trust the Ref's to call a fair game, I don't think they can.

And that's no throw. No way

What are we calling this incident now? Wrist-flick-gate?

That should not be considered an attempted pass. That is a fumble. QBs don't even feel like they have to protect the ball if they make some half-assed effort at a limp wristed flip of the ball. It's not grounding either. It's a sack or a fumble. Probably both.