There are 262 users in the forums
question on noncall at end of pats-panthers game
Nov 19, 2013 at 9:23 AM
- Joecool
- Veteran
- Posts: 70,984
Great job of the refs finally using common sense and not rewarding a team for a play that was not going to have success either way.
Nov 19, 2013 at 10:06 AM
- blizzuntz
- Veteran
- Posts: 48,115
Crabtree in the SB
Nov 19, 2013 at 10:16 AM
- 4ML
- Veteran
- Posts: 51,574
Originally posted by Joecool:
Great job of the refs finally using common sense and not rewarding a team for a play that was not going to have success either way.
It was an excellent call and by the rule. You can't have PI if the pass is tipped or intercepted before it gets to the receiver. Finally, refs got something right.
Nov 19, 2013 at 11:33 AM
- hofer36
- Veteran
- Posts: 8,257
Originally posted by maltz88:
Originally posted by ChazBoner:
worst part is that they actually threw the flag,then just picked it up. It was pass interference since it happened when the ball was in the air.
..........but it's not pass interference if the ball is tipped or intercepted before the ball makes it to the receiver.
I think it's actually a good call. Horrible rule.
By the rule, what's to keep a defender from absolutely driving a receiver out of the way while a ball is in the air and letting another defender in the area make the int. unconstested?
that cant be the rule if the interference or hold prevents the receiver from getting too the ball before the interception--in other if the interference allows the db to make the int unimpeded, it had an effect on the play
Nov 19, 2013 at 12:14 PM
- DelCed2486
- Veteran
- Posts: 7,158
It was PI...the referees' decision to justify picking up the flag because it was "uncatchable" is ludicrous. Even though the pass wasn't thrown precisely to the spot Gronkowski was, he's 6'6", can cover ground quickly, clearly saw the path of the ball and was attempting to go make the catch. Keuchly was guility of at least two of the following:
PROHIBITED ACTS
Article 2 Prohibited Acts by both teams while the ball is in the air.
��Acts that are pass interference
include but are not limited to:
(a) Contact by a player who is not playing the ball that restricts the opponent's opportunity to make the
catch.
(b) Playing through the back of an opponent in an attempt to make a play on the ball.
(c) Grabbing an opponent's arm(s) in such a manner that restricts his opportunity to catch a pass.
(d) Extending an arm across the body of an opponent, thus restricting his ability to catch a pass, and
regardless of whether the player committing such act is playing the ball.
(e) Cutting off the path of an opponent by making contact with him, without playing the ball.
(f) Hooking an opponent in an attempt to get to the ball in such a manner that it causes the opponent's
body to turn prior to the ball arriving.
(g) Initiating contact with an opponent by shoving or pushing off, thus creating a separation in an attempt
to catch a pass.
Note: If there is any question whether player contact is incidental, the ruling should be no interference.
PROHIBITED ACTS
Article 2 Prohibited Acts by both teams while the ball is in the air.
��Acts that are pass interference
include but are not limited to:
(a) Contact by a player who is not playing the ball that restricts the opponent's opportunity to make the
catch.
(b) Playing through the back of an opponent in an attempt to make a play on the ball.
(c) Grabbing an opponent's arm(s) in such a manner that restricts his opportunity to catch a pass.
(d) Extending an arm across the body of an opponent, thus restricting his ability to catch a pass, and
regardless of whether the player committing such act is playing the ball.
(e) Cutting off the path of an opponent by making contact with him, without playing the ball.
(f) Hooking an opponent in an attempt to get to the ball in such a manner that it causes the opponent's
body to turn prior to the ball arriving.
(g) Initiating contact with an opponent by shoving or pushing off, thus creating a separation in an attempt
to catch a pass.
Note: If there is any question whether player contact is incidental, the ruling should be no interference.
Nov 19, 2013 at 12:42 PM
- 4ML
- Veteran
- Posts: 51,574
Originally posted by hofer36:
Originally posted by maltz88:
Originally posted by ChazBoner:
worst part is that they actually threw the flag,then just picked it up. It was pass interference since it happened when the ball was in the air.
..........but it's not pass interference if the ball is tipped or intercepted before the ball makes it to the receiver.
I think it's actually a good call. Horrible rule.
By the rule, what's to keep a defender from absolutely driving a receiver out of the way while a ball is in the air and letting another defender in the area make the int. unconstested?
that cant be the rule if the interference or hold prevents the receiver from getting too the ball before the interception--in other if the interference allows the db to make the int unimpeded, it had an effect on the play
But the ball was intercepted about 5 yards before it got to Gronk. There was no way he could have caught it.
Notice when Gronk first tries to slow down...he has gone past the defender who makes the INT. That defender is going forward and Gronk is moving back. He can not catch that ball. No penalty.
Nov 19, 2013 at 12:49 PM
- blizzuntz
- Veteran
- Posts: 48,115
Originally posted by 4ML:Originally posted by hofer36:Originally posted by maltz88:Originally posted by ChazBoner:worst part is that they actually threw the flag,then just picked it up. It was pass interference since it happened when the ball was in the air.
..........but it's not pass interference if the ball is tipped or intercepted before the ball makes it to the receiver.
I think it's actually a good call. Horrible rule.
By the rule, what's to keep a defender from absolutely driving a receiver out of the way while a ball is in the air and letting another defender in the area make the int. unconstested?
that cant be the rule if the interference or hold prevents the receiver from getting too the ball before the interception--in other if the interference allows the db to make the int unimpeded, it had an effect on the play
But the ball was intercepted about 5 yards before it got to Gronk. There was no way he could have caught it.
Notice when Gronk first tries to slow down...he has gone past the defender who makes the INT. That defender is going forward and Gronk is moving back. He can not catch that ball. No penalty.
He cant stop from going backwards Bc there is a guy with his arms around him. Gron has the athletic ability to come back for the ball except for a 250lb defender's momentum and arms preventing it.
Nov 19, 2013 at 12:54 PM
- zaghawk
- Veteran
- Posts: 2,315
Originally posted by 4ML:
Originally posted by hofer36:
Originally posted by maltz88:
Originally posted by ChazBoner:
worst part is that they actually threw the flag,then just picked it up. It was pass interference since it happened when the ball was in the air.
..........but it's not pass interference if the ball is tipped or intercepted before the ball makes it to the receiver.
I think it's actually a good call. Horrible rule.
By the rule, what's to keep a defender from absolutely driving a receiver out of the way while a ball is in the air and letting another defender in the area make the int. unconstested?
that cant be the rule if the interference or hold prevents the receiver from getting too the ball before the interception--in other if the interference allows the db to make the int unimpeded, it had an effect on the play
But the ball was intercepted about 5 yards before it got to Gronk. There was no way he could have caught it.
Notice when Gronk first tries to slow down...he has gone past the defender who makes the INT. That defender is going forward and Gronk is moving back. He can not catch that ball. No penalty.
Lets say Gronk wasn't held, and he was able to jump forward...I'm pretty sure he would have pushed the player who made the interception and wouldn't that have been grounds for offensive PI resulting in game over?
Nov 19, 2013 at 1:01 PM
- 4ML
- Veteran
- Posts: 51,574
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
Originally posted by 4ML:
Originally posted by hofer36:
Originally posted by maltz88:
Originally posted by ChazBoner:
worst part is that they actually threw the flag,then just picked it up. It was pass interference since it happened when the ball was in the air.
..........but it's not pass interference if the ball is tipped or intercepted before the ball makes it to the receiver.
I think it's actually a good call. Horrible rule.
By the rule, what's to keep a defender from absolutely driving a receiver out of the way while a ball is in the air and letting another defender in the area make the int. unconstested?
that cant be the rule if the interference or hold prevents the receiver from getting too the ball before the interception--in other if the interference allows the db to make the int unimpeded, it had an effect on the play
But the ball was intercepted about 5 yards before it got to Gronk. There was no way he could have caught it.
Notice when Gronk first tries to slow down...he has gone past the defender who makes the INT. That defender is going forward and Gronk is moving back. He can not catch that ball. No penalty.
He cant stop from going backwards Bc there is a guy with his arms around him. Gron has the athletic ability to come back for the ball except for a 250lb defender's momentum and arms preventing it.
He's too far...and running int he wrong direction. You can clearly see when he realizes the ball is under-thrown and tries to slow down. By that time...the defender is moving forward to catch the ball. Unless Gronk is superman - he can't catch the ball. He'd have to make a complete stop...plant his foot and jump forward...while a defender is catching the ball and another defender between him and ball.
Nov 19, 2013 at 1:03 PM
- DelCed2486
- Veteran
- Posts: 7,158
Originally posted by zaghawk:
Originally posted by 4ML:
Originally posted by hofer36:
Originally posted by maltz88:
Originally posted by ChazBoner:
worst part is that they actually threw the flag,then just picked it up. It was pass interference since it happened when the ball was in the air.
..........but it's not pass interference if the ball is tipped or intercepted before the ball makes it to the receiver.
I think it's actually a good call. Horrible rule.
By the rule, what's to keep a defender from absolutely driving a receiver out of the way while a ball is in the air and letting another defender in the area make the int. unconstested?
that cant be the rule if the interference or hold prevents the receiver from getting too the ball before the interception--in other if the interference allows the db to make the int unimpeded, it had an effect on the play
But the ball was intercepted about 5 yards before it got to Gronk. There was no way he could have caught it.
Notice when Gronk first tries to slow down...he has gone past the defender who makes the INT. That defender is going forward and Gronk is moving back. He can not catch that ball. No penalty.
Lets say Gronk wasn't held, and he was able to jump forward...I'm pretty sure he would have pushed the player who made the interception and wouldn't that have been grounds for offensive PI resulting in game over?
"Pushing", as in using him arms to move the player out of his way...yes, that would be PI. But if he makes "incidental contact" while competing for the ball, no, that would not be PI.
Nov 19, 2013 at 1:05 PM
- DelCed2486
- Veteran
- Posts: 7,158
Originally posted by 4ML:
He's too far...and running int he wrong direction. You can clearly see when he realizes the ball is under-thrown and tries to slow down. By that time...the defender is moving forward to catch the ball. Unless Gronk is superman - he can't catch the ball. He'd have to make a complete stop...plant his foot and jump forward...while a defender is catching the ball and another defender between him and ball.
Disagree, he's starting to plant his foot to come back to the ball, but then it's Keuchly's hug/momentum that forces Gronkowski back another 5-6 steps.
Nov 19, 2013 at 1:11 PM
- Cjez
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 163,053
should've been PI no matter how you slice it. Ball was in play, contact occurred before the INT. if Gronk had put a little more effort in getting back to the ball, the call would've stood. 1st and goal.
[ Edited by ChazBoner on Nov 19, 2013 at 1:12 PM ]
Nov 19, 2013 at 1:20 PM
- 4ML
- Veteran
- Posts: 51,574
Originally posted by DelCed2486:
Originally posted by 4ML:
He's too far...and running int he wrong direction. You can clearly see when he realizes the ball is under-thrown and tries to slow down. By that time...the defender is moving forward to catch the ball. Unless Gronk is superman - he can't catch the ball. He'd have to make a complete stop...plant his foot and jump forward...while a defender is catching the ball and another defender between him and ball.
Disagree, he's starting to plant his foot to come back to the ball, but then it's Keuchly's hug/momentum that forces Gronkowski back another 5-6 steps.
When he's starting to plant his foot...the other defender is moving forward to catch the ball. There is no way Gronk can plant is foot and jump forward and make a play on that ball. The ball is ridiculously under thrown.
Nov 19, 2013 at 1:21 PM
- ChipDouglas510
- RIP ChipDouglas510
- Posts: 19,157
Originally posted by ChazBoner:
should've been PI no matter how you slice it. Ball was in play, contact occurred before the INT. if Gronk had put a little more effort in getting back to the ball, the call would've stood. 1st and goal.
This
Nov 19, 2013 at 1:28 PM
- 4ML
- Veteran
- Posts: 51,574
lol...he's too far and going in the wrong direction. He can't compete for that ball.