A question about "The Interception"

Joker said:

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/passinterference

Nah...I probably need a Milky Way to understand this space alien "pass interference" theory.

Click to expand...

What is your problem?

You need to work on your reading comprehension.

Nobody was advancing a theory. The DB knocked the receiver out of the way. I was trying to understand why that wasn't PI. People explained. Now I understand. No thanks to your snarkiness.

jemmer said:

What is your problem?

You need to work on your reading comprehension.

Nobody was advancing a theory. The DB knocked the receiver out of the way. I was trying to understand why that wasn't PI. People explained. Now I understand. No thanks to your snarkiness.

Click to expand...

Joker is rumored to escaped from a secret government facility where he was subject to a series of experiments trying to turn him into the perfect war machine. I'm saying he's Wolverine....allegedly. Or maybe just a close relative. That snark is part of his charm. Don't take it personal.

Petersen23 said:

As long as you play the ball, they won't flag you on it... unless your unfortunate to have Ed Hochuli as the ref (j/k Hochuli is ok in small doses), very close play though... Butler just got a great jump

Click to expand...

That gif in your signature takes my breath away.

You keep posting "the DB KNOCKED the WR out of the way!!!!"...Butler did NOT knock him out of the way. Butler went for the ball which is HIS RIGHT! Do you NOT get this??? The receiver collided with HIM. Stop trying to push this "KNOCKED THE RECEIVER OUT OF THE WAY!!!!!" agenda of yours. You've printed it how many times now? Why would you even bring this up if not for some agenda trying to degrade Butler's play and infer the Patriots committed a penalty that NEVER EXISTED!!!

And everyone else, there is a poster named McGinly from J.I. I'm sure a lot of you know exactly who I'm talking about. He has openly bragged about possessing over 20 mults on this site of ours since 2007. THIS is his M.O.,try to create a controversy HERE that is taken as FACT on that sewerhole Rat board.

Joker said:

You keep posting "the DB KNOCKED the WR out of the way!!!!"...Butler did NOT knock him out of the way. Butler went for the ball which is HIS RIGHT! Do you NOT get this??? The receiver collided with HIM. Stop trying to push this "KNOCKED THE RECEIVER OUT OF THE WAY!!!!!" agenda of yours. You've printed it how many times now? Why would you even bring this up if not for some agenda trying to degrade Butler's play and infer the Patriots committed a penalty that NEVER EXISTED!!!

And everyone else, there is a poster named McGinly from J.I. I'm sure a lot of you know exactly who I'm talking about. He has openly bragged about possessing over 20 mults on this site of ours since 2007. THIS is his M.O.,try to create a controversy HERE that is taken as FACT on that sewerhole Rat board.

Click to expand...

Look. I'm not a football expert. I have stated that numerous times. I have no agenda. I'm not trying to start any controversy. I was just trying to understand what happened.

When I look at the replay, Butler hits the receiver with his shoulder and knocks him down. I don't agree that the receiver collided with him - to me it looks the other way around.

I was simply trying to understand why a flag wasn't thrown. These days they throw a flag on almost every pass play, or at least the receivers and the announcers expect one.

I'm glad that the play stood. The Patriots won their 4th!! I'm VERY happy about that. I just was curious why it wasn't PI.

Like I said, lighten up. Geez.

Thanks to everyone else for being civil to a neophyte.

You, GFY. But I repeat myself. Apologies to everyone else.

Jemmer, they do throw flags like crazy these days, but not in the playoffs. And definitely not in the Superbowl. It's one of the many, many reasons Manning-led teams tend to wilt. They can't cry for flags as much in the playoffs.

Bella*chick said:

Jemmer, they do throw flags like crazy these days, but not in the playoffs. And definitely not in the Superbowl. It's one of the many, many reasons Manning-led teams tend to wilt. They can't cry for flags as much in the playoffs.

Click to expand...

Yes. I think I understand that about the post season.

I just wondered why in this case there was no crying at all by anybody.

That's all it is, Joker.

Family said:

Butler was playing the ball; not the receiver. The defensive back has as much right to the ball as the receiver.

Click to expand...

Strangely, the rule also says that if the defender goes over the back of the receiver, even if apparently toward the ball, it is defensive PI. From the rules:

Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to:
(a) Contact by a defender who is not playing the ball and such contact restricts the receiver’s opportunity to make the catch.
(b) Playing through the back of a receiver in an attempt to make a play on the ball.

Click to expand...

On the other hand, it does say exactly what you said:

Note 2: Defensive players have as much right to the path of the ball as eligible offensive players.

Click to expand...

jemmer said:

Yes. I think I understand that about the post season.

I just wondered why in this case there was no crying at all by anybody.

That's all it is, Joker.

Click to expand...

Because blind people lack the requisite skill required to watch football.

That may have been one of the best officiated games I have ever seen. They missed the roughing the punter call but it got evened out by the non PI trip call on Butler.

The only mystery was the Amendola PI call. That was ticky tac.

It was something I had to think through after it happened, so I am pretty surprised that it hasn't been brought up as much by people without basic knowledge of that particular rule (ESPN and Broncos fans in particular). I think the OP was sincerely looking for an explanation.

That said, if anyone still thinks that it's anything close to PI AFTER an explanation, they've got their head up their ass.

Joker said:

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/passinterference

Nah...I probably need a Milky Way to understand this space alien "pass interference" theory.

Click to expand...

It was the Seattle player that initiated the contact.

Bruins29 said:

That may have been one of the best officiated games I have ever seen. They missed the roughing the punter call but it got evened out by the non PI trip call on Butler.

The only mystery was the Amendola PI call. That was ticky tac.

Click to expand...

And the head to head on Edleman.

jemmer said:

What is your problem?

You need to work on your reading comprehension.

Nobody was advancing a theory. The DB knocked the receiver out of the way. I was trying to understand why that wasn't PI. People explained. Now I understand. No thanks to your snarkiness.

Click to expand...

Except he didn't. He caught the ball as the Seattle player ran into him.

Yeah, its never a PI (or should be) when going for the ball.

rochrist said:

And the head to head on Edleman.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that should have been called.

Actions that do not constitute pass interference include but are not limited to:

(a) Incidental contact by a defender’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball, or neither player is looking for the ball. If there is any question whether contact is incidental, the ruling shall be no interference.



(e) Contact by a defender who has gained position on a receiver in an attempt to catch the ball.

neuronet said:

Strangely, the rule also says that if the defender goes over the back of the receiver, even if apparently toward the ball, it is defensive PI. From the rules:


On the other hand, it does say exactly what you said:

Click to expand...

Not really strange. It's all about position. If both the defender and the receiver have a straight path to the ball, then both have a right to try and catch it. However, if one player has position, the other can't go through that player in trying to make the catch. Works the same for both the offense and the defense.

Say that the receiver is running a fly route and the defender is trailing. If the ball is underthrown severely and the defender has position, if the WR comes back to the ball and goes through the back of the reciever to catch it, it's offensive PI.

Demosthenes said:

Not really strange. It's all about position. If both the defender and the receiver have a straight path to the ball, then both have a right to try and catch it. However, if one player has position, the other can't go through that player in trying to make the catch. Works the same for both the offense and the defense.

Click to expand...

This is useful, but subjectively it doesn't seem to be called in a symmetric way. I don't have any data to back this up, though, and admittedly you rarely see the 'going over the back' based PI call, but I think I have never seen it called on an offensive player. Am I wrong here?

In practice, though, if both players are facing and going for the ball, they typically don't call PI. I'm so glad BB stopped coaching for them to not turn around...

He's playing the ball and he's within five yards of the line of scrimmage (which, even more to the point) is why there was no penalty on Browner.

jemmer said:

Sorry you didn't approve of my question. I know both players have an equal right to the ball, but it seemed to me that Butler got to the spot to catch the ball and simultaneously knocked the receiver on his ass. I simply wanted to know why that wasn't PI. Sorry I'm not as smart as you.

Click to expand...

I think other posters have answered your question pretty well, as you indicate, but Heh Heh, if we want to take this to another level, I'd go so far as to make the suggestion that it is "not completely absurd" to argue that Butler actually is in a better position to catch the ball than Lockette and that, since he has an equal right to the ball, that any interference on the play would have been Offensive interference.

Please note that I am not proposing that as a serious suggestion, but only in the spirit of the humor that others have introduced into the discussion.