NFL flip-flops, says Hobbs call was correct

[DaBruinz]

After finally being able to get hold of a video of that play (thanks, Sarge!) I'm not sure what the right call should be.

There were two moments of contact between Wayne and Hobbs before the ball arrived. The first was Hobbs hand literally brushing Wayne's upper arm as Wayne is about to leap in the air. As this contact was so light and momentary as to be in no way a possible hindrance to Wayne's catching the ball, I assume this is not what was called.

The second contact was between Hobbs' facemask and Wayne's wrist, as Wayne is jumping for the ball. The contact between Hobbs' facemask and Wayne's wrist prevents Wayne from reaching out for the ball with both hands. Is this interefence? I honestly don't know. On one hand, Hobbs is not playing the ball, and his head prevents Wayne from being able to reach the ball. On the other hand, the contact between the two players is initiated by Wayne, as he is the one reaching out with his arm for the ball.

Ultimately, I believe that the contact between Hobbs' head and Wayne's arm does take this call out the realm of "misinterpreted rule," and makes the call defendable by the NFL. If a corner uses his helmet to hit another player's arm to prevent a catch, it's certainly pass interference.

Pat_Nasty - there is one minor flaw here. You already stated that Hobbs didn't know where the ball was. How can you then make the assumption that he was using his helmet to hit Wayne's arm intentionally? Also, the Ball hit Hobbs on his back LEFT side. Wayne wasn't STOPPED. He was running his route away from the ball. How could Wayne have been going for the ball? It was BEHIND Hobbs.

Now, unless they changed the rule on pass interference since the start of the season, the contact was incidental and did not cause Wayne to alter his route.

 

[DaBruinz]

That's the problem -- Hobbs wasn't playing the ball.

This is true. However, the ball was underthrown and Wayne did not adjust his route to come back for the ball. Wayne had no chance for the ball because he was already PAST the point of making the reception. Well, unless you ENTIRELY remove Hobbs from the playing field. They Wayne could have made it. However, since there is no faceguarding, Hobbs doesn't NEED to play the ball in that situation. He also can't initiate any contact. Which, if he actually did, it wasn't enough to cause Wayne to alter his route. That is supposed to be the definition of pass interference. Contact by the defensive player beyond 5 yards on the offensive receiver that results in the offensive receiver having to alter his route to the point of not being able to catch the ball.

Last I looked, Wayne never flinched and kept running his route. Wayne never attempted to come back for the ball. So there was no way he could have made the catch.

 

[Pat_Nasty]

Pat_Nasty - there is one minor flaw here. You already stated that Hobbs didn't know where the ball was. How can you then make the assumption that he was using his helmet to hit Wayne's arm intentionally? Also, the Ball hit Hobbs on his back LEFT side. Wayne wasn't STOPPED. He was running his route away from the ball. How could Wayne have been going for the ball? It was BEHIND Hobbs.

Now, unless they changed the rule on pass interference since the start of the season, the contact was incidental and did not cause Wayne to alter his route.

I don't believe that Hobbs used his helmet to hit Wayne's arm intentionally, but that's not at issue here.

We all know that if a d-back slows down and gets in the way of a receiver trying to come back for an under-thrown ball, that will be called interference every time.

What happened with Hobbs + Wayne can be seen as an instance of that on a much smaller scale. Hobbs was not playing the ball, and when Wayne tried to reach back for the under-thrown pass, his arm ran into Hobbs' head, which was between Wayne and the ball.

If I made up the rules, there's no way that would be called interference. I'm also fairly dubious as to whether that should be considered interference by the NFL rules, as they stand. So, while I disagree with the call, I also see why the NFL is saying that the obsolete faceguarding rule was not at issue here, because there was some contact between dback and receiver. The question is whether it should have been ruled incidental or initiated by the offense.

 

[AdamJT13]

This is true. However, the ball was underthrown and Wayne did not adjust his route to come back for the ball. Wayne had no chance for the ball because he was already PAST the point of making the reception. Well, unless you ENTIRELY remove Hobbs from the playing field. They Wayne could have made it. However, since there is no faceguarding, Hobbs doesn't NEED to play the ball in that situation. He also can't initiate any contact. Which, if he actually did, it wasn't enough to cause Wayne to alter his route. That is supposed to be the definition of pass interference. Contact by the defensive player beyond 5 yards on the offensive receiver that results in the offensive receiver having to alter his route to the point of not being able to catch the ball.

Last I looked, Wayne never flinched and kept running his route. Wayne never attempted to come back for the ball. So there was no way he could have made the catch.

He doesn't have to alter his route. If you prevent the receiver from reaching up to grab the ball, that's interference.

In this case, Hobbs' helmet prevented Wayne's left arm from reaching up to catch the ball, which he might have been able to do by reaching over/around Hobbs. Because Hobbs wasn't playing the ball, that contact -- apparently -- was sufficient enough to make it interference.

 

[The Dog]

I have coached football and played it my whole life. I am not a fan of the Colts or Chargers. I have read polls by so-called experts about knowledgable fan bases. Your base is low. I grant you that this is not the most scientific.

I know more about football than any of you posters combined. I love how people who probably have never played or coached the game have this wealth of knowledge. I have seen absolutely no evidence that their is a speck of knowledge of the game by any of you bashers of that call. NONE. I am aware of the NFL rules committee's reasoning for the point of emphasis. Obviously the Pats were only a part of it.

To latch onto a lack of holding calls on offensive linemen is stupid. Anyone can bring in a tape of any team and point out tons of holds not called. That is just another in a long line of examples of ignorant pats fans are. Lastly admit the pats were the beneficiary of many non- calls in pass defense and I will be done bashing your lack of objectivity. I am not talking about the tuck rule.

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

woof, woof, a talking dog! amazing...

 

[The Dog]

Harrison and Bruschi are 2 of the 3 worst cheap shot artists. Not even debatable.

 

[MTaylorJ1]

I know more about football than any of you posters combined.

It is my experience in life that people who truly do know more about something than a given group of people, NEVER utter those words. Unless its House M.D. but he's fictional.

Another key indicator that you're overestimating your position on the football knowledge evolutionary chart, is that you're here in the first place making inflamatory statements about a given fan base on A MESSAGE BOARD making extremely generalized statements with little to no evidence to back it up.

 

[PATSNUTme]

]I have coached football and played[/B] it my whole life. I am not a fan of the Colts or Chargers. I have read polls by so-called experts about knowledgable fan bases. Your base is low. I grant you that this is not the most scientific.

I know more about football than any of you posters combined. I love how people who probably have never played or coached the game have this wealth of knowledge. I have seen absolutely no evidence that their is a speck of knowledge of the game by any of you bashers of that call. NONE. I am aware of the NFL rules committee's reasoning for the point of emphasis. Obviously the Pats were only a part of it.

To latch onto a lack of holding calls on offensive linemen is stupid. Anyone can bring in a tape of any team and point out tons of holds not called. That is just another in a long line of examples of ignorant pats fans are. Lastly admit the pats were the beneficiary of many non- calls in pass defense and I will be done bashing your lack of objectivity. I am not talking about the tuck rule.

Would you be much more specific. What teams did you play for? What teams did you coach.? What positions did you play? What positions did you coach? Were you "all league" "all conference" 'all american' 'all pro"? What level did you coach and what were your records? Were you a head coach or a GM or both?

We need to know all of this in order to bow down to you superior knowledge and admit that we are ignorant fools compared to someone like you.

 

[The Dog]

I have decided it is not worth my time arguing with you people anymore. Your argument that you are right because you said so sounds too much like my father's when I was a kid. I gave you games as examples, not specific plays. As one point of clarification the penalty on samuel that wasn't called was on the next to last SD possession. SD could have run out the clock with a penalty called there and won the game.
I played college football, although I rarely saw the field, and currently coach h.s. football. I am an assistant coach, basically the oc.

 

[MTaylorJ1]

I have decided it is not worth my time arguing with you people anymore. Your argument that you are right because you said so sounds too much like my father's when I was a kid. I gave you games as examples, not specific plays. As one point of clarification the penalty on samuel that wasn't called was on the next to last SD possession. SD could have run out the clock with a penalty called there and won the game.
I played college football, although I rarely saw the field, and currently coach h.s. football. I am an assistant coach, basically the oc.

That was predictable. The "you people" was the icing on the cake.

 

[PATSNUTme]

I have decided it is not worth my time arguing with you people anymore. Your argument that you are right because you said so sounds too much like my father's when I was a kid. I gave you games as examples, not specific plays. As one point of clarification the penalty on samuel that wasn't called was on the next to last SD possession. SD could have run out the clock with a penalty called there and won the game.
I played college football, although I rarely saw the field, and currently coach h.s. football. I am an assistant coach, basically the oc.

Guess what, I played and coached too. I know what coaches go through and I also know that coaches are not the most knowlegable when it comes to the rules. Some of the posters here have also played and coached. Most of us who have, don't come on here with a superior attitude.

But more importantly, some are students of the game and spend time breaking down tape and still learning to improve their knowledge. They probably have gained more knowledge of the Pro game than you or I have.

You can voice your opinion here. What I object to is your arrogant attitude and calling fans here ignorant, just because you say that played and coached. Yes, as in any group on the internet, there are some with a screw loose and some who don't have a clue of what they are talking about. But, there are many others here who are knowledgable and I value their opinions.

So drop the superior attitude, and give us your opinion. Some will agree and some won't.

EDIT: I just saw what you posted about Tedy and Rodney. You have no crdiblility, if you can only recite Patriot hater sound bites. That is not what "knowledgable' football people do.

 

[mtbykr]

Harrison and Bruschi are 2 of the 3 worst cheap shot artists. Not even debatable.

With your Vast football knowledge could you please provide some examples instead of this broad sweep? You are talking about 2 of the most respected members of the pats, so please back up your claim!

I know more about football than any of you posters combined

You haven't proven it yet, at least not here! By the way football knowledge isn't reading your home team board (most likely SD or Indy) and then spewing that over here!

 

[Oswlek]

I have coached football and played it my whole life. I am not a fan of the Colts or Chargers. I have read polls by so-called experts about knowledgable fan bases. Your base is low. I grant you that this is not the most scientific.

I know more about football than any of you posters combined. I love how people who probably have never played or coached the game have this wealth of knowledge. I have seen absolutely no evidence that their is a speck of knowledge of the game by any of you bashers of that call. NONE. I am aware of the NFL rules committee's reasoning for the point of emphasis. Obviously the Pats were only a part of it.

To latch onto a lack of holding calls on offensive linemen is stupid. Anyone can bring in a tape of any team and point out tons of holds not called. That is just another in a long line of examples of ignorant pats fans are. Lastly admit the pats were the beneficiary of many non- calls in pass defense and I will be done bashing your lack of objectivity. I am not talking about the tuck rule.

1) The penalty that you reference on Samual happened on SD's own 35 with the score 21-21. SD could neither run out the clock nor where they in definitive position to win since they had at least 5 other possessions that started with field position as good or better that ended with no points.

2) Again, you have not answered this, but I have to assume that you harbor just as much resentment towards Indy for their win in the AFCCG. The Bears and Broncos must also be on your hit list for all the extra contact they were able to get away with (and have NE get called for unnecessarily) in recent games vs. NE. If you do not, than you show less objectivity than those that you berate.

3) I realize that every team holds on the OL. But why does that excuse the action? Also, the holds that I refer to are the kind where a guy is tackled or his jersey is stretching out behind him; blatant, game changing penalties. Why do these get a free pass while NE continues to get crap for something that happened over three years ago. Do you really think that NE is the only team to get away with extra contact? I will say it *again* where is your vitriol towards the Colts and their obvious PI fouls that went uncalled?

4) Since you keep mentioning the 2003 AFCCG, I have to also assume that you resent the Carolina Panthers too. While NE seems to be the posterchild for secondary penalties, the Cats held far more often that day.

5) When did I say that NE did not get away with anything in the 2003 AFCCG? I only countered to show that the calls were even and Indy got away with just as much. No one likes to admit this because it detracts from the "Big, Bad Dirty Patriots" label, but it is the truth.

6) If you cannot admit that all of the above is true, than you are the one who needs objectivity, not us. Irrational faith is one thing, but irrational hatred is far worse.

 

[ajmitch81]

I have coached football and played it my whole life. I am not a fan of the Colts or Chargers. I have read polls by so-called experts about knowledgable fan bases. Your base is low. I grant you that this is not the most scientific.

I know more about football than any of you posters combined. I love how people who probably have never played or coached the game have this wealth of knowledge. I have seen absolutely no evidence that their is a speck of knowledge of the game by any of you bashers of that call. NONE. I am aware of the NFL rules committee's reasoning for the point of emphasis. Obviously the Pats were only a part of it.

To latch onto a lack of holding calls on offensive linemen is stupid. Anyone can bring in a tape of any team and point out tons of holds not called. That is just another in a long line of examples of ignorant pats fans are. Lastly admit the pats were the beneficiary of many non- calls in pass defense and I will be done bashing your lack of objectivity. I am not talking about the tuck rule.

You remind me of that guy who tells someone "I'm a black belt in Tae Kwon Doe" because he's hoping that the person that wants to fight him will back down in "fear".

Well The Dog kudos to you if you coach football and more kudos to you for knowing more about football than any human that has ever placed on this great planet Earth.

That doesn't erase the fact that, by and large, the AFC Championship Game was officiated rather poorly. Had the final score been 39-14, the calls most likely would not be as big a deal as they're being made on this board. But, when the score is 38-34 and you can look at two calls having a potential eight point swing in the Patriots favor, absolutely we, as fans of the New England Patriots have a reason to be upset.

My main gripe is that the Officials had set a precedent that they were calling the game tight, which is fine -- but when you set this precedent you must adhere to it. To swallow the whistles on the Caldwell play is simply unacceptable. When you called Hobbs for PI for Wayne's forearm nicking his helmet, you absolutely have to call the PI on the Colts. After all, face guarding is not a penalty and I trust the Officials know this, since they are required to. So if Hobbs committed PI, than the Colts player of coures also committed PI based on the precedent set...

If you are disputing this than I certainly have to question your coaching skills -- because any person who has EVER coached knows that all officials are different, so one game they may permit rough play, the next game they may not. BUT, if a referee is consistant than the coach alters his coaching style to the referee.

It was a bad call (the no PI on Caldwell) and had it been made the Pats have the ball on the one -- Corey Dillon most likely punches it in and Gost hits the XP and it's a 7 point lead. From there, the Colts may march down the field and tie it with a TD. The Pats probably don't burn timeouts because they want to see if they can hold them. SO - you probably have OT... Who wins? I don't know.

Nobody here is attempting to take away from the Colts - they earned a victory and Peyton Manning earned my respect for the way he led his team down the field. It was one of the best games I've ever seen -- I'm just a little upset that a few calls put a black spot on the outcome. Would the Pats have one - we can't say yes or no... But you can't say they would have lost had those calls gone differently either.

 

[PATSNUTme]

With your Vast football knowledge could you please provide some examples instead of this broad sweep? You are talking about 2 of the most respected members of the pats, so please back up your claim!





You haven't proven it yet, at least not here! By the way football knowledge isn't reading your home team board (most likely SD or Indy) and then spewing that over here!

I didn't see that post he made about Rodney and Tedy. And to think I tried to reason with someone who is that dumb. He's suppose to be a self proclaimed football guy and doesn't appreciate real football players. Instead he just recites some canned phase by Patriots haters- can't make the judgement with his own two eyes.

 

[The Dog]

I wasn't going to respond any further, but I will. Os you are 100% correct in that other teams such as the Colts have benefitted from poor calls. Denver last year against you benefitted as did the Steelers in last year's super bowl. My problem is with the fans of any team complaining about calls. Some of the fans have been rational enough not to blame the calls for the loss while others think that the officials were the sole cause of it.

 

[Oswlek]

I wasn't going to respond any further, but I will. Os you are 100% correct in that other teams such as the Colts have benefitted from poor calls. Denver last year against you benefitted as did the Steelers in last year's super bowl. My problem is with the fans of any team complaining about calls. Some of the fans have been rational enough not to blame the calls for the loss while others think that the officials were the sole cause of it.

Other than mild distaste at the blatantly obvious missed call on defender who mugged Caldwell, I did not walk away from that game feeling that anyone was responsible for NE's loss but the players themselves.

Despite everything they had the ball with a 3rd and four that would have basically ended the game. NE also could have still gotten 3 points after the penalty on Brown and Evan's dumb 12 man penalty was a key mistake. I still think that the Colts were handed a few breaks, but the took advantage of them and NE did not seal the deal.

(I will admit that I do blame the officials for much of NE's loss against Denver. Yes, a NE screwup happened just before every blown call - Faulk's fumble, Brady's int, Brown's muff - but every single point but three of Denver's was adied by terrible calls. Add to that the fact that Brady was hit at least 5 times later and harder than Manning was on the RTP call I really harbored some resentment towards the league after that game.)

 

[The Dog]

Os, I realy do not have a problem with you. You recognize that there were some bad calls in that game and other games. I also believe that the pats were on the bad end of calls against the colts. I never said otherwise. I don't like excuses is all. I don't ever make them when teams I play on or coach get beat. I don't make them for the teams I cheer for either. for another poster I do agree that officials in different games call things differently. I also know that the easiest way to get me upset with an official is if they are not consistent within a game. I want a penalty that is called in the 1st quarter to be called in the 4th as well. I do not think that was the case in this game.

As far as Harrison and bruschi go they were voted by NFL players as being the dirtiest in the league. Their hits are always borderline late. I would say Harrison is the bigger offender of the 2.

 

[FloridaPatsFan]

The league has had an agenda for which teams they want to see in the big game for the last few years. They have done everything they can to get the Colts to the SuperBowl for the last 3 years, but New England and Pittsburgh, until this year were able to overcome biased refereeing. New England, while being one of the most popular teams in the country, has been a thorn in the side of the NFL every year for the past 3 years. They have been able to overcome refereeing that has been dead set against them for several years. Winning the SB in 2003 and '04 was nearly a miracle due to blatant disregard to fairness on the way to the SB. Winning was the only thing that softened how bad it was at times.

However, I have a feeling that after this year, the league will allow us to compete for another SB soon. Once the Colts have the SB victory, and the NFL is appeased to have finally gotten what they wanted, then NE will once again be treated fairly.

It is my hope.