That was pass interference

[TheBostonStraggler]

Receivers dont 'jostle' with corners as they are running past them with their back to the ball. Boyces arm went up in response to being grabbed.

Bingo!
The threshold for PI is a different under those circumstances. When a defender does not look back/not playing the ball, "jostling" is not jostling. It's the easy path to PI for small-ish contact -- never mind the fact, as you correctly point out, running past a defender is not what is called jostling.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Didn't read this whole thread...

I watched the replay on DVR multiple times. A camera on the end line center showed the DB making clear contact with Boyce's inside shoulder/upper arm where the flag was thrown right before the ball arrived.

PI? Feel free to debate. Intentional contact by the DB prior to the ball arriving? Indisputable.

Regards,
Chris


Posted from Patsfans.com App for Android

Yep. And I take it even further, 'intentional contact by a defender, who was beat and not playing the ball, that altered the momentum/trajectory of the receiver', indisputable'.
Enough to call PI in that context (last seconds of the game)? Very debatable.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Lets not assume that at full speed, while contact was going on for 12+ yards, and while the ref is also watching for the catch, that not pinpointing the spot of the PI is some proof of what he was calling.
Many PI penalties are marked at the wrong spot, especially on deep throws.

Another excellent point. PI flags not being instantly thrown at time of the 'infraction'? Seriously, that is not wildly uncommon. Of course fans of all teams not liking the delayed flag that can happen with PI and a few others? Extremely common

Personally I couldn't care less if the flag was spotted at a point there was no infraction yet there was an infraction 7 yards back. If the net result is fairness of the outcome, why does it matter?? Sure, it is best to get the spot right, however, the defender's actions prevented a high probability of a TD into an extremely low probability of a TD. If the defender's actions were illegal then fairness dictates the Patriots are provided another high probability of a TD outcome.
As to whether it is fair to call a penalty like that at that time of the game? I agree that is a point of fairness that is arguable.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

IMO the ref calls it because he thinks McFadden restricts Boyce's left arm. Add in the fact that McFadden never played the ball or even attempted to look back. In this era that's the kind of stuff that gets called, however ticky-tack it may be.

It's easy to dissect it watching it over and over again but the ref sees it real-time and it's bang-bang you either leave the flag in or you throw it. He threw it.

A good point that is evident in many other game examples, yet something that is being disregarded by many. Again, not playing the ball gets you a penalty with small-ish contact and that is not an uncommon thing in the NFL. Whether fans like it or not (worthy of debate) it's reality. If the Cleveland defender simply turns his head around, he can get away with a lot more contact with a much lesser chance of PI.
As Patriot fans watching this with our own DBs (not turning toward the ball) over the last few years, this kind of PI situation should be old friggin hat.

 

[Triumph]

Points 1 and 3 describe face guarding, which isn't illegal. Point 2 is iffy at best.

1. Not playing the ball isnt face guarding. The Cleveland defender made no attempt whatsoever to ever look back for the ball. Watch the video.

2. The Cleveland player restricts Boyces left arm when he attempts to reach up to catch the ball at the goaline because he was beat. Watch the video in real time or slow motion.

3. Ok, hands to the face is a reach, but Boyce is grabbed by the shoulder around the 8 yard line. There are pics in this thread that clearly show this happening.

NE players have been called plenty of times for plays just like this one. I have no problem with a NE DB being called for PI when theyre not playing the ball when they are beat.

 

[UK_Pat37]

Simple solution to this debate is as follows:

You can see WHY the flag was thrown. There was contact with Boyce's left arm initially and then you see his hand reach on to Boyce's shoulder just before the ball got there. In real time a referee can see that and be inclined to throw the flag. We get the benefit of slow motion replay.

However, bottom line for me is this; I would be *****ing like hell if that call cost us a win. As would most of you.

It was a tick-tack call but we've had plenty go against us this season too...so I'm not going to complain when we finally get an iffy call go our way.

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

1. Not playing the ball isnt face guarding. The Cleveland defender made no attempt whatsoever to ever look back for the ball. Watch the video.

2. The Cleveland player restricts Boyces left arm when he attempts to reach up to catch the ball at the goaline because he was beat. Watch the video in real time or slow motion.

3. Ok, hands to the face is a reach, but Boyce is grabbed by the shoulder around the 8 yard line. There are pics in this thread that clearly show this happening.

NE players have been called plenty of times for plays just like this one. I have no problem with a NE DB being called for PI when theyre not playing the ball when they are beat.

I think the official might've turned a blind eye to either the initial tug or the minor amount of contact, but when you combine them with how close the play was they were compelled to flag the play. McFadden gambled with exactly how much he could get away with and lost. Considering the position of everyone on the field and what McFadden is doing this wasn't an outrageous call; if it didn't spot the ball on the 1 at a critical point in the game no one would be complaining.

(c) Grabbing a receiver’s arm(s) in such a manner that restricts his opportunity to catch a pass.

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

Sure from that angle and in slow motion we can tell that he barely if at all restricted the arm, but... if you don't want to get called don't put your arm there to begin with.

 

[The Brandon Five]

I think the official might've turned a blind eye to either the initial tug or the minor amount of contact, but when you combine them with how close the play was they were compelled to flag the play. McFadden gambled with exactly how much he could get away with and lost. Considering the position of everyone on the field and what McFadden is doing this wasn't an outrageous call; if it didn't spot the ball on the 1 at a critical point in the game no one would be complaining.

They did throw a flag on the initial tug. There were two flags thrown. One for the tug at the 8-ish yard line and one in the end zone.

 

[upstater1]

Another excellent point. PI flags not being instantly thrown at time of the 'infraction'? Seriously, that is not wildly uncommon. Of course fans of all teams not liking the delayed flag that can happen with PI and a few others? Extremely common

Personally I couldn't care less if the flag was spotted at a point there was no infraction yet there was an infraction 7 yards back. If the net result is fairness of the outcome, why does it matter?? Sure, it is best to get the spot right, however, the defender's actions prevented a high probability of a TD into an extremely low probability of a TD. If the defender's actions were illegal then fairness dictates the Patriots are provided another high probability of a TD outcome.
As to whether it is fair to call a penalty like that at that time of the game? I agree that is a point of fairness that is arguable.

The ref clearly understood that the yank prevented Boyce from getting to the ball. So when it tipped off his fingertips, he decided to throw the flag. He had every reason to wait for the end result, since only at that point could he determine that the yank impacted the result.

 

[upstater1]

They did throw a flag on the initial tug. There were two flags thrown. One for the tug at the 8-ish yard line and one in the end zone.

Wow, I didn't see that. Two refs threw 2 flags?

 

[fnordcircle]

I don't understand this.
You agree there was PI, but you think it should not be called? Can you explain?

Andy struggles with concept of non-black and white world.

 

[Ring 6]

Andy struggles with concept of non-black and white world.

No Andy struggles with 2+2=5

 

[Ivan]

Simple solution to this debate is as follows:

You can see WHY the flag was thrown. There was contact with Boyce's left arm initially and then you see his hand reach on to Boyce's shoulder just before the ball got there. In real time a referee can see that and be inclined to throw the flag. We get the benefit of slow motion replay.

However, bottom line for me is this; I would be *****ing like hell if that call cost us a win. As would most of you.

It was a tick-tack call but we've had plenty go against us this season too...so I'm not going to complain when we finally get an iffy call go our way.

People keep assuming the Patriots would not have scored had the penalty not been called, imo they were going to score either way. The Browns had shown absolutely no ability to stop them in the fourth quarter so i see no reason they would have somehow mustered the defense to do so then. Campbell had no problem moving the Browns almost to FG range, Brady would have finished the job either way,

 

[JMC00]

People keep assuming the Patriots would not have scored had the penalty not been called, imo they were going to score either way. The Browns had shown absolutely no ability to stop them in the fourth quarter so i see no reason they would have somehow mustered the defense to do so then. Campbell had no problem moving the Browns almost to FG range, Brady would have finished the job either way,

Yep. All that flag did was give the Browns more time to attempt to get into FG range.

 

[condon84]

People keep assuming the Patriots would not have scored had the penalty not been called, imo they were going to score either way. The Browns had shown absolutely no ability to stop them in the fourth quarter so i see no reason they would have somehow mustered the defense to do so then. Campbell had no problem moving the Browns almost to FG range, Brady would have finished the job either way,

Agreed with this. That call was unnecessary IMO. It just shows how awful that officiating crew was.

Talib makes a lot more contact on every single pass attempt his way. I'd hate for the refs to start calling all those PIs.

 

[JMC00]

All the people saying it was a bad flag, don't worry Goodell will instruct the ref crew doing the game this week to call a few pass interference calls on the Pats and look the other way when the Dolphins line assaults Chandler Jones.

 

[IllegalContact]

No Andy struggles with 2+2=5

and the notion of intentional contact with no intent to play the ball not being pass interference is the one I have a problem with.

it was textbook pass interference....

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

and look the other way when the Dolphins line assaults Chandler Jones.

I thought this was put into effect for week 1 or maybe it's more basic that the "rookie" treatment gets extended an additional year for patriot players.

Ok, I know we've received some beneficial calls, but it seems the timing and atrociousness of the calls really works against us most of the times...though I'm fairly certain 31 other fan bases disagree (with a handful of exceptions here and there).

 

[IllegalContact]

Agreed with this. That call was unnecessary IMO. It just shows how awful that officiating crew was..

the call may have been not needed for the pats to score, but it was the right call.....the ref who threw the flag made the right call

 

[Ring 6]

and the notion of intentional contact with no intent to play the ball not being pass interference is the one I have a problem with.

it was textbook pass interference....

Of course, but in this case it was someone saying they agreed pass interference occured but disagreed with the ref calling it.