That was pass interference

[juny]

Are jet fans that stupid? There is no fix. It took a miracle onside kick recovery to get a chance to win. If there was a fix, the refs wouldn't wait so long to hand the pats the game.

 

[reflexblue]

The announcer is a moron.

The ball was in the air.

The CB yanked Boyce back at the 3 yard line and slowed him down.

If he doesn't get yanked, he catches that TD.

The announcer doesn't even know basic rules of football, like the fact that you can hit WRs when he QB is out of the pocket.

Yeah i thought it was. There was a camera angle from the opposite sideline (Boyces left) that showed him clearly being interfered with although it happened just Before he got into the end zone

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

The call was PI in the endzone. It didn't happen. It was a terrible call.

As for the 5 yard line thing, that was 2 players jockeying. Rodney Harrison doesn't think it was a penalty either. Lastly, it's you making the claim, and you're pretty reliably wrong, so that should cement it for pretty much everyone.

I agree. In the endzone that was not enough for PI though the defender put both hands on Boyce and didn't look back for the ball whatsoever. That helps initiate a flag. The defender doesn't do that and he gives no reason for the endzone part of the PI to be called.

As far as two players "jockeying" at the 6, I agree. Jockeying is a fair description. One guy, Boyce, was a step ahead looking back for the ball and giving the stiff arm. The other was a step behind, not looking back for the ball and was giving a stiff arm -- until he gave a quick grab that shows on the replay that changed Boyce's forward momentum. Then, ultimately, the pass was inches to long. Otherwise the ball goes right in the hands of Boyce for a very high possibility at a TD catch without that momentum change.

The grab that impeded Boyce was not severe, however, it is, arguably PI. It most certainly made the difference between a good shot at a TD catch and no real shot at a TD catch.
You characterizing it as a completely awful call is not accurate IMHO. There have been PI calls that have made that look routine.

Arguably the PI shouldn't be called altogether? I agree that is very arguable.
But in terms of fairness and why I am ok with it? Put it this way, the PI on Gronk against Carolina was egregious. Conversely the one that was called for Boyce was very uncertain to the letter of the law. Yet the fairer call was Boyce because that directly hampered a definite TD catch possibility.... where Gronk's non call would have ultimately made up for an otherwise extremely outside chance at a TD catch opportunity. That is what I call just penalizing versus words in a rule book.
You may not agree and that is fine. But one of the worst PI calls? Not even close....

 

[VJCPatriot]

Here is the replay that also includes the reverse angle:
Cleveland Browns called for pass interference - NFL Videos

You can clearly see the DB's hand pulling on Boyce's shoulder while inside the endzone. By letter of the rule, the PI call was made correctly.

I don't see any reason for people to cry over the call, when you can't even make the argument that the call was incorrect by rule, rather what most of you are quibbling over is the 'severity' of the interference. That really doesn't matter. The rule just cites what actions or types of contact are illegal.

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.

Let me ask you this, if you were a 70% free throw shooter on average, and the defender grabbed your shoulder the instant you tried to get off the free throw on every free throw attempt you took, how many shots do you think you would make?

The foul doesn't have to be hard, or even draw blood, if it's enough to affect your ability to complete the play, and is not legal by the rule, then it's a foul. The foul may not be 'severe' looking, but a foul is a foul. I will not go around pretending like the victory was 'tainted' because of a call that was technically correct. How many of you think Panthers fans were crying over what a bad noncall there was on Gronk even when it was obvious he got bear-hugged?

C'est la vie. Calls even out over the course of a game, and the officiating was actually overall pretty terrible but the last so called 'controversial' call, I don't find all that controversial compared to the other calls and noncalls made in the same game.

I'm tired of beating the dead horse. We won, move on. Don't be concerned about 'appearing' like a homer for a call that was technically correct by the text of the rule. Worry about what we're going to do next week and the rest of the season without Gronk.

 

[sambam94]

He was touched in the end zone as well. Look at the replay.

touching is not PI, the touching has to somehow impede or interfere with the receiver catching the ball

 

[SVN]

Lets face it. We would be furious if that was called on the pats. The bigger question for me is why go for the bomb on the first play ? That too to boyce. Still had 40 odd secs with only 40 yards to go?

 

[unoriginal]

Lets face it. We would be furious if that was called on the pats. The bigger question for me is why go for the bomb on the first play ? That too to boyce. Still had 40 odd secs with only 40 yards to go?

Why go for the bomb at all?
Why on second down? Now the offense is out of rhythm and its third and long!
Why on third down? Now we've only got one play left!
Why on fourth down? All we needed was a first down Josh! Learn how to playcall better!

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

Why go for the bomb at all?
Why on second down? Now the offense is out of rhythm and its third and long!
Why on third down? Now we've only got one play left!
Why on fourth down? All we needed was a first down Josh! Learn how to playcall better!

Zolak went off about this the other day explaining that the routes were a result of coverage and preplanned routes are a hs or college thing. Another words- Boyce went deep because the coverage dictated, and Brady threw because his it was the first open read.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Lets face it. We would be furious if that was called on the pats. The bigger question for me is why go for the bomb on the first play ? That too to boyce. Still had 40 odd secs with only 40 yards to go?

I think you make a fair point regarding going for it all on the first play. There was enough time for a series of under 10 yard completions (though they had to end out of bounds) that could have moved to the ball to the 10 - 15 yard line with enough time for a couple of shots at the endzone. Hard to say what had the higher percentage chance of victory but I ain't unhappy with what did happen

One thing overlooked, because of the big PI controversy, is Brady's pass. A pass to a rarely used rookie receiver, outside in cold weather, no timeouts and only 40 seconds left on the clock(?), down by 5 points, game totally on the line on this one series. Brady throws a pass which travels almost half the length of a football field in the air which appeared to be virtually perfect for Boyce's route trajectory. So whether you think the defender's grab of Boyce around the 6 yard line was PI or something that should never be called, the smallish change it caused in his momentum appears to be the only thing that kept an otherwise ridiculously difficult throw/situation from being epic perfection.

 

[Deus Irae]

I agree. In the endzone that was not enough for PI though the defender put both hands on Boyce and didn't look back for the ball whatsoever. That helps initiate a flag. The defender doesn't do that and he gives no reason for the endzone part of the PI to be called.

As far as two players "jockeying" at the 6, I agree. Jockeying is a fair description. One guy, Boyce, was a step ahead looking back for the ball and giving the stiff arm. The other was a step behind, not looking back for the ball and was giving a stiff arm -- until he gave a quick grab that shows on the replay that changed Boyce's forward momentum. Then, ultimately, the pass was inches to long. Otherwise the ball goes right in the hands of Boyce for a very high possibility at a TD catch without that momentum change.

The grab that impeded Boyce was not severe, however, it is, arguably PI. It most certainly made the difference between a good shot at a TD catch and no real shot at a TD catch.
You characterizing it as a completely awful call is not accurate IMHO. There have been PI calls that have made that look routine.

Arguably the PI shouldn't be called altogether? I agree that is very arguable.
But in terms of fairness and why I am ok with it? Put it this way, the PI on Gronk against Carolina was egregious. Conversely the one that was called for Boyce was very uncertain to the letter of the law. Yet the fairer call was Boyce because that directly hampered a definite TD catch possibility.... where Gronk's non call would have ultimately made up for an otherwise extremely outside chance at a TD catch opportunity. That is what I call just penalizing versus words in a rule book.
You may not agree and that is fine. But one of the worst PI calls? Not even close....

The PI call was on the contact in the endzone, not at the 5 yard line. Yes, it was a completely awful call.

Maybe people arguing about the 5 yard line contact are trying to come up with some justification for getting a flag there that their brains can accept. Surely they know that the actual call was a lousy one, so maybe they're looking for a bailout, and they're willing to pretend that the handfighting is enough of one, in order to make the victory seem more pure.

But, really, they're jousting at windmills over nothing. The wrong call was made, and it may have been the reason the Patriots won for all we know, but that still doesn't even balance out the Jets/Panthers games. We need feel no shame for being content with the outcome, even if we acknowledge that the call sucked. We'd be wanting to tar and feather Bogarts if this call had been made with the teams reversed, so we do nothing but make ourselves look as foolish as Jets fans when we pretend this was a good call because it went in the Patriots favor.

 

[mtbykr]

If teams we reversed, we would be beside ourselves with how bad that call was.

 

[BradyBranch39]

Yep, I agree. I thought it was PI, too. Slo-mo makes it look better, but at real speed, you can see how Boyce was restricted.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Here is the replay that also includes the reverse angle:
Cleveland Browns called for pass interference - NFL Videos

You can clearly see the DB's hand pulling on Boyce's shoulder while inside the endzone. By letter of the rule, the PI call was made correctly.

I don't see any reason for people to cry over the call, when you can't even make the argument that the call was incorrect by rule, rather what most of you are quibbling over is the 'severity' of the interference. That really doesn't matter. The rule just cites what actions or types of contact are illegal.

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.

Let me ask you this, if you were a 70% free throw shooter on average, and the defender grabbed your shoulder the instant you tried to get off the free throw on every free throw attempt you took, how many shots do you think you would make?

The foul doesn't have to be hard, or even draw blood, if it's enough to affect your ability to complete the play, and is not legal by the rule, then it's a foul. The foul may not be 'severe' looking, but a foul is a foul. I will not go around pretending like the victory was 'tainted' because of a call that was technically correct. How many of you think Panthers fans were crying over what a bad noncall there was on Gronk even when it was obvious he got bear-hugged?

C'est la vie. Calls even out over the course of a game, and the officiating was actually overall pretty terrible but the last so called 'controversial' call, I don't find all that controversial compared to the other calls and noncalls made in the same game.

I'm tired of beating the dead horse. We won, move on. Don't be concerned about 'appearing' like a homer for a call that was technically correct by the text of the rule. Worry about what we're going to do next week and the rest of the season without Gronk.

Excellent post.
The reference to the Carolina game is especially salient. The 'we would all be furious if the situation was reversed' is mostly a straw man. Certainly any call that is open for interpretation will be viewed favorably by most of the winning team/fan base and not so by most of the losing team/fan base. I don't see how that is germane.

And to the point of severity, again another good point but I take the 'how severe it was' point even further. For me how severe the infraction is not as important as its tangential effect on the outcome of the play. On this play the defender's actions look to have stopped a high likelihood of a TD. So even if the infraction was at most modest, to me that's an issue of fairness that the defender get called for a penalty. Conversely, if the same exact thing happened between Boyce and his defender (and even if the defender's actions were now more 'severe'), yet it happened well away from where the pass was sailing to, IMHO calling that penalty would not result in fairness.

Of course it would be difficult if not totally impractical to ref a game using this as the guiding principle. Ultimately this means we can only hope that fairness simply happens. And being penalized for barely committing an infraction of the rule when that infraction changed the high likelihood of a TD into the very low likelihood of a TD is fairness in action.

 

[BradyFTW!]

By the letter of the rule it was the correct call. I still don't think it should have been called, and that level of contact usually isn't called. I understand why Browns fans are pissed, but after seeing the Pats get screwed by the refs so many times this year. I'm not feeling bad. I just consider it boger's make-up call for the Jets travesty.

 

[UK_Pat37]

At first I thought the call was total BS but, upon looking at it, you can see he yanks at his arm whilst the ball is in the air. Like hell did it occured in the EZ though. This was an awful crew and they called an awful game for most of it.

 

[Sciz]

I don't care if it was right or not. As Dean Blandino says, it's a judgment call that the refs have to make in real time without the use of slow motion replay. That means that no matter what they decide, they're right.

 

[Marqui]

It was definitely a tippy tap call, but the Pats deserved it after that Jets game.

 

[Uncle Meat]

If that was PI then their should be a flag every single passing play in the NFL. One lucky team

I have no doubt that the "it was definitely pass interference" crowd would be screaming bloody murder if the shoe was on the other foot and the refs called that penalty AGAINST the Patriots in that same situation. The call was ticky-tack AT BEST, and it's outrageous to call something like that in that situation.

"One lucky team" is right. They were handed that game on a silver platter. It was a bull**** call.

 

[PatsFan24]

Looked like a bad call to me. But hey, I'm not complaining. The Pats have been on the wrong end of some bad calls this year late in the game!

 

[Banjo]

I've seen the play a few times. That absolutely WAS pass interference. But of course, I'll take it. It sorta makes up for that Jets and Panthers calls that cost us those games