That was pass interference

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

In this case the hit was also unnecessary becuase it was in the end zone and once 2 feet were down it is a TD and the play is over.

(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:
(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him;

It would've met the criteria anywhere on the field. Most fans just magically realize they don't like these rules when they work against their team or for a team they hate. The amount of butthurt the Pats have spread around the NFL over the past decade plus just makes the cries that much louder when :gasp: a bad rule or interpretation is applied in their favor.

I don't like either of the rules that worked in the Pats favor in this game, but their applications were certainly correct and in line with the current interpretations. I also don't like the maulings that the OL is allowed to get away with that worked for the Pats in the Saints game. However if people don't like the rules they need to complain about that and not pretend like it's some lucky break for the Pats.

 

[Ring 6]

No, I want to take the action of rewarding teams with yardage that was only earned hypothetically - the only time in football it is done - and have it applied only with discretion. It's the only infraction where the outcome of the play, which never happened, is ruled as having happened simply by the occurrence of the penalty.

It's too much power for a rule that is not enforced all that well. Much like calls in the NBA, it's becoming too big an issue in the outcome of games.

So you want to eliminate the spot foul for PI.

 

[Ring 6]

The bad enforcement in other penalties is not as game-changing, again, due to the severity. I'll end the debate there and just agree to disagree. Like I said, I don't pretend to have an answer for the problem I'm suggesting exists, so I have little else to say.

Committing the interference is game changing. You are defending a play with an illegal action.

 

[BAM!]

I do not blame the officials for the ridiculous judgement calls they have to make while players, coaches, and fans lobby for this call. I blame Bill Polian for not being a man and crying so hard after the Pats spanked them in 2003 that he got the rules changed.

 

[Dingleberry]

I do not blame the officials for the ridiculous judgement calls they have to make while players, coaches, and fans lobby for this call. I blame Bill Polian for not being a man and crying so hard after the Pats spanked them in 2003 that he got the rules changed.

That has been my point all thread. Yet, many Patriots fans seem to want to see a flag every time there is any kind of contact. Yes, by saying that was a good PI call, you are endorsing a flag on many, many more plays.

Fun football that would be to watch.

 

[Ring 6]

That has been my point all thread. Yet, many Patriots fans seem to want to see a flag every time there is any kind of contact. Yes, by saying that was a good PI call, you are endorsing a flag on many, many more plays.

Fun football that would be to watch.

No there should be a flag when there is pass interference.
If a defensive player is not playing the ball and impedes the receiver from getting to it, it is pass interference. Its really that simple.
It seems you are distinguishing between whether he holds him up so he comes close to getting to the ball or shoves him to the ground. The result is the same.

 

[Dingleberry]

No there should be a flag when there is pass interference.
If a defensive player is not playing the ball and impedes the receiver from getting to it, it is pass interference. Its really that simple.
It seems you are distinguishing between whether he holds him up so he comes close to getting to the ball or shoves him to the ground. The result is the same.

Should the '03 AFCCG against Indy have been officiated differently? Serious question.

I detest the "enforcement" brought on by that turd Polian. I would rather minor contact be allowed and only the most egregious of interferences be called. It is one of the reasons I do not like basketball, where breathing too hard on somebody can be a foul.

If a penalty is called every time there is some sort of impeding going on (on the level of this call), there are going to be a lot of flags. If you have the NFL Game Rewind thing on NFL.com, go pick a random game and watch some random pass plays without a penalty called. It is rare that a DB is NOT making some sort of contact that is technically impeding the WR.

If we call them all, we might as well take all of the terrible towels out of Pittsburgh and dump them on the field. Because that is what it will look like. And it makes for a boring, frustrating game.

Listen, I am all for the Patriots finally catching a break. But football would be a lot better if those calls were not made against anybody.

Anybody remember a PI call against Samuel in the playoff game in Denver? We all b1tched about that one screwing the Patriots, and rightfully so. If the Boyce call was PI, then the Patriots apparently did not get screwed on that Samuel call.

Oh, and the Colts got screwed in '03 and '04.

 

[Deus Irae]

Should the '03 AFCCG against Indy have been officiated differently? Serious question.

I detest the "enforcement" brought on by that turd Polian. I would rather minor contact be allowed and only the most egregious of interferences be called. It is one of the reasons I do not like basketball, where breathing too hard on somebody can be a foul.

If a penalty is called every time there is some sort of impeding going on (on the level of this call), there are going to be a lot of flags. If you have the NFL Game Rewind thing on NFL.com, go pick a random game and watch some random pass plays without a penalty called. It is rare that a DB is NOT making some sort of contact that is technically impeding the WR.

If we call them all, we might as well take all of the terrible towels out of Pittsburgh and dump them on the field. Because that is what it will look like. And it makes for a boring, frustrating game.

Listen, I am all for the Patriots finally catching a break. But football would be a lot better if those calls were not made against anybody.

Anybody remember a PI call against Samuel in the playoff game in Denver? We all b1tched about that one screwing the Patriots, and rightfully so. If the Boyce call was PI, then the Patriots apparently did not get screwed on that Samuel call.

Oh, and the Colts got screwed in '03 and '04.

The non-calls in '03 and '04 were consistent with the way the rule was being called at the time. That means the Colts didn't get screwed.

The call made in the Browns game was not consistent with the way PI calls have been made in 2013 and other recent seasons. That means the Browns got screwed.

 

[Dingleberry]

The non-calls in '03 and '04 were consistent with the way the rule was being called at the time. That means the Colts didn't get screwed.

The call made in the Browns game was not consistent with the way PI calls have been made in 2013 and other recent seasons. That means the Browns got screwed.

I agree on the '03 and '04 games, was just being a little sarcastic there.

But there was not a Patriots fan alive who wasn't livid about the Samuel call (in 2006, I think). And this was after the Polian effect. There was about the same contact as the PI we are arguing about now. They were ticky-tack and should not have been called.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

I agree on the '03 and '04 games, was just being a little sarcastic there.

But there was not a Patriots fan alive who wasn't livid about the Samuel call (in 2006, I think). And this was after the Polian effect. There was about the same contact as the PI we are arguing about now. They were ticky-tack and should not have been called.

If memory serves, there was no contact. It was Hobbs covering Wayne and at the last minute Hobbs jumped up facing away from the QB and towards the receiver to hopefully hit the ball. It worked. But apparently he was supposed to get out of the way of the ball because stopping the ball from reaching a receiver is unfair.

 

[A man named Brady]

We got a big break... It is what it is

 

[newenglandsports11]

We got a big break... It is what it is

The calls even out over the course of the season. So we deserve another break, I certainly hope it is against the Ravens.

 

[Dingleberry]

If memory serves, there was no contact. It was Hobbs covering Wayne and at the last minute Hobbs jumped up facing away from the QB and towards the receiver to hopefully hit the ball. It worked. But apparently he was supposed to get out of the way of the ball because stopping the ball from reaching a receiver is unfair.

It was against Denver, not Indy. Was that 2005, the Ben Watson chasing down Bailey game?

In this case, Samuel touched the WR, but it was hardly worthy of a call. I have the tape of the game somewhere. I'll go back and watch it again, because now I am doubting the when and where of it!

Goddam, we were all so pissssed at that call back then! Why can't we remember it better?

 

[Uncle Meat]

Which has proven it was the correct call.


Poor angle, but yes first contact was head to head

LOL, that was PROVEN to NOT be pass interference how? Because some of you guys want to apply your Mickey Mouse homeristic interpretation of the rules?

Mike Pereira begs to differ. This guy is an expert on these things. Here is what HE has to say about it:

No, that definitely was NOT pass interference

He says "McFadden and Boyce were hand-fighting down the field. There was not enough contact for defensive pass interference to be called." He says "That ball getting placed at the 1-yard line on that call is an injustice."

Pereira: No, that definitely was NOT pass interference | FOX Sports on MSN

read that please. This is the guy that guys in the booth consult to get his opinions on calls because he is an expert on the rules. He's got a resume. It's what the freakin' guy does for a living. You should know who he is, anyway. Are you going to dismiss THIS so readily out of hand? He just hates the Patriots, right? You've already proven the expert wrong, I suppose.

Also, it's just a "bad angle" on the unnecessary roughness call, huh? Show me the favorable angle.

 

[Ring 6]

LOL, that was PROVEN to NOT be pass interference how? Because some of you guys want to apply your Mickey Mouse homeristic interpretation of the rules?

Mike Pereira begs to differ. This guy is an expert on these things. Here is what HE has to say about it:

No, that definitely was NOT pass interference

He says "McFadden and Boyce were hand-fighting down the field. There was not enough contact for defensive pass interference to be called." He says "That ball getting placed at the 1-yard line on that call is an injustice."

Pereira: No, that definitely was NOT pass interference | FOX Sports on MSN

read that please. This is the guy that guys in the booth consult to get his opinions on calls because he is an expert on the rules. He's got a resume. It's what the freakin' guy does for a living. You should know who he is, anyway. Are you going to dismiss THIS so readily out of hand? He just hates the Patriots, right? You've already proven the expert wrong, I suppose.

Also, it's just a "bad angle" on the unnecessary roughness call, huh? Show me the favorable angle.

Great you found someone to agree with you. Means nothing. The call was fine.

 

[Ring 6]

Should the '03 AFCCG against Indy have been officiated differently? Serious question.

I detest the "enforcement" brought on by that turd Polian. I would rather minor contact be allowed and only the most egregious of interferences be called. It is one of the reasons I do not like basketball, where breathing too hard on somebody can be a foul.

If a penalty is called every time there is some sort of impeding going on (on the level of this call), there are going to be a lot of flags. If you have the NFL Game Rewind thing on NFL.com, go pick a random game and watch some random pass plays without a penalty called. It is rare that a DB is NOT making some sort of contact that is technically impeding the WR.

If we call them all, we might as well take all of the terrible towels out of Pittsburgh and dump them on the field. Because that is what it will look like. And it makes for a boring, frustrating game.

Listen, I am all for the Patriots finally catching a break. But football would be a lot better if those calls were not made against anybody.

Anybody remember a PI call against Samuel in the playoff game in Denver? We all b1tched about that one screwing the Patriots, and rightfully so. If the Boyce call was PI, then the Patriots apparently did not get screwed on that Samuel call.

Oh, and the Colts got screwed in '03 and '04.

Your argument is terrible. Calling pass interference on one play negates the quality of the call on another totally different play?
No.

So football would be better if a WR streaks past a corner into the end zone and the corner tackles him so he can't make the catch, and it doesn't get called?
If you don't call a guy for impeding a receiver while not even knowing where the ball is, you can't call that one either.

 

[Uncle Meat]

Great you found someone to agree with you. Means nothing. The call was fine.

Wow...just wow.

Simply unbelievable reply. "Means nothing." I'm actually speechless.

Then explain to me how it was proven that it WAS pass interference, like you claimed. I brought up that the expert in the field says it wasn't, so what do you have to contradict that? I ask the question knowing that you have absolutely nothing. Your total copout reply reflects that.

You just WANT it to be pass interference so badly for some reason that you stick your head in the sand. Totally.

I found "somebody" to agree with me...you should listen to yourself and how you come across to so readily dismiss it completely like that. I KNEW you'd do that too.

I hope you don't go to your doctor with the attitude that you know more than him, too. "I feel fine, so therefore I'm fine."

 

[Ring 6]

Wow...just wow.

Simply unbelievable reply. "Means nothing." I'm actually speechless.

Explain to me how it was proven that it WAS pass interference, like you claimed. I brought up that the expert in the field says it wasn't, so what do you have to contradict that? I ask the question knowing that you have absolutely nothing. Your reply reflects that.

You just WANT it to be pass interference so badly for some reason that you stick your head in the sand. Totally.

I found "somebody" to agree with me...you should listen to yourself and how you come across to so readily dismiss it completely like that. I KNEW you'd do that too.

Its pass interference because its pass interference.
Trotting out a guy who uses it as an example to push the agenda he is unabashedly pushing means nothing.

 

[Uncle Meat]

Its pass interference because its pass interference.

Well, then...you've absolutely convinced me.

It's pass interference BECAUSE it's pass interference. Who could ever argue with that?

Trotting out a guy who uses it as an example to push the agenda he is unabashedly pushing means nothing.

I'm not even sure what you even said here.

Forget about what you think about ME.

I'm talking about an expert's opinion. Do you think Mike Pereira has an agenda? Don't fcking dodge me like this. This guy knows everything about the rules inside and out. He interprets rules for a living. Now he's wrong because you don't like me?

Mike Pereira said those things. What do you think about that? That's the only question. What he said has NOTHING to do with me...not like he consulted me first or whatever. Just stick to that point if you are capable. Yeah, I know, he's wrong because you need to be right no matter what. You give the professionals no respect or what?

 

[Jackson 2]

Who cares? Most people would like to win without the benefit of iffy calls, but I am 100% sure of this: if the Patriots are the beneficiaries of iffy calls in every game for the rest of the season and win the Super Bowl, I'll sleep like a baby all spring and summer with a huge smile on my face without an ounce of guilt. I've been around long enough to have seen my teams screwed plenty of times in big situations by referees and umpires. No one ever feels sorry for the fans of victimized teams and those who hate your team will always claim anything you won was bogus anyway, which brings me full circle back to this: Who cares? Just my two cents worth.