That was pass interference

[Ring 6]

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

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



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. Now he's wrong because you don't like me?

Periera has an agenda which is clear from the article, citing his 100s of times he has argued with the NFL about the spot foul rule, and that he will go to his death bed thinking spot fouls on PI are wrong.
Of course he has an agenda, and this play gives him the perfect example to pimp his agenda by calling it a bad call.

As for you, I thought it was clear after your years of trolling here, your opinion is meaningless to me.

 

[captain stone]

While we are posting animated gifs of questionable calls, anyone have the video of Dont'a Hightower stripping the ball as he hit the receiver where the ball was loose before the whistle, but the refs called forward progress stopped and making it unreviewable?

That play was so grossly, incompetently officiated that I'm surprised it doesn't have
its own thread.

And back to topic, Boyce should've caught the ball anyway. It went right through his hands.

 

[Uncle Meat]

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.

That's right.

I agree with your basic premise entirely, and the attitude is spot-on.

 

[Dingleberry]

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.

The CB tackling the WR? That bit of hyperbole is your example of a good argument? We both know that's not what we are talking about.

I'll leave it at this. I hate the ticky-tack calls that have infected the NFL in the Polian era. This PI call was just another example of it. If a flag is thrown EVERY time a DB impedes a WR, we are looking at a very boring game. And Polian's wet dream. Every Patriots fan would be furious if that was our CB getting called for that play. This is not basketball. Some contact should be allowed for.

As someone who reads more than he posts, I have come to respect your opinions and your fandom while reading through this message board. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

But you ARE wrong.

 

[Uncle Meat]

Periera has an agenda which is clear from the article, citing his 100s of times he has argued with the NFL about the spot foul rule, and that he will go to his death bed thinking spot fouls on PI are wrong.
Of course he has an agenda, and this play gives him the perfect example to pimp his agenda by calling it a bad call.

As for you, I thought it was clear after your years of trolling here, your opinion is meaningless to me.

Pereira was merely interpreting and applying the existing rules. He's not arguing the merit of any rule, he's saying that it was NOT pass interference...definitely NOT pass interference is what he said exactly. His expert interpretation was entirely based on existing rules. Period. But, of course, that doesn't matter at all.

And you did not read the article right if you are saying these things. Read it again because you are WAY off. Seriously way off.

He also completely disagreed with the no-call pass interference in the Panthers game. Did he have an agenda that time? Pereira has no stain on his reputation that I'm aware of.

And I can tell that my opinion doesn't matter to you, as evidenced by your constant replies, many of which were just dodging the question. I'm just having a debate here. If you don't want to debate or are not prepared to back up your claims in the face of contradictory evidence, then put me on ignore or don't reply...turn tail and flee, and that might be typical. If you wanna argue about a disagreement, you are no less guilty than I.

 

[Joker]

Mods, please remove this contentious, argumentative troll from this thread. Thanks.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

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.

Very well said MoveTheChains. I too have issues with some of the new rules, and even with a few longer existing rules, yet the argument isn't about calling the penalty, the argument is the existence of the rule.

As someone who lives in Oakland Raider territory, a good example was the tuck rule game/play. My Raider fan coworkers continually disregarded what the rule stated about being 'tucked'. To them it obviously wasn't a pass (it wasn't a pass), Brady had all but brought the ball into a full cradled position (it was a 1/100th of a second away from being tucked), that should be a fumble (fairness probably dictates a ball being held at the waist of a QB that gets knocked loose should be a fumble), and if the situation was reversed most Patriot fans would have been livid with IR reversing it and calling that an incomplete pass (a very normal thing for a fan base to do). But the rule on the books said that was an incomplete pass. And while I never said it to those loudmouth Raider fans (too busy enjoying rubbing their noses it ), I agreed with them on the point of 'by all rights that should be a fumble'.

And while the outcome of the play giving the ball back to the Patriots was to our very good fortune, it wasn't really a lucky break. It was an interpretation of the rule, a rule that many many many (right after that game) felt was a stupid and terrible rule (whether it is or not is up for debate).

 

[PATS16N0]

Bottom line as far as I'm concerned is this:

We've been hosed on so many ticky-tacky calls in the last three seasons that I'll take this one with a smile.

On another note, and this isn't meant to be hostile, but I don't understand our fan base sometimes. We don't have to be the martyrs of the NFL.

Last year when we got so blatantly cheated in that regular season game against the Ravens, that Chris Collinsworth had to start apologizing on air, nobody else came to our rescue or our defense. Raven fans took the win with a smile and happily tossed salt in our wounds.

The Jet fans happily took that BS in OT against us this year.

The entire world tried to say that Gronk wasn't interfered with against Carolina.

So why apologize when we finally get one our way?

This is just like the thread about Tomlin. "Oh, boo-hoo, just because we were unfairly penalized doesn't mean others should be."

I'm sorry, but #^@% that.

I'm sick of being the entire league's punching bag, from other fan bases (even NFC fan bases!) to most of sports-media, and then people in our own tent crying rivers for them when we FINALLY don't get hosed.

Think if he caught that TD pass and a phantom offensive PI took it back the Browns would be whimpering apologies over it? Think if Belichick didn't `accidently` impede a kick returner everyone else wouldn't be watering at the mouth at the thought of the league taking draft picks from us?

As a Pats fan in the age of the internet, we're here in a fox hole all by ourselves.

So screw everyone else.

Would of liked him to catch the ball, but since he didn't I'll take a phantom PI for a freaking change, just like I'll take the Pittsburgh* Steelers eating a draft pick for cheating without shedding crocodile tears over it.

Screw everyone but the Patriots.

 

[patsfanincleveland]

That play was so grossly, incompetently officiated that I'm surprised it doesn't have
its own thread.

And back to topic, Boyce should've caught the ball anyway. It went right through his hands.

Definitive proof that it was the correct call.

 

[Bella*chick]

Bottom line as far as I'm concerned is this:

We've been hosed on so many ticky-tacky calls in the last three seasons that I'll take this one with a smile.

On another note, and this isn't meant to be hostile, but I don't understand our fan base sometimes. We don't have to be the martyrs of the NFL.

Last year when we got so blatantly cheated in that regular season game against the Ravens, that Chris Collinsworth had to start apologizing on air, nobody else came to our rescue or our defense. Raven fans took the win with a smile and happily tossed salt in our wounds.

The Jet fans happily took that BS in OT against us this year.

The entire world tried to say that Gronk wasn't interfered with against Carolina.

So why apologize when we finally get one our way?

This is just like the thread about Tomlin. "Oh, boo-hoo, just because we were unfairly penalized doesn't mean others should be."

I'm sorry, but #^@% that.

I'm sick of being the entire league's punching bag, from other fan bases (even NFC fan bases!) to most of sports-media, and then people in our own tent crying rivers for them when we FINALLY don't get hosed.

Think if he caught that TD pass and a phantom offensive PI took it back the Browns would be whimpering apologies over it? Think if Belichick didn't `accidently` impede a kick returner everyone else wouldn't be watering at the mouth at the thought of the league taking draft picks from us?

As a Pats fan in the age of the internet, we're here in a fox hole all by ourselves.

So screw everyone else.

Would of liked him to catch the ball, but since he didn't I'll take a phantom PI for a freaking change, just like I'll take the Pittsburgh* Steelers eating a draft pick for cheating without shedding crocodile tears over it.

Screw everyone but the Patriots.

I agree with very single thing you have written here times ten. Except the Carolina thing…there were plenty on our side but the bottom line remained the same. You can't change it you can only shake your head and say, well that wasn't right.

Excellent point about what if it was a TD/offensive PI situation instead.

 

[I am party]

Rewatching the game, finally got to the end...

I don't think that was pass interference, but I also don't think it mattered all that much. If it hadn't been called, Brady still would have had 2nd and 10 from the Browns 30 yard line with 35 seconds left. A touchdown there was pretty much inevitable regardless. This is TFB we're talking about here.

 

[Ring 6]

The CB tackling the WR? That bit of hyperbole is your example of a good argument? We both know that's not what we are talking about.

No it was to emphasize the RESULT is the same.
I don't know why we would distinguish from not playing the ball and preventing the WR from making a catch he would make and not playing the ball and heavily preventing the WR from making the catch.

I'll leave it at this. I hate the ticky-tack calls that have infected the NFL in the Polian era. This PI call was just another example of it.

I disagree. Ticky tack calls when the defender is playing properly are bad. Calling contact when the defender has no clue at all of where the ball is is correct.
I think you are missing the distinction between a defender making a legitimate play on the ball and a defender beaten beaten and hitting the receiver to make up for it.

If a flag is thrown EVERY time a DB impedes a WR, we are looking at a very boring game.

You left out when they are not playing the ball. A key consideration.
What you would have is not a boring game but DBs who played the ball.

And Polian's wet dream. Every Patriots fan would be furious if that was our CB getting called for that play. This is not basketball. Some contact should be allowed for.

That is fine if the DB is playing the ball. Again, you are overlooking the difference between contact trying to make a play and a desperate stab at a receiver who has beaten you.

As someone who reads more than he posts, I have come to respect your opinions and your fandom while reading through this message board. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

But you ARE wrong.

The point is to exchange ideas, is it not? I agree that if McFadden was playing the football, my comments would be wrong, but he was not. He was beaten, in order to overcome that he started swatting, clutching and grabbing at the receiver in order to disrupt the receiver from what he was doing NOT in order to protect his own right to the football.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

Good/bad idea? Adopt the college rules: 15yd for PI throughout the game except in the last 2 minute, offense get ball on spot of foul to prevent "prevent defense".

 

[Snake Eyes]

Good/bad idea? Adopt the college rules: 15yd for PI throughout the game except in the last 2 minute, offense get ball on spot of foul to prevent "prevent defense".

Why? That means a BD could just mug a receiver beyond 15yds.

The rules are fine, we just need better refs who are applying them.

 

[Uncle Meat]

Mods, please remove this contentious, argumentative troll from this thread. Thanks.

Why so serious, Joker?

Get a life, and stop cyber-stalking me please. Thanks. You got a problem, and the first step is to admit it. God forbid debates happen on message boards...almost unheard of, really.

Now tell me what you think of Mike Pereira saying "that was definitely not pass inference." You know, talk about the subject of the thread...just like me.

Mike Pereira thinks that was definitely not pass interference. What do YOU think? I'd like to know. All I really know is that you dislike me for being a Bills fan, and that hurts me deeply. But I'd like to know what you think about...you know, the actual topic of the thread. You know, the things we've actually been talking about here. Do you have an opinion?

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

Why so serious, Joker?

Get a life, and stop cyber-stalking me please. Thanks. You got a problem, and the first step is to admit it. God forbid debates happen on message boards...almost unheard of, really.

Now tell me what you think of Mike Pereira saying "that was definitely not pass inference." You know, talk about the subject of the thread...just like me.

Mike Pereira thinks that was definitely not pass interference. What do YOU think? I'd like to know. All I really known is that you dislike me for being a Bills fan, and that hurts me deeply. But I'd like to know what you think about...you know, the actual topic of the thread. You know, the things we've actually been talking about here.

The NFL needs to hire Mike to be Vice President of Officiating again no matter what the cost. Back when he was in charge the officials rarely made incorrect calls, but now they seem to blow at least a couple major calls a week (according to him).

 

[Uncle Meat]

The NFL needs to hire Mike to be Vice President of Officiating again no matter what the cost. Back when he was in charge the officials rarely made incorrect calls, but now they seem to blow at least a couple major calls a week (according to him).

Mike Pereira is able to speak more openly about his interpretation of penalties called or not called now, as opposed to when he was the Vice President of Officiating.

The league itself rarely admits a mistake, even though it may be an obvious one. They admitted a mistake this week about a call in the Bengals/Colts game, but it's not like they come out publicly with the truth after the fact very often. I guess it's not in their best interests to second-guess the rulings on the field later. You think Pereira would have been employed by the NFL for long if he came out publicly with his true opinions on a regular basis? These refs probably find out later and know when they fcked up badly, but they are not going to go around telling everybody that.

Remember that Packers/Seahawks game with the replacement refs where they gave Seattle the touchdown at the end? The call was terrible, but the NFL's official stance was that they got the call right. That's what they do. I find it hard to believe that they REALLY believed what they told everybody. Yeah, this was the right call:



ONE of these refs was right.

Bad calls will inevitably happen no matter what, but I gotta tell you that this year seems especially bad with them...worst year in recent memory.

 

[Rob0729]

Good/bad idea? Adopt the college rules: 15yd for PI throughout the game except in the last 2 minute, offense get ball on spot of foul to prevent "prevent defense".

I have been for this for years. Everyone say defenders will just tackle players on long balls rather than let them get a big passing play especially in the end zone, but you don't see that happening in the college game all that much.

They could do a two tier PI call like they used to with a facemask penalty (a 5 yarder for just grabbing the face mask and a 15 yarder if you turn the head). They can make minor PI foul a 15 yarder and if the defender take down a receiver, make it a spot foul or 15 yards which ever is longer.

 

[Ring 6]

I have been for this for years. Everyone say defenders will just tackle players on long balls rather than let them get a big passing play especially in the end zone, but you don't see that happening in the college game all that much.

They could do a two tier PI call like they used to with a facemask penalty (a 5 yarder for just grabbing the face mask and a 15 yarder if you turn the head). They can make minor PI foul a 15 yarder and if the defender take down a receiver, make it a spot foul or 15 yards which ever is longer.

I'd rather go with interference or not inference because the result is the same no matter how severe the interference is.
Whether its a spot foul or 15 yards doesn't matter much to me, I can see both arguments.
The NFL needs to learn that if it isn't broke don't fix it, but they haven't understood that since Goodell showed up.

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

Mike Pereira is able to speak more openly about his interpretation of penalties called or not called now, as opposed to when he was the Vice President of Officiating.

The league itself rarely admits a mistake, even though it may be an obvious one. They admitted a mistake this week about a call in the Bengals/Colts game, but it's not like they come out publicly with the truth after the fact very often. I guess it's not in their best interests to second-guess the rulings on the field later. You think Pereira would have been employed by the NFL for long if he came out publicly with his true opinions on a regular basis? These refs probably find out later and know when they fcked up badly, but they are not going to go around telling everybody that.

Remember that Packers/Seahawks game with the replacement refs where they gave Seattle the touchdown at the end? The call was terrible, but the NFL's official stance was that they got the call right. That's what they do. I find it hard to believe that they REALLY believed what they told everybody. Yeah, this was the right call:



ONE of these refs was right.

Bad calls will inevitably happen no matter what, but I gotta tell you that this year seems especially bad with them...worst year in recent memory.

Unless you're his boss you have no clue how openly he's allowed to speak. If you believe he was just a shill for the NFL, then that experience should take away from his credibility not add to it. As such any opinion he presents should carry less weight not more than anyone else's. When you factor in that part of his current job is to present these opinions they lose all credibility.