PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Does the NFL admit they screwed up again?

Status
Not open for further replies.
It should have been holding instead of pass interference. Gronk didn't sell PI and he allowed his momentum to take him out of the play.

I expect the refs to start bailing our defenders out when do something similar.

He didn't have to sell it. The back judge, who was in the best position made the call.

Even if he would have sold it more and flopped to the ground that idiot blakeman would have still run in and said uncatchable. How a ball is uncatchable when a guy that was 2-3 feet further away than Gronk makes a play on the ball is beyond me.

In regards to the whole selling it thing. There would be people, probably like yourself who would have come on here and started popping off and complaining about Gronk being a diver and trying to get the call instead of Gronk being Gronk and making a play
 
The refs were right for letting the players play


The game should not be a decided on a PI CALL and i expect the refs to bail our defense out when we need a play like this.


The referees have opened Pandora's box and i expect them to stick by this rule when the pats defense needs it on the final play.

Let the players play.

Then no flag on McCourty, right? Let the players play and I think the Pats win.
 
He didn't have to sell it. The back judge, who was in the best position made the call.

Even if he would have sold it more and flopped to the ground that idiot blakeman would have still run in and said uncatchable. How a ball is uncatchable when a guy that was 2-3 feet further away than Gronk makes a play on the ball is beyond me.

In regards to the whole selling it thing. There would be people, probably like Yourself who would have come on here and started popping off and complaining about Gronk being a diver and trying to get the call instead of Gronk being Gronk and making a play

"In regards to the whole selling it thing. There would be people, probably like Yourself who would have come on here and started popping off and complaining about Gronk being a diver and trying to get the call instead of Gronk being Gronk and making a play" You know what they say about assuming so don't

"How a ball is uncatchable when a guy that was 2-3 feet further away than Gronk makes a play on the ball is beyond me." Because at best the ball would have been matted down before had the chance to catch it.
 
was that within the Final 10 seconds?

No but a huge play in the game. Why didn't they let 'em play?

It's one set of rules - strict or soft, apply them equally to both teams.
 
The bottom line then: You can hold any receiver in the end zone on any pass play as long as the ball is determined not catchable for them? Don't we see calls away from the intended receiver flagged all day long for interference. I think we had some Monday night that continued drives. Does not matter "if" the Patriots sucked or what players were out of the game with injuries. Bad call cost them one more play and a chance to win on the field.
 
"In regards to the whole selling it thing. There would be people, probably like Yourself who would have come on here and started popping off and complaining about Gronk being a diver and trying to get the call instead of Gronk being Gronk and making a play" You know what they say about assuming so don't

"How a ball is uncatchable when a guy that was 2-3 feet further away than Gronk makes a play on the ball is beyond me." Because at best the ball would have been matted down before had the chance to catch it.

That has no bearing on whether something is catchable. Go back the the Green Bay/Seattle game last year. In this case, the offensive player shoved a defensive player to the ground where the defensive player would have unlikely intercepted the ball. The NFL said that should have been offensive interference. You can't have it both ways. You can't determine that the ball would have been batted because this isn't "Minority Report".
 
That has no bearing on whether something is catchable. Go back the the Green Bay/Seattle game last year. In this case, the offensive player shoved a defensive player to the ground where the defensive player would have unlikely intercepted the ball. The NFL said that should have been offensive interference. You can't have it both ways. You can't determine that the ball would have been batted because this isn't "Minority Report".

"You can't determine that the ball would have been batted because this isn't" They can and they did.

I miss the good ole days when defenders could do anything they wanted to receivers and they would still catch the ball.

This is why i think the call is fine....AS LONG AS THE REFS REFUSE TO CALL IT WHEN THE PATS DO IT!!!!!!!!
 
I think the league would be heading down a very slippery slope if players are expected to "sell it" in order for a penalty to be called. What you are doing then is encouraging flopping; if that's what you want then watch soccer, or even NBA basketball.

When I initially saw the flag being picked up, I actually thought it was the correct call. It was only after watching it in replay that I felt otherwise; Kuechly made contact just threw yards deep, and pushed Gronkowski back.

In terms of 'selling it', perhaps Greg Olsen should be fined for his embellishment. I haven't re-watched that play yet but in real time it seemed as if Olsen was actually holding McCourty's arm with one hand to give the appearance that McCourty was guilty, and then throwing the other hand up in the air to draw the attention of a referee.

All that being said, to me the most critical play was neither of those, nor Ridley's fumble, nor Newton's scramble, or even the touchdown by Ginn; it was the third and one inside the ten yard line when Blount was running the ball well, and they decided to pass. I just did not understand that play call.



For the record, per the NFL Rulebook that final play should have been defensive holding.

NFL Rules Digest: Use of Hands, Arms, and Body


The defensive player cannot use his hands or arms to push from behind, hang onto, or encircle an eligible receiver in a manner that restricts movement as the play develops. Beyond this five-yard limitation, a defender may use his hands or arms ONLY to defend or protect himself against impending contact caused by a receiver. In such reaction, the defender may not contact a receiver who attempts to take a path to evade him.​
 
"You can't determine that the ball would have been batted because this isn't" They can and they did.

I miss the good ole days when defenders could do anything they wanted to receivers and they would still catch the ball.

This is why i think the call is fine....AS LONG AS THE REFS REFUSE TO CALL IT WHEN THE PATS DO IT!!!!!!!!

You seem to think this hasn't come up before yet I pointed out an example where it did and the NFL offered an apology for the non-call.

Golden Tate knocks defender down during Hail Mary pass where the defender was unlikely to catch the ball and the NFL said it "SHOULD" have been called.
 
And the answer to this thread is no.
Blandino: We feel the officials followed proper protocol - NFL Videos

Nothing really of note there. Blandino uses the word "judgment" a few hundred times and says that given what the refs judged, they made the right call.

The one absolute BS comment in there is when he says that Kuechly's restriction of Gronk happened simultaneously with the ball, and then on the video you see it happens multiple seconds beforehand.
 
They should but they won't. They will do what the usually do they turn there head on the call and bend the rules so it sounds like it was a good call.
 
They should but they won't. They will do what the usually do they turn there head on the call and bend the rules so it sounds like it was a good call.

This..... they still haven't acknowledged blowing the Jets game. The closest they've come is admitting that the Jets should have been flagged for it earlier.

This is a problem with all four of the 'big' leagues, IMO. They all defend the officiating first, then look for the error as a secondary priority.
 
And the answer to this thread is no.
Blandino: We feel the officials followed proper protocol - NFL Videos

Nothing really of note there. Blandino uses the word "judgment" a few hundred times and says that given what the refs judged, they made the right call.

The one absolute BS comment in there is when he says that Kuechly's restriction of Gronk happened simultaneously with the ball, and then on the video you see it happens multiple seconds beforehand.

And because it was a judgement call it is therefore not reviewable - which is another can of worms.

Think hypothetically here for a moment (and somebody please correct me if I am wrong). Let's say Gronk had wrestled Kuechly out of the way and caught the pass for a touchdown. In that case the play can be reviewed and overturned, even though though the judgement at the time was that there was no offensive pass interference .... but if a defender does the same thing which results in no score, then the play cannot be reviewed.

Yeah, that makes sense...
 
And the answer to this thread is no.
Blandino: We feel the officials followed proper protocol - NFL Videos

Nothing really of note there. Blandino uses the word "judgment" a few hundred times and says that given what the refs judged, they made the right call.

The one absolute BS comment in there is when he says that Kuechly's restriction of Gronk happened simultaneously with the ball, and then on the video you see it happens multiple seconds beforehand.

Heard Mike Pereria on Felger. He didn't pull any punches - you can't pick up that flag. Now watch the league tie itself into knots trying to put a happy face on this screw up.
 
Jeff Howe:

Best part: Blandino says "the restriction occurred simultaneously with the ball being touched."... Then Blandino turns toward replay monitor, restriction clearly begins 3 seconds before interception.

Here is Dean Blandino's explanation of the call on NFLN Total Access

Blandino: We feel the officials followed proper protocol - NFL Videos

2:00 mark is amazing
 
This..... they still haven't acknowledged blowing the Jets game. The closest they've come is admitting that the Jets should have been flagged for it earlier.

This is a problem with all four of the 'big' leagues, IMO. They all defend the officiating first, then look for the error as a secondary priority.

Well the way there were talking about that call in the jets game sure makes it sound like the NFL is on the refs side. But The NFL are always on the refs side. They will just blow off this pass interference call like it never happened. If they do have a press release on that I'm very interested to hear how the NFL takes the refs side.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft 6 – A Week Before the Draft
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf Pre-Draft Press Conference 4/13
Patriots News 04-12, What To Watch For In The NFL Draft
MORSE: Pre-Draft Patriots News and Notes
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft 5
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft 5
Mark Morse
1 week ago
Patriots Part Ways with Another Linebacker as Offseason Roster Shake-Up Continues
Patriots News 04-05, Mock Draft 2.0, Patriots Look For OL Depth
MORSE: 18 Game Schedule and Other Patriots Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Mike Vrabel Press Conference at the League Meetings 3/31
MORSE: Smokescreens and Misinformation Leading Up to Patriots Draft
Back
Top