Question about spotting of ball near goal line in both SB and KC game--thoughts

[wheresmosi]

Hi. When Gronk caught the ball on the TD drive, the ball was spotted at the 2, and I thought maybe it should be inches shy of the goalline. If you look at the play, he is touched by a defender as he is falling down getting ready to receive the pass, BUT it seemed to me contact was over by the time he fully caught the ball. He then attempted to roll toward the goalline and was touched just inches short.

Also, in the KC game, on the drive where Brady threw the endzone pick, the play before they got stuffed at the 1 (if memory serves), Michel was driving and to me forward progress took him inches from the goalline. Had he been willing to gamble and reach out with the ball, he probably could have broken the plane, but BB warns against that because of how easy it is to be swatted away. However, at that play they spotted it right at the 1. When they got stuffed next play (if I remember correctlY), they thought they had to try a pass. But if they had been a foot or less away, I think they might have tried to just slug it in, and probably would have scored.

Thoughts on either of these plays?

 

[sambam94]

It looks like the defender touched him while gronk was in the air. Why are there 2 defenders on gronk besides the safety coming over late?

 

[Angelpats]

Yeah the defenders touched gronk in the process. It seemed like the correct spot but that whole sequence was special. When Brady started his throw Gronk was covered tightly and while the ball was in the air he out ran two cbs and caught it. He’s going to play again next year.

 

[wheresmosi]

Yeah the defenders touched gronk in the process. It seemed like the correct spot but that whole sequence was special. When Brady started his throw Gronk was covered tightly and while the ball was in the air he out ran two cbs and caught it. He’s going to play again next year.

Right, but I don't think he actually had the ball when he was touched in the air. It looked to me like he was reaching out while falling to grab it, there is contact, and then just as he hits the ground he actually catches the ball, and then tries to roll. He might have been touching the ball when they touched him, but did not possess it--by the time he gets to the ground and secures the ball, there is no contact. Maybe the rule is if you are contacted on your way to the ground in the process of securing the ball that downs you?

 

[wheresmosi]

I also still have questions on the KC Michel play.

 

[wheresmosi]

It's hard to see, but the Michel play is about 21:55--look to where he seems to get to (he is pushed back a bit after the whistle), and look where it is spotted on the next play--with the tip right at the 1. It looked to me like his push got him to at least the half yard line the previous play.

 

[tobias funke]

Right, but I don't think he actually had the ball when he was touched in the air. It looked to me like he was reaching out while falling to grab it, there is contact, and then just as he hits the ground he actually catches the ball, and then tries to roll. He might have been touching the ball when they touched him, but did not possess it--by the time he gets to the ground and secures the ball, there is no contact. Maybe the rule is if you are contacted on your way to the ground in the process of securing the ball that downs you?

I assumed this would be delineated in the rule book, but it's not (or at least, I can't find it). The way it's officiated seems to be that if there is any contact from a defender during the process of the catch (while going to the ground), they'll rule down by contact, even if it technically occurs before the ball is officially possessed.

 

[Angelpats]

Right, but I don't think he actually had the ball when he was touched in the air. It looked to me like he was reaching out while falling to grab it, there is contact, and then just as he hits the ground he actually catches the ball, and then tries to roll. He might have been touching the ball when they touched him, but did not possess it--by the time he gets to the ground and secures the ball, there is no contact. Maybe the rule is if you are contacted on your way to the ground in the process of securing the ball that downs you?

.

I really thought the same thing too. The ball should have been spotted where he gained actual possession when the defender touched him. I would like to see the official rule though.

 

[Angelpats]

It's hard to see, but the Michel play is about 21:55--look to where he seems to get to (he is pushed back a bit after the whistle), and look where it is spotted on the next play--with the tip right at the 1. It looked to me like his push got him to at least the half yard line the previous play.

You are right about this spot. He may have been 1ft from the goal line. These refs rarely ever gets the spots right, unless they install gps chips on the ball we will always have to rely on the estimated vision of the refs. Even challenges to these spots rarely get changed. Like our 4th and 2 challenge.

 

[ALP]

i think we did get some favorable spots in SB (but that one time whre they measured it and said it was inches away and was actually a 1st down lol)

 

[wheresmosi]

I assumed this would be delineated in the rule book, but it's not (or at least, I can't find it). The way it's officiated seems to be that if there is any contact from a defender during the process of the catch (while going to the ground), they'll rule down by contact, even if it technically occurs before the ball is officially possessed.

Yeah, I feel like Ive heard that somewhere before, but Im not sure. But that would definitely explain the spot.

 

[wheresmosi]

You are right about this spot. He may have been 1ft from the goal line. These refs rarely ever gets the spots right, unless they install gps chips on the ball we will always have to rely on the estimated vision of the refs. Even challenges to these spots rarely get changed. Like our 4th and 2 challenge.

It probab ly wouldn't seem worth a challenge (you'd like to think they could ram it in even if it was a full yard away), BUT part of me thinks if they put it where it actually was, we would more likely have run rather than passed the next play, and very likely tried for it on 4th if we didn't make it and didn't lose distance (though a FG still would have been up 10-0). But from a full yard away, it makes the sneak much less likely, etc. Im not sure we do a pass if it is just a foot away.