The fallacy of "uncatchable."

[Uncle Meat]

Holding by YOUR Bills went on last week...uncalled. Holding goes on in every game and goes uncalled. Part of the game. Pass interference that is CALLED by the ref responsible for THAT part of the field, that is waved off by another official with NO EXPLANATION is a totally different issue altogether. You seem to conflate the two in your mind. The Jets call had NEVER been called and has NEVER BEEN CALLED since. I can show instances including the Jets in THAT game doing the exact same thing, all season long. Don't patronize me with your holier than thou nonsense. I'm sorry you are a Bills fan with a huge axe to grind, and that you're blinded by seeming blind rage when your idiotic assertions are shredded. Sleep it off. The end of another rotten Bills campaign will be here soon enough.

Forget about your idiotic Bills insults, if that's what you need to resort to. My having an "axe to grind" is ridiculous. You constantly project that **** on me when we disagree, and you resort to insults because you got nothing. Guess what? You are blinded by homerism. Guess what else? I bet MONEY on the Patriots in the Panthers game. MONEY, and not just a little. If I had a bias, it would be for the Patriots there.

My assertions have hardly been addressed, much less "shredded." Blind rage? ha, ha.

So you are saying that Nate Solder's blantant hold meant nothing in the Saints game? Am I getting that? Even though it looked like that very same hold was the thing that gave Brady time to throw that pass and thus win the game? That was less of a penalty because a flag wasn't thrown, huh? You just display a mindless bias here, point blank. I won't sugar-coat that. It doesn't matter who else did what in the entire history of mankind. That was a blatant and drastic hold that had a direct effect on the success of the play.

The eventual explanation on the non-call with pass interference was that the ball was uncatchable. Define uncatchable, if you will. You don't know if the guy throwing the flag was thinking pass interference or defensive holding, either, do you? In my opinion there is no way Gronk catches that pass regardless. A holding call is more in line. Lot's of people disagree about the non-call, but there WAS an explanation in the end. Greater football minds than you or I agree with the call made on the field or think it could go either way, too.

If Luke Kuechly doesn't do what he did with Gronk, how likely is it that Gronk catches that pass in your estimation? Another question you refuse to answer, much less "shred." LOL.

Did the Patriots "push into the pile" on that play in the Jets game? That's the only question, not if somebody else may have done it but it wasn't called, or even if that's the only time it was called. The question is whether or not they did it. Did they? That's the rule. You want to cry about that too.

It's amazing to me that you cannot see what happened in the Saints game with a level head, though. What's wrong with you? Just admit that the Patriots got away with a BIG one there and stole a win. It's true. There is no possible way to deny that. You'd rather fixate on a picked up flag as if that makes all the difference in the world. It doesn't. Reality is still reality.

 

[Pat Riot]

They are the same because they possibly cost the game for a team that should not have won, is the the point. Called Karma. Hes saying live with it.

There's clearly no point arguing this with either of you, we all have our "beliefs". I'm not changing any and no one is changing mine.

L8r

 

[pherein]

There's clearly no point arguing this with either of you, we all have our "beliefs". I'm not changing any and no one is changing mine.

L8r

I dont see a problem with that, all fans see things the way they want to. We can have differences, and still have fun together. Though the cry babe goes a bit far ,on a ref calls where the other team has a legitimate point.
I think most believe that was PI, but you just have to deal with it.

 

[UK_Pat37]

I've mostly gotten over the non-call, but this is eating at me.

We've all seen PI waved off because of an uncatchable ball, but those have always been on balls that are so far away or out of bounds that a receiver is physically incapable of catching up to it. Hence, "uncatchable."

But how in the world can a ball that would arrive within a guy's catch radius be uncatchable?

Take the defenders out of the play, for the moment. Could Brady's throw have been caught by Gronk, even in his Kuechly-aided position at the back of the end zone? Yes.

Put the defenders back in. Could the ball have squirted through the defender's hands and gotten to Gronk? Again, yes. In that case, we have what was ruled uncatchable becoming catchable.

What?

By this logic, any ball that is picked off negates PI. The interception apparently renders the ball uncatchable by the receiver, regardless of the accuracy of the throw or the activity of the defender.

That should make things pretty interestng.

If the ball hadn't been intercepted, I'd imagine that flag might have stood.

It's what home field gets you in any loud stadium.

 

[Fixit]

I can't believe there are people who can't tell the difference between a missed holding call (which happens all the time; I bet New Orleans got away with a bunch, too) and a call that was correctly flagged, then incorrectly picked up and explained away long after the fact by not one but two different B.S. stories.

As for karma, (which is idiotic and beneath you, Pherein) I'm pretty sure the Jets game took care of that.

Then again, every time NE gets a bad call, it's apparently all karma for one correct call 12 years ago, so maybe I just expect too much from fans.

 

[Pat Riot]

Re: Re: The fallacy of "uncatchable."

I can't believe there are people who can't tell the difference between a missed holding call (which happens all the time; I bet New Orleans got away with a bunch, too) and a call that was correctly flagged, then incorrectly picked up and explained away long after the fact by not one but two different B.S. stories.

As for karma, (which is idiotic and beneath you, Pherein) I'm pretty sure the Jets game took care of that.

Then again, every time NE gets a bad call, it's apparently all karma for one correct call 12 years ago, so maybe I just expect too much from fans.

QFT

10 char

 

[PatsSox363804]

The trend in all 3 of the calls being discussed here is that they favored the home team, and maybe that's the bigger issue here. I don't want the NFL to turn into the NBA but it seems it's going in that direction. Every week we seem to be discussing some bad call from at least one game and more often than not it seems to favor the home team. With regards to the Patriots when you look back through all of the calls we're discussing here good and bad the only road call I remember really going our way was the one against the Ravens in 2007. The worst of the worst, no touchback in 05, faceguarding in 06, the holds on the Tyree play, the "good" field goal last year, and the 2 this year were all on the road or at a neutral site. Of course the call that apparently trumps all calls in the tuck rule was a home game. If I had the time to do it I'd love to do an analysis of what fans consider bad or disputed calls and see how often they favor the home team.

 

[Uncle Meat]

I can't believe there are people who can't tell the difference between a missed holding call (which happens all the time; I bet New Orleans got away with a bunch, too) and a call that was correctly flagged, then incorrectly picked up and explained away long after the fact by not one but two different B.S. stories.

The difference is that one gives you endless license to cry into your sleeve apparently. And the one that goes in your favor...well, you can just rack that up as "hey, it happens."

In the Panthers game, the refs got together, discussed it, and drew a conclusion. Remember that the the play happened very quickly in real time, and these guys did not have the benefit of watching it ten times in slow motion. Do you think that they deliberately made the wrong call? Honest question.

So you can just completely forgive the Saints non-call because they flat-out missed it? The incompetence factor (if you will) was much less then, huh?

The only point is that the end result is the same. Two calls (or non-calls) that were basically going to decide the outcome of the game. The main difference as to what actually happened during the plays was that the Saints non-call actually had the larger impact on the play. But I guess that doesn't matter either, right? You'll never know if the Pats would have scored a TD if pass interference was called against Kuechly, either. That's not a given.

If you need to rely on the refs for what happens on the last play of the game, you are in a world of hurt...moral to the story. The refs making wrong calls at the end of games did not affect the Patriots record this year, bottom line. That's all there is to it.

 

[Fixit]

The difference is that one gives you endless license to cry into your sleeve apparently. And the one that goes in your favor...well, you can just rack that up as "hey, it happens."

In the Panthers game, the refs got together, discussed it, and drew a conclusion. Remember that the the play happened very quickly in real time, and these guys did not have the benefit of watching it ten times in slow motion. Do you think that they deliberately made the wrong call? Honest question.

So you can just completely forgive the Saints non-call because they flat-out missed it? The incompetence factor (if you will) was much less then, huh?

The only point is that the end result is the same. Two calls (or non-calls) that were basically going to decide the outcome of the game. The main difference as to what actually happened during the plays was that the Saints non-call actually had the larger impact on the play. But I guess that doesn't matter either, right? You'll never know if the Pats would have scored a TD if pass interference was called against Kuechly, either. That's not a given.

If you need to rely on the refs for what happens on the last play of the game, you are in a world of hurt...moral to the story. The refs making wrong calls at the end of games did not affect the Patriots record this year, bottom line. That's all there is to it.

You're completely set in your argument, and you're not even listening to what people are saying.

No, I don't think the refs deliberately made the wrong call. I think they deliberately made the call that would get them out of there and they didn't care if it was right.

And yes, the refs have affected the Pats record. Flip the NO and Carolina games if you want to. If the refs call a push on the Jets during NE's field goal attempt, NE wins that game.

Let me ask you this last thing: Which would be harder to stomach as a NO fan ... the missed call on the holding, or them throwing a flag and then picking it up?

 

[Kontradiction]

The difference is that one gives you endless license to cry into your sleeve apparently. And the one that goes in your favor...well, you can just rack that up as "hey, it happens."

It does happen. Sometimes officials miss calls. Holding calls get missed all the time. This call was correct and it wasn't miss at first. But then, they did the incorrect thing and picked the flag up. That's the big difference.

In the Panthers game, the refs got together, discussed it, and drew a conclusion. Remember that the the play happened very quickly in real time, and these guys did not have the benefit of watching it ten times in slow motion. Do you think that they deliberately made the wrong call? Honest question.

It was either deliberate or it was a product of incompetence. Neither of which is remotely excusable.

So you can just completely forgive the Saints non-call because they flat-out missed it? The incompetence factor (if you will) was much less then, huh?

Missed calls happen. That's a part of any sport. Calls that were correct, then overturned for whatever reason are egregious.

If you need to rely on the refs for what happens on the last play of the game, you are in a world of hurt...moral to the story. The refs making wrong calls at the end of games did not affect the Patriots record this year, bottom line. That's all there is to it.

Sure it did. Folk would have missed the field goal in one game and the Pats would have had the ball on the 1 yard line for an untimed down in another.

 

[Uncle Meat]

You're completely set in your argument, and you're not even listening to what people are saying.

Of course I'm listening.

No, I don't think the refs deliberately made the wrong call. I think they deliberately made the call that would get them out of there and they didn't care if it was right.

Ok, so you base that opinion on what exactly? Why have you ruled out the possibility that the refs simply made a mistake?

And yes, the refs have affected the Pats record. Flip the NO and Carolina games if you want to. If the refs call a push on the Jets during NE's field goal attempt, NE wins that game.

Wow. That's a pretty embarrassing take.

First of all, New England didn't even attempt a field goal against the Jets when they lost to them. Did they? I'm not aware of that. Even if the Patriots DID score a field goal, that would mean a tie and overtime in the grand scheme, not a win. The Jets won by 3. You'll have to explain this idea further, because I'm not exactly sure what you are talking about.

But you are entering into crybaby territory here if that's all you got. Like you've already mentioned, bad or missed calls happen all the time. In fact, they pretty much happen in every game every week. It's part of the game, and it's up to teams to overcome them when it works against them.

We are talking about calls that affected the outcome of games in the last seconds here, which is different because there is no time to overcome them. And you can't sit there an claim that bad calls didn't go in your favor in close games too, right?

Let me ask you this last thing: Which would be harder to stomach as a NO fan ... the missed call on the holding, or them throwing a flag and then picking it up?

I totally understand about one call being harder to stomach than the other. To me, that's a given and is not a matter of discussion. But we are talking about how the refs affected games at the very end. Being more emotional about one side doesn't mean that the other side had less of an impact. If you were able to look at it objectively, you'd see that the holding call didn't deserve to be called any less...and that non-call helped decide the outcome of the game in a big way. How does that not make sense?

 

[Fixit]

Wow. That's a pretty embarrassing take.

First of all, New England didn't even attempt a field goal against the Jets when they lost to them. Did they? I'm not aware of that. Even if the Patriots DID score a field goal, that would mean a tie and overtime in the grand scheme, not a win. The Jets won by 3. You'll have to explain this idea further, because I'm not exactly sure what you are talking about.

But you are entering into crybaby territory here if that's all you got.

Well, don't let your lack of knowledge about a game in question in any way keep you from a) arguing about it, or b) insulting me.

Well played.

 

[Uncle Meat]

It does happen. Sometimes officials miss calls. Holding calls get missed all the time. This call was correct and it wasn't miss at first. But then, they did the incorrect thing and picked the flag up. That's the big difference.

It was either deliberate or it was a product of incompetence. Neither of which is remotely excusable.

The fact that one is harder to take does not invalidate the other. Every single call is a judgment call. Yeah, they didn't see it so it didn't happen. Sure.

Like I said, that Panthers play happened so fast. You can at least entertain the idea that the refs thought the ball was uncatchable at the time, can't you?

Sure it did. Folk would have missed the field goal in one game and the Pats would have had the ball on the 1 yard line for an untimed down in another.

Folk would have missed that field goal...if what? If the Patriots didn't commit a penalty? Did the Patriots "push into the pile?" Did they? Because if they did, that's on them entirely and there was no unfairness taking place.

The Pats would have had one chance on the 1-yardline against perhaps the best front 7 in the league if pass interference was called. I agree. But the Patriots would have had one more chance at the 27-yardline against the Saints had the right thing happened there, too. There is no disputing that. But neither of those things happened, so call it a push where it evens out and stop crying like a little baby about one side of it as though things should go your way every single time.

 

[Uncle Meat]

Well, don't let your lack of knowledge about a game in question in any way keep you from a) arguing about it, or b) insulting me.

Well played.

So you win somehow then?

Ridiculous.

 

[Fixit]

So you win somehow then?

Ridiculous.

Didn't say anything about winning. I merely pointed out that you're arguing about something and you don't even know what the argument is.

 

[Fixit]

Like I said, that Panthers play happened so fast. You can at least entertain the idea that the refs thought the ball was uncatchable at the time, can't you?

I know I can't, because no one's ever seen "uncatchable" applied in that situation, and the head of officiating never mentioned it in his clarification, either.

Seriously, show me another instance of PI being waved off because of an uncatchable ball that was CAUGHT within two yards of the intended receiver.

 

[Kontradiction]

The fact that one is harder to take does not invalidate the other. Every single call is a judgment call. Yeah, they didn't see it so it didn't happen. Sure.

Didn't say that. It happened, but was missed. That's part of the game. Unfortunately for the Saints, game over. This one wasn't missed but was incorrectly picked up. You don't seem to understand the difference between the two.

Like I said, that Panthers play happened so fast. You can at least entertain the idea that the refs thought the ball was uncatchable at the time, can't you?

No, and that's a piss poor excuse. The original ref that threw the flag had it correct. The others had time to have a conference and decided to pick it up. You can't use the excuse that the "play happened too fast" when the ref had it right to begin with.

Folk would have missed that field goal...if what? If the Patriots didn't commit a penalty? Did the Patriots "push into the pile?" Did they? Because if they did, that's on them entirely and there was no unfairness taking place.

Fine. I'll see your counter argument and raise you that if the Jets had gotten called when they had done the same on the series before that, the Pats drive continues and Gostkowski doesn't have to kick a field goal.

The Pats would have had one chance on the 1-yardline against perhaps the best front 7 in the league if pass interference was called. I agree. But the Patriots would have had one more chance at the 27-yardline against the Saints had the right thing happened there, too. There is no disputing that.

The best font seven in football that the Pats had been moving the ball against all day...

 

[Uncle Meat]

Didn't say anything about winning. I merely pointed out that you're arguing about something and you don't even know what the argument is.

I didn't understand what you said. If you don't want to clarify it, then move on.

 

[Fixit]

I didn't understand what you said. If you don't want to clarify it, then move on.

I would have gladly clarified, if you hadn't been a pooface about it. So .

Anyway, this has gotten stale.

 

[Uncle Meat]

Didn't say that. It happened, but was missed. That's part of the game. Unfortunately for the Saints, game over. This one wasn't missed but was incorrectly picked up. You don't seem to understand the difference between the two.

I understand what you think the difference between the two is. I also understand that you seem to be incapable of taking a step back and looking at it objectively. If you were able to do that, you wouldn't be crying about only one of the calls so much because the end results are what matter. I really don't want to have to explain why again, but it should be obvious.

No, and that's a piss poor excuse. The original ref that threw the flag had it correct. The others had time to have a conference and decided to pick it up. You can't use the excuse that the "play happened too fast" when the ref had it right to begin with.

The original ref was looking to the others the moment he threw the flag. They talked about it, and a mistake was likely made.

Fine. I'll see your counter argument and raise you that if the Jets had gotten called when they had done the same on the series before that, the Pats drive continues and Gostkowski doesn't have to kick a field goal.

LOL, I thought that when refs don't see penalty infractions, they didn't happen, which is how you can so readily dismiss what happened with the Saints as "just being part of the game" or whatever. Now you want to be a hypocrite about it, apparently. It matters this time, even though we are talking less game-deciding Mickey Mouse play? Not only that, but the Patriots were guaranteed a TD if that drive was extended, huh? Ridiculous. At least be consistent and not apply outlooks that are most situationally convenient.

Now I remember. This is what Fixit was talking about but did not want to clarify. The "yeah, but they did it too" argument. I remember hearing about that claim and looking it up at the time. I watched the play again, but did not see any push into the pile on the Jets part.

I also read something that said Rex Ryan warned the refs beforehand that the Patriots may be pushing into the pile and to keep their eyes peeled about that. If that's true, smart move, I'd say.

The best font seven in football that the Pats had been moving the ball against all day...

We are only talking about an opportunity here, not guaranteed success.