No PI at end of NE / Car game??

Not sure what I just saw at the end of the game there. Last play of the game, Gronk was running into the end zone looks like he wanted to turn and make a play on the ball but a panther was draped all over him and absolutely prevented him from making any kind of comeback to the ball. The back line judge immediately threw a flag for PI but after the refs huddled they said there was no penalty on the play and the game was over. They didn't explain why it wasn't a penalty though.

The announcers a minute later stated that because the ball was intercepted there was no way the receiver could have made a play on the ball thus Passing Interference could not have been called as there was no pass to the receiver to interfere with.

WTH?!?!?!?

This is going to get a LOT of press coverage and I can't wait to see what the final outcome is on this one. Just go back to the TB game and Earl Thomas' interception. He intercepted the ball preventing the player from being able to make the catch so why the heck would they throw the flag for PI?? I know this is a stupid comparison and the NFL already admitted that Earl's play wasn't PI but it just blows my mind how different plays are interpreted differently by the various referee crews!!

Man...I can't wait until they finally make flags like these reviewable (I know, will probably never happen).

Yeah, that was crap. But it was fun to see Brady all butthurt that for once the refs didn't bail him out.

1. Ball was way underthrown, by 5 yards at least and low to boot.
2. Gronk didn't even attempt to go through his man for a play on the ball.

I think 2. affected the no-call most. He had no fight in him. It isn't as egregious as many other calls but its the Pats so people gonna hug their nuts on this one.

At least for once it didn't involve us so just enjoy the fact someone deserving finally got screwed.

Milehighhawk":188sb8vg said:

1. Ball was way underthrown, by 5 yards at least and low to boot.
2. Gronk didn't even attempt to go through his man for a play on the ball.

I think 2. affected the no-call most. He had no fight in him. It isn't as egregious as many other calls but its the Pats so people gonna hug their nuts on this one.

Click to expand...

This, if Gronk fought to get back at the ball, it would have been called.

If the Seahawks weren't playing so well, I don't know if I could watch this BS. Every week, nearly every game there are blatantly bad calls. The referee huddles should not be allowed or at least held to a minimum, today they huddle after every "guess" by an official.

Ball was way underthrown, Gronkowski ran too far couldn't have got back to the ball anyway.

If no flag was thrown there would be no controversy.

Milehighhawk":ih3bgzrd said:

1. Ball was way underthrown, by 5 yards at least and low to boot.
2. Gronk didn't even attempt to go through his man for a play on the ball.

I think 2. affected the no-call most. He had no fight in him. It isn't as egregious as many other calls but its the Pats so people gonna hug their nuts on this one.

Click to expand...

There's a linebacker wrestling him out of the endzone. How's he supposed to "run through him"?

Terrible call IMO.

The PI call before that was pretty suspect so it evened out.
Regardless, refs are way to flag happy

It was pass interference period. I still enjoyed watching the cry baby afterwards who has gotten EVERY advantage all his carrier from refs. Hope he gets fined for his actions because that was pathetic behavior.

I have no problem with it not being a penalty, but if so, do not throw a flag. Officials have to throw flags on what they see, not what they think they see. If they aren't sure, they shouldnt throw a flag

Milehighhawk":3af7gr1h said:

1. Ball was way underthrown, by 5 yards at least and low to boot.
2. Gronk didn't even attempt to go through his man for a play on the ball.

I think 2. affected the no-call most. He had no fight in him. It isn't as egregious as many other calls but its the Pats so people gonna hug their nuts on this one.

Click to expand...

This.

blkhwk":3af7gr1h said:

I have no problem with it not being a penalty, but if so, do not throw a flag. Officials have to throw flags on what they see, not what they think they see. If they aren't sure, they shouldnt throw a flag

Click to expand...

Immediately after throwing the flag the ref who threw it called in the other refs to talk about it, probably because he realized that Gronk didn't try to make a play on it and it was intercepted 5 yards ahead of him.

If the ref in the booth is correct, it at least should have been holding, 5 yds and untimed play. If it isn't catchable then it should at least be holding. Which looking at the Seahawks yesterday, Sherman should have been called for holding instead of pass interference. Too bad the Seahawks didn't have tonight's crew.

DavidSeven":bk9z4riy said:

Milehighhawk":bk9z4riy said:

1. Ball was way underthrown, by 5 yards at least and low to boot.
2. Gronk didn't even attempt to go through his man for a play on the ball.

I think 2. affected the no-call most. He had no fight in him. It isn't as egregious as many other calls but its the Pats so people gonna hug their nuts on this one.

Click to expand...

There's a linebacker wrestling him out of the endzone. How's he supposed to "run through him"?

Terrible call IMO.

Click to expand...

Your definition of wrestling is greatly distorted. He had is hands outside the shoulders guiding him toward the back of the endzone. He didn't grip anything nor attempt to throw him to the ground (which is what the word wrestle implies). Exaggeration is the enemy of intelligent observation.

Milehighhawk":2mryun65 said:

DavidSeven":2mryun65 said:

Milehighhawk":2mryun65 said:

1. Ball was way underthrown, by 5 yards at least and low to boot.
2. Gronk didn't even attempt to go through his man for a play on the ball.

I think 2. affected the no-call most. He had no fight in him. It isn't as egregious as many other calls but its the Pats so people gonna hug their nuts on this one.

Click to expand...

There's a linebacker wrestling him out of the endzone. How's he supposed to "run through him"?

Terrible call IMO.

Click to expand...

Your definition of wrestling is greatly distorted. He had is hands outside the shoulders guiding him toward the back of the endzone. He didn't grip anything nor attempt to throw him to the ground (which is what the word wrestle implies). Exaggeration is the enemy of intelligent observation.

Click to expand...

My unintelligent observation is that he wasn't playing the ball (at all) and clearly impeded the receiver's ability to make a play on the ball, for which he has equal right to any Panther. PI. :roll:

Milehighhawk":2l7u0xss said:

DavidSeven":2l7u0xss said:

Milehighhawk":2l7u0xss said:

1. Ball was way underthrown, by 5 yards at least and low to boot.
2. Gronk didn't even attempt to go through his man for a play on the ball.

I think 2. affected the no-call most. He had no fight in him. It isn't as egregious as many other calls but its the Pats so people gonna hug their nuts on this one.

Click to expand...

There's a linebacker wrestling him out of the endzone. How's he supposed to "run through him"?

Terrible call IMO.

Click to expand...

Your definition of wrestling is greatly distorted. He had is hands outside the shoulders guiding him toward the back of the endzone. He didn't grip anything nor attempt to throw him to the ground (which is what the word wrestle implies). Exaggeration is the enemy of intelligent observation.

Click to expand...

Dude. Did you even see the play? Gronk was on his heels, wrapped up, and driven backward. You have no room to speak of "intelligent observation," bud.

Smh. Refs get to pick the outcome.

It was very clear pass interference on that play. Gronk had a play on the ball and was pushed out of it. Peria or whatever his name is is just doing damage control. However its sweet justice to me. Brady has gotten so many bogus calls over the years its ridiculous.

WAIT WAIT WAIT. People actually think that it shouldnt have been a penalty because Gronk didnt try to "fight" through the guy..... WTF how is this even relevant? Like seriously what does Gronk fighting or not fighting the defender have to do with anything? He was either prevented from making a play on the ball or he wasn't. I really dont get what Gronk not battling against the defender has to do with anything. He was being escorted out of the endzone for gods sakes

PI is arguable, but it was at least pretty blatant defensive holding (Kuchely was all over Gronk).