No PI at end of NE / Car game??

[Sonichellboy]

I thought the more egregious call was the Olsen play where he held the DBs arm and flopped around like a fish.

 

[Sac]

There were two penalties. Illegal contact (by the guy who made the pick) then PI. Of course Gronk would have been in position to make a play on the ball. He was clearly held and kept from making his way back.

Actually you are allowed to "box out" (to borrow a basketball term) as a defender. Our Legion of Boom does it all the time. The Defender is allowed to position himself to the ball as well.

What isn't allowed is grabbing and such (faceguarding is allowed). Also when contact was made, the ball was already in the air (as has already been noted on this thread). That means that defensive holding is no longer an option. It's PI or nothing.

Edit: Clarification

Yes. You can position yourself. That doesn't man you can GRAB and hold, as Kuechly did. That's PI.

Before the pass, Robert Lester (#38) clearly contacted Gronk passed 5 yards and rubbed him in front of Kuechly. That's illegal contact.

 

[Polaris]

There were two penalties. Illegal contact (by the guy who made the pick) then PI. Of course Gronk would have been in position to make a play on the ball. He was clearly held and kept from making his way back.

Actually you are allowed to "box out" (to borrow a basketball term) as a defender. Our Legion of Boom does it all the time. The Defender is allowed to position himself to the ball as well.

What isn't allowed is grabbing and such (faceguarding is allowed). Also when contact was made, the ball was already in the air (as has already been noted on this thread). That means that defensive holding is no longer an option. It's PI or nothing.

Edit: Clarification

Yes. You can position yourself. That doesn't man you can GRAB and hold, as Kuechly did. That's PI.

Before the pass, Robert Lester (#38) clearly contacted Gronk passed 5 yards and rubbed him in front of Kuechly. That's illegal contact.

Ball was already in the air when illegal contact was made (at least near as I can tell). That's the problem with getting the ball out so fast. So it would be PI or nothing, and on hail mary type plays, it's an unwritten rule that contact fouls simply aren't called.

 

[volsunghawk]

A lot of misinformation in this thread.

Firstly, it can not be defensive holding. Holding can only occur while the qb still has the ball. Contact didn't happen until after the ball was thrown.

So the only option for the contact was PI. However, because the ball was intercepted five yards up, this made the ball uncatchable, therefor negating PI.

The only argument that can be made was that Gronk could have made it back to the point of the interception if he wasn't PI'd. That's a judgement call at that point. I don't think he could have, so the no-call was good.

The ref could have avoided all this controversy talk if he just explained that at the end instead of running off.

Defensive holding doesn't have any rule about the ball being in the QB's hands. That's "illegal contact."

If the ball is in the air, it can be defensive holding or defensive pass interference. The PI call requires the ball to be catchable. So your view of whether it was defensive holding or defensive PI would depend on whether you thought the ball was catchable.

 

[Donn2390]

The TE's momentum was going away from the ball. If he had not been touched, it would have been impossible for him to stop, reverse his field, and get back to the ball. The law of physics were totally against him. That is what the refs saw and that is how and why they ruled as they did. it was the correct call.
You can't be running full speed and reverse your field under those circumstances.. Impossible..

 

[mikeak]

SERIOUSLY HOW IS THIS STILL GOING?

Ball was in the air - the flag was thrown for PI.

The PI flag was picked up because the ball was intercepted prior to a point where the receiver could have gotten back to the ball

You can agree or disagree with the decision that the receiver could have gotten back to the ball BUT THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT THE RULES BEING UTILIZED FOR THIS CALL

If only the ref would have realized that parts of his job is to explain the rules

 

[therealjohncarlson]

The TE's momentum was going away from the ball. If he had not been touched, it would have been impossible for him to stop, reverse his field, and get back to the ball. The law of physics were totally against him. That is what the refs saw and that is how and why they ruled as they did. it was the correct call.
You can't be running full speed and reverse your field under those circumstances.. Impossible..

If you watch the slow motion gif you clearly see gronk was running no where near full speed and he actually tried to change direction but couldn't because he got escorted out of the end zone.

To me, even if there is a shred of doubt that gronk COULD have possibly come back to the ball you need to give the benefit of the doubt to him and make the call. To me the uncatchable justification is reserved for obvious plays where you know with 100% certainty that they player could not have caught the ball if not interfered with. And IMO you can make the argument that gronk probably wouldn't have been able to change direction and catch the ball, but you can not say beyond a doubt he wouldnt have, so you have to give him the benefit of the doubt

 

[Cyrus12]

Oh well..after spygate and the tuck rule...about time calls started going agaisnt them...asterisk beside every one of their championships imo..

 

[MANUNITED23]

it was a bad call.

 

[aawolf]

GRONK INITIATED THE CONTACT COMING BACK TO THE BALL!! If its a comeback route and Keuchly was defending the receiver, is Keuchly just supposed to stop his momentum, step aside, and let the receiver try to catch the ball? That is the point that is lost in all this analysis. you don't have to move out of the way of a receiver COMING BACK TO THE BALL. It would have been impossible for Keuchly to avoid contact on that play as his momentum was carrying him forward while he was running with the receiver, then Gronk turned and stopped and Keuchly ran into him. That is not pass interference.

Kuechly has to turn to defend the ball. He can't just faceguard while contacting the receiver. C'mon, man, you should know that.

Personally, I think it was a defensive hold, but I don't care if another team gets screwed. In fact, I'm reveling in it. The Taterception is now a thing of the past.

Watching it again, it did seem like pass interference, since Keuchly wasn't playing the ball. If his head was turned toward the ball, then it would be a tough PI call to make. But, I'm glad they didn't call it and it would have been controversial anyway, with time expired, to end the game on the 1 yard-line on a penalty call in BofA stadium.

 

[mikeak]

^ NOBODY IS ARGUING THAT IT WASN'T A PI. Not even the refs

The only thing argued is that because he couldn't catch the ball prior to it being intercepted the PI call was nullified

 

[Exittium]

I can't believe dumb@$$'s are arguing over a call that has no effect for the Hawks ... Who care's Pats lost tough sh!t move on to the next game, Grats to Carolina they've been playing hard once again move on to the next game. Just like When we Played the colts I don't even remember this much argument, we lost tough sh!t move on, right? I mean overall who cares, Its nice to see the underdog teams get one.

 

[loafoftatupu]

I could see a call being made if it was like a clothesline job with the forearm, but nobody is stupid enough to do that shit anymore

 

[Axx]

If anything defensive holding but thats only a 5 yd penalty.
either way carolina still wins

 

[JGfromtheNW]

I can't believe dumb@$$'s are arguing over a call that has no effect for the Hawks ... Who care's Pats lost tough sh!t move on to the next game, Grats to Carolina they've been playing hard once again move on to the next game. Just like When we Played the colts I don't even remember this much argument, we lost tough sh!t move on, right? I mean overall who cares, Its nice to see the underdog teams get one.

This is why I don't give af about the outcome haha.

The only thing I'll say is a Carolina win makes our SOS stronger

 

[DTexHawk]

If anything defensive holding but thats only a 5 yd penalty.
either way carolina still wins

And a first down.

BTW, game can't end on a defensive penalty. There would be 1 more play.

 

[mikeak]

I can't believe dumb@$$'s are arguing over a call that has no effect for the Hawks ... Who care's Pats lost tough sh!t move on to the next game, Grats to Carolina they've been playing hard once again move on to the next game. Just like When we Played the colts I don't even remember this much argument, we lost tough sh!t move on, right? I mean overall who cares, Its nice to see the underdog teams get one.

This is why I don't give af about the outcome haha.

The only thing I'll say is a Carolina win makes our SOS stronger

1) This is under the NFL header not the Seahawks header........

2) How does that SOS matter when the 49ers and the Saints both play Carolina........

 

[JGfromtheNW]

I don't necessarily think it matters now as far as tie-breakers go (at this point), just overall it makes our SOS stronger this year.

 

[Legion12Boom]

Gronk should of sold it better. He just stood there, if he would of broke back towards the ball I think they wouldn't have picked the flag up. Considering how it played out, I think it was the right call "picking the flag up".

 

[Axx]

If anything defensive holding but thats only a 5 yd penalty.
either way carolina still wins

And a first down.

BTW, game can't end on a defensive penalty. There would be 1 more play.

yes i was implying that tom brady would not have completed the ball.

carolinas d-line would have gotten a sack