For all the IDIOTS complaining about the Partiots / Panthers Non Call...

[Absolut]

the pats beat the falcons earlier this year by wrapping up tony gonzalez the same way. they got away with that one. it went against them this time. thems the breaks

 

[really]

Actually that is exactly what uncatchable means. Uncatchable is always based on the refs judgement...what else could it possibly be based on? In this case one of the refs felt that it was not possible for gronk to stop and come forward enough to get in front of that defender...

I think this is a key element people are leaving out...that gronk has to get in front of or at least dead even with the guy who intercepted it...look at the video...no way on earth that was going to happen

"A wise man said don't argue with fools, because people from afar can't tell who is who"



Somebody in this thread must be a distraught Boston fan.... Either that or have some type of compulsive mental disorder... nikka is just throwing shyt out there like he knows the rulebook now (and saying it like he knows EXACTLY what he's talking about and we're all wrong)




http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/19/nfl-rule-book-doesnt-define-uncatchable/


We all now know (if we already didn’t) that pass interference isn’t pass interference when the pass is uncatchable. But what more is there to know about what makes a pass uncatchable?

As it turns out, not much.

The official NFL rule book contains only one reference to the term “uncatchable.” Rule 8, Section 5, Article 3(c) identifies as a permissible act “[c]ontact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the pass is clearly uncatchable by the involved players.”

So, basically, the mugging of Patriots tight end Rob Gronkowski by Panthers linebacker Luke Kuechly becomes permissible if the ball Gronkowski hoped to catch was “clearly uncatchable.”

 

[really]

Honestly, the rule is fukking dumb.

So a hold is not a penalty if a ball is uncatchable....but a hold on one side of the field while the play is on the other side of the field which did not affect the play at all is a penalty. The rule book is flawed. They also need to chill on the tacky roughing the passer penalties.

Damn it feels good to actually know / understand what the hell I'm watching every Sunday



1) Defensive holding is called even if a player is on the other side of the field from where the ball is EVENTUALLY thrown, because the hold happened BEFORE the pass was thrown.... Basically, DEFENSIVE HOLDING is a rule in place so you can't affect the ROUTE RUNNER before the ball is thrown... If you affect the route runner BEFORE the ball is thrown, then the QB is FORCED to pass to the other side of the field, because you fukked up the route on the OTHER side of the field... this is defensive HOLDING... 5 yard penalty, 1st down...




2) If a player is held AFTER the ball has already been thrown, but the ball is UNCATCHABLE FOR THEM, then, it's a Non Call (like if they were on the other side of the field, or this case with Gronk, SIMPLE)



3) The only time defensive holding will be called AFTER the ball is thrown, is if the player being held actually has a REMOTE / EVENTUAL chance to GET TO the ball, but is held, so he can't get to it...



4) PASS INTERFERENCE is when you have have a CLEAR CHANCE at catching a ball (IE, it's close to you, close to coming down, not still 20 yards away in the AIR...) Basically, you have a 1,0000% chance to catch this ball, but you weren't able to catch it because you got Mugged.. NOW the penalty is 15 yards or 60 yards down field if that's where the mugging happened, because your chances of catching the ball is MORE CLEAR / APPARENT vs a simple holding penalty in the same situation, and your CLEAR opportunity at a 60 yard bomb was illegally disrupted.





Again, DAMN it feels good to know / understand what I'm watching every Sunday....


Sucks for you if you on some dumb Blonde shyt "Honey whats a Safety?"

 

[really]

NFL vice president of officiating Dean Blandino put his stamp of approval on the referees' decision to pick up a pass interference flag in the end zone on the final play of the New England Patriots' 24-20 loss to the Carolina Panthers on Monday night, saying they used "proper mechanics" to make a "tight judgment call."

-------------


Let me guess.... YALL ARE RIGHT, but the nikkas the CREATE the NFL rulebook (ie.. the person that CREATED the rulebook you fukkin nitwits are arguing about), is wrong?



My work is done here.... #levelsToThisshyt

 

[UserNameless]

Basically the officials used common sense, which I applaud, and hope they do more off.

Close thread.

 

[Ronnie Lott]

idk bout this play im not a ref though so wtf does my opinion mean

what i do think is kueckly is a very smart player, and you can see he looks back and sees the pass before doing what he did. He didnt grab gronk he did some weird manuever idk how to describe it. either way, i think he and the refs know how things work better than the coaches an analysts. believe it or not, a lot of coaches dont know the rules nearly as well as the refs, so these ex coaches an ex players who are out of touch with current nfl rules are not better judges than the refs. the fact that the refs looked afterwards and still stood by the call confirms this to me.

you don't think the refs blow calls

 

[really]

Close thread.

Bro you see how FEVERISHLY some people are still arguing this shyt? It's pretty scary the depths of which some LACK this common sense we speak of

 

[Ronnie Lott]

I don't see what the big deal is...to believe that ball was catchable is to say that Gronk...who was running toward the back of the endzone..was going to be able to stop, and come forward to make a good solid attempt to catch that pass...

Look at where that ball is thrown in relation to when Gronk stops fading backwards for the ball...

Look at where the ball was intercepted at...

I don't necessarily have the laws of physics on speed dial...but we are cool enough for him to confide in me that no way in hell Gronk was getting to that ball...

You are missin the point tho. The LB prevented Gronk from even attempting to make a play on the ball. We can't difinitivley say that Gronk could not have made a play on the ball had he not been held.

A defender can't face guard, grab, hold, tackle or impede the reciever while the ball is in flight

 

[really]

You are missin the point tho. The LB prevented Gronk from even attempting to make a play on the ball. We can't difinitivley say that Gronk could not have made a play on the ball had he not been held.

You seem like a decent person just speaking your mind... So I'm trying not to bash your fukkin brains in....


But how can we NOT DEFINITIVELY SAY THAT???


Please, please explain how we CAN'T definitively say that....


Can a human being jump over a 20 foot tall building? Can we DEFINITIVELY say this isn't possible? Yes or fukkin no?


When it comes to the laws of PHYSICS, we CAN definitively say a LOT of things..... "Whats to say a WR who has the ball thrown 20 feet ahead of him while he's running full speed would'nt have caught up to it"...


Do you know how fukkin dumb that sounds?



If it's your OPINION that he could've made a play on the ball (no matter how DUMB and IDIOTIC that opinion is), that doesn't make it fact... My OPINION is, he DEFINITELY wouldn't have been able to make a play on the ball.... If your WARPED opinion, even after all the facts and reasoning posted in this thread, is STILL of a different variety, so be it..... But don't act like it was IMPOSSIBLE for someone else to have the opinion that he DEFINITIVELY wouldn't have been able to make a play on the ball...

 

[itsyoung!!]

gronk is bein driven back by kuechly, the ball goes exactly where gronk was before he's prevented from stopping and coming back to the spot, while lester jumps in front. its clearly PI/Face guarding, holding or illegal contact. all of those could of been called and been correct.

Your eyes lost... you can clearly see Gronk is going to go to the back of the end zone, being held or not and you can clearly see the ball woulda been intercepted, gronk being held or not, and you can clearly see even if the ball wasnt intercepted lets just say it was swatted down that gronk has 0 chance of ever catching that ball. That ball wasnt getting to gronk regardless of hold or not. Trent Dilfer was embarassing last night talking about "Gronk can dive 2 yards ahead and catch the ball" his eyes fukking lost.. that woulda been the longest 2 yards ever considering it was more like 5 yards and the ball was going down

 

[Buggsy Mogues]

The whole "uncatchable ball" term is bullshyt to me because the refs never, ever call a ball uncatchable when it's in the field of play.. well, at least not before this game. The only time you see that is on a pass tipped or going way out of bounds or something.

So the question to me isn't was it catchable or not. The question to me is was Gronk's ability to attempt to catch the ball interfered with? The answer is a clear yes. OP is on some Sports Science shyt trying to break down angles and nanoseconds. The only thing we know for a fact is that the Keuchly made contact w/ Gronk and began driving him back at the exact spot where the ball ended up getting intercepted. How is that NOT interference?

shyt, look at college football last saturday. There were two games won on passes (Auburn and UCF) that would have been deemed "uncatchable" by the MNF refs if a DB had grabbed the WR and pushed them out of the way at the exact moment before they got to the ball (or the ball got to them). What if the ball had bounced off the Carolina DB's hands like it did to Georgia and Gronk couldn't catch it because he was being HELD by Keuchly?

If you are going to call that a clean play, then you're basically saying that a DB can just tackle a WR or drive a WR out of the way on a hail mary. If it's 3 offensive players and 5 DB's waiting to catch the ball, the DB's can basically just tackle them out of the way to force them into an "uncatchable" position.

Would Gronk have stopped on a dime to catch it? Who knows...but he should be given the opportunity to try to. Refs fukked up.

 

[protestor]

You are missin the point tho. The LB prevented Gronk from even attempting to make a play on the ball. We can't difinitivley say that Gronk could not have made a play on the ball had he not been held.

A defender can't face guard, grab, hold, tackle or impede the reciever while the ball is in flight

Gronk was prevented from making an attempt on the ball? It looked like he just gave the fuk up or knew that ball was to far off. If Gronk would have put the effort, he might have gotten the call.

 

[Lakers Offseason]

Neither of those fouls exist after the ball is thrown.

I just read that in an article this morning.

Then that has to be called a PI.

 

[Ronnie Lott]

The whole "uncatchable ball" term is bullshyt to me because the refs never, ever call a ball uncatchable when it's in the field of play.. well, at least not before this game. The only time you see that is on a pass tipped or going way out of bounds or something.

So the question to me isn't was it catchable or not. The question to me is was Gronk's ability to attempt to catch the ball interfered with? The answer is a clear yes. OP is on some Sports Science shyt trying to break down angles and nanoseconds. The only thing we know for a fact is that the Keuchly made contact w/ Gronk and began driving him back at the exact spot where the ball ended up getting intercepted. How is that NOT interference?

shyt, look at college football last saturday. There were two games won on passes (Auburn and UCF) that would have been deemed "uncatchable" by the MNF refs if a DB had grabbed the WR and pushed them out of the way at the exact moment before they got to the ball (or the ball got to them). What if the ball had bounced off the Carolina DB's hands like it did to Georgia and Gronk couldn't catch it because he was being HELD by Keuchly?

If you are going to call that a clean play, then you're basically saying that a DB can just tackle a WR or drive a WR out of the way on a hail mary. If it's 3 offensive players and 5 DB's waiting to catch the ball, the DB's can basically just tackle them out of the way to force them into an "uncatchable" position.

Would Gronk have stopped on a dime to catch it? Who knows...but he should be given the opportunity to try to. Refs fukked up.

Thank You. @really

 

[Maschine_Man]

The whole "uncatchable ball" term is bullshyt to me because the refs never, ever call a ball uncatchable when it's in the field of play.. well, at least not before this game. The only time you see that is on a pass tipped or going way out of bounds or something.

So the question to me isn't was it catchable or not. The question to me is was Gronk's ability to attempt to catch the ball interfered with? The answer is a clear yes. OP is on some Sports Science shyt trying to break down angles and nanoseconds. The only thing we know for a fact is that the Keuchly made contact w/ Gronk and began driving him back at the exact spot where the ball ended up getting intercepted. How is that NOT interference?

shyt, look at college football last saturday. There were two games won on passes (Auburn and UCF) that would have been deemed "uncatchable" by the MNF refs if a DB had grabbed the WR and pushed them out of the way at the exact moment before they got to the ball (or the ball got to them). What if the ball had bounced off the Carolina DB's hands like it did to Georgia and Gronk couldn't catch it because he was being HELD by Keuchly?

If you are going to call that a clean play, then you're basically saying that a DB can just tackle a WR or drive a WR out of the way on a hail mary. If it's 3 offensive players and 5 DB's waiting to catch the ball, the DB's can basically just tackle them out of the way to force them into an "uncatchable" position.

Would Gronk have stopped on a dime to catch it? Who knows...but he should be given the opportunity to try to. Refs fukked up.

honestly I've seen them call balls uncatchable alot.
and most of the time they don't even throw the flag so you wouldn't even know it happened anyway.

and PI is almost NEVER ever called on a hail mary play. there is PI or holding on almost 99% of all hail mary throws.