http://www.patsfans.com/ian/blog/20...-conference-transcript-17/?sc=mf#.Uor1OuI9irs Belichicks post game transcript
Gronk could not get to the spot, a flag was thrown. Picking it up was easier then changing the game like the push call... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
It was clear PI but he wouldn't have been able to catch it regardless. What's the ruling in that situation?
The Panther had already jumped the route and broken on the ball. Even if Gronk was untouched there was no guarantee that's still not an INT or broken up.
It was not PI because the Panther that made the INT had the same right to the ball as Gronkowski. It was a late game endzone toss. Nothing gets called on those deal with it
59 clearly interfered with Gronkowski. I believe the reason it was picked up is because he wouldn't have been able to catch it regardless, right? I'll deal with it, I hate NE, y'know?
Your post is correct. Gronk was not in a position to make any kind of a catch, regardless of PI or not. The PI call came fractionally AFTER the INT any way. Ha ha NE are funny this year
I saw a jet fan threw himself off the upper deck in Buffalo. Poor bastard. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
It's only an issue when they lose a game... Whenever they win one though, it's not even a peep. btw, pass was uncatchable...GAME OVER
Bad call. Any other time in the game and there is no way the refs let that INT stand. 100% PI. In that situation... with the home crowd roaring... the head ref shat bricks and wanted out of there.
Can't wait for all the Pats fans to scream conspiracy theories he he Sent from my wey aye phone using Tapatalk - now Free
I'm not sure about that. But at most he'd have been able to break up the interception given the underthrow. Either way, if he's being interfered with I think they're entitled to another play. I think they got rooked. That said, its very gratifying to see that the Patriots have submerged to the ranks of every other mediocre team as far as getting all the calls from the refs. About time.
It would have added to the Cam is immature storyline, Cam is unclutch, Cam can't lead a team stories and things. Yeah it was really weird, I bet if Gronk made some type effort to throw Luke to the side or show he was getting held, he would get it. But he just drifted with Luke. If the pass was deeper into the EZ he might have gotten the call also. Does "uncatchable" include if another player undercuts the ball. I think untouched Gronk wouldn't have been able to cutback to the ball, but for the refs to throw the flag and then make that judgement looks bad. Probably a gut reaction, Tom Brady intercepted, must be a flag on the play.
Refs quotes: http://espn.go.com/blog/new-england...9/fascinating-battle-clouded-by-confusing-end There were two officials that came in. One was the umpire [Garth DeFelice] and the other one was our side judge [Greg Meyer] and there was a discussion at that point as to the, in essence, the catchability of the ball due to its location. “So it was determined at that point in time that when the primary contact occurred on the tight end that the ball, in essence, was coming in underthrown and in essence it was immediate at that point intercepted at the front end of the end zone. So there was a determination that, in essence, uncatchability, that the ball was intercepted at or about the same time the primary contact against the receiver occurred.” Also funny quotes: “The last time I started asking an official about a call, that was the wrong thing to do, so I have no idea. We’ve been down that road before. Didn’t get one [an explanation] tonight. Didn’t get one at the Baltimore game [in 2012 and was fined]. I guess that’s the way we do it.” Running back Stevan Ridley said he wasn’t surprised about the flag being picked up. “Not really, man. We’re not at home,” he said.
As Yisman said, Kuechly was an idiot - if his hold had occurred a fraction of a second earlier it would have been defensive holding, and if the pass had been thrown a little better it would have been pass interference. By the letter of the law picking up the flag was the right thing to do, but the Panthers were very lucky it played out that way. This shows an interesting inconsistency in these kinds of penalties - it turns out that doing what is usually worse (interfering with a receiver when the ball is in the air rather than beforehand) turns out to be better (because of the catchability clause in the PI rule). If this play ends up getting airplay for more than just the next day or two I wonder if an attempt will be made to close that loophole somehow during the offseason. I'm not sure how to do that fairly, however - the catchability clause seems reasonable to me, but you can't have it for defensive holding because often it's the holding that makes the ball uncatchable before the QB tries to throw it, so he throws elsewhere. Of course, the Pats complaining about not getting a call is moronic, but that's a different issue.
