NFL Week 11

[Dr. Sak]

Two things of note:

The calling official NEVER knows the catchability of a pass. If he does then he isn't doing his job of watching his key. That's where he gets help from the two deep wings to know the catchability of the ball.

Second thing...I am not certain in the NFL Rule book but in the NCAA CFO test there was this exact play. (Pass inteference downfield a few yards from where the ball was intercepted). And in that play there is no pass inteference by rule. I would bet that there is a similar play in the NFL book because this one just came into the NCAA book this year and it's normally a trickle down effect.

[Suburban Rhythm]

I'm only seeing replays, did not watch last night.

May need a PING Dr Sak, but my question is:

Official threw the flag for DPI. Another official confers and says no DPI, uncatchable. Can the 1st official modify his call to defensive holding?

I'll buy the 'no DPI because uncatchable', but it's clearly holding then.

How many times do you see a holding call bring back a kickoff/punt return, and the hold occurs 20 yards away, opposite side of the field? Still gets called, even if there is no impact to the play.

EDIT TO ADD:

Damn...he read my mind!

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by Suburban Rhythm

Official threw the flag for DPI. Another official confers and says no DPI, uncatchable. Can the 1st official modify his call to defensive holding?

Defensive holding is always prior to the pass...so if he deemed all actions prior to the ball being in the air legal (and he did cause he called DPI which is while the ball is in the air), then he can't change that DPI into a DH.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Dr. Sak

Defensive holding is always prior to the pass...so if he deemed all actions prior to the ball being in the air legal (and he did cause he called DPI which is while the ball is in the air), then he can't change that DPI into a DH.

This was what I thought as well (holding only before the pass) but got a bit tripped up when the ESPN guys (Dilfer especially) were going nuts about how if it was uncatchable, it had to be defensive holding.

So I guess it should have been illegal contact then? 5 yards and a replay?

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by Dr. Sak

Defensive holding is always prior to the pass...so if he deemed all actions prior to the ball being in the air legal (and he did cause he called DPI which is while the ball is in the air), then he can't change that DPI into a DH.

Makes sense

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by Logan

So I guess it should have been illegal contact then? 5 yards and a replay?

I can't really answer that one because I am not familar with the illegal contact foul. My assumption is that it is also prior to the pass.

I only got to see the play two times while eating breakfast this morning but I would be interested to see it again and to see who actually created the contact prior to the pass (if any).

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Dr. Sak

I can't really answer that one because I am not familar with the illegal contact foul. My assumption is that it is also prior to the pass.

Duh...of course it is. My bad.

[Ronnie Dobbs3]

Thanks Dr. Sak. It's odd to think that the ball is uncatchable in this instance because Gronk is in the area and any chance he could have had was taken from him.

[Logan]

BTW, Tom Brady is getting a tremendous pass here. That throw was terrible. You're throwing it to Gronk in coverage, it needs to be high.

[Dutch]

Never, ever, ever, thought I would say this, but I appreciate the hell out of Ray Lewis.

[Butter]

Yes, it is hard to help murder people and cover it all up after. That guy really knows his stuff.

[Dr. Sak]

On a side note...this play was one of 2 questions I missed on my CFO 100 point test earlier this year.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

Yes, it is hard to help murder people and cover it all up after. That guy really knows his stuff.

He didn't kill no mothafuckin lion.

[ISiddiqui]

Thanks Dr. Sak. Totally makes more sense of the play - they should have you on to give commentary on officiating plays .

[JeeberD]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

REPORT: Former Falcons LB Thomas Howard died in horrific crash... | Atlanta Falcons | www.ajc.com

This is so horrible. He's a former UTEP linebacker...he actually walked-on at UTEP as a safety and worked his way into an early 2nd round pick. By all accounts he was a great person, very down to earth and very giving. I'm afraid that the fact that he made a stupid mistake and it cost another man his life is going to overshadow all that.

RIP, THo.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JeeberD

This is so horrible. He's a former UTEP linebacker...he actually walked-on at UTEP as a safety and worked his way into an early 2nd round pick. By all accounts he was a great person, very down to earth and very giving. I'm afraid that the fact that he made a stupid mistake and it cost another man his life is going to overshadow all that.

RIP, THo.

It is a shame that he didn't just kill himself.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Lathum

It is a shame that he didn't just kill himself.

Always hate is when someone doing something stupid ends up killing someone completely unrelated.

[gstelmack]

If that is a valid no-call on Gronk, the rule needs changing like the Tuck Rule. Watching the replays, he is starting to try and break back for the ball as Keuchly holds him, giving him no chance to get back for it. Sorry, the defense now has license to tackle the receiver if the ball is underthrown, if any defenders are in any position to get a hand on it? Seriously?

The thing about this is, they were calling a relatively tight game. Drive after drive was sustained on both sides thanks to defensive penalties. THAT'S the one they overrule and decide not to call?

Of course, with Brady's accuracy on the drive, there is no guarantee they would have punched it in on the extra play. And Ridley's fumble in the red zone in the first half was a killer that put them in a hole they had to dig out of. And they really needed a TD instead of a FG after the defense got them the key stop. So that call was not a "cost us the game" call. But it sure was annoying to have such a good game tarnished by that as a finish. Carolina shouldn't have to live with that kind of asterisk for going toe-to-toe with New England all game.

Also, FWIW, I was there at the game, and MBBF and his KC-noise can kiss my butt - that stadium was ROCKING for that final New England drive. Everyone on their feet, everyone cheering, we were half-deaf leaving the stadium. Was a great crowd, and a pretty good stadium experience, except for the fact that we got maybe one video replay after most plays, long after the play.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

If that is a valid no-call on Gronk, the rule needs changing like the Tuck Rule. Watching the replays, he is starting to try and break back for the ball as Keuchly holds him, giving him no chance to get back for it. Sorry, the defense now has license to tackle the receiver if the ball is underthrown, if any defenders are in any position to get a hand on it? Seriously?

The thing about this is, they were calling a relatively tight game. Drive after drive was sustained on both sides thanks to defensive penalties. THAT'S the one they overrule and decide not to call?

That is what I thought as well. There was pass interference before the ball was uncatchable. Once the LB initiates the tackle with the ball in the air, all bets should be off on calling it uncatchable because it was intercepted "upfield" of where the receiver and LB ended up.

[Julio Riddols]

Looks to me like that ball would have been picked anyway. There was no way Gronkowski was going to be able to come back and get that the way his body was turned. The DB would have had just as easy a shot at it.

[Arles]

Here's what I don't understand. You can have a play that's close to the ball but called "uncatchable" so no PI. Yet, you can have holding when the runner is well past the play and it gets called back. That just doesn't make sense to me. Why is it OK to PI if the pass is 5 yards away but not OK to hold when the runner is five yards past where the hold happens?

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by Arles

Here's what I don't understand. You can have a play that's close to the ball but called "uncatchable" so no PI. Yet, you can have holding when the runner is well past the play and it gets called back. That just doesn't make sense to me. Why is it OK to PI if the pass is 5 yards away but not OK to hold when the runner is five yards past where the hold happens?

Takedown holds are always called no matter when they occur. Also don't confuse when the flag is thrown as to when the hold occurs. The restriction may habe begun when the runner was before or at the hole, but the flag usually won't come out till after the runner is through the hole. Mainly because it is the NFL philosophy that if a defender is being restricted and makes the tackle, the restriction wasn't enough to be classified as a hold. Or if a player is restricted and his teammate makes a tackle at the point of restriction, holding is not called cause there was no advantage on the play.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

Looks to me like that ball would have been picked anyway. There was no way Gronkowski was going to be able to come back and get that the way his body was turned. The DB would have had just as easy a shot at it.

I kind of agree here - at best Gronk could have come back and broken up the pick, but probably wasn't catching that clean - but that brings up the question of just how catchable is uncatchable? Take Kuechly's interference out of the play and Gronk could at least have gotten back to the spot where the ball would have landed; and Kuechly's interference did begin after the ball was thrown but well before it was actually intercepted, and at the same time the safety passed Gronk going towards the ball. So it's exceedingly unlikely Gronk would have caught the ball, but not impossible like if it was thrown 10 yards over his head out of bounds.

It's also interesting considering how used to hearing about our LB's deficiencies in coverage that Luke Kuechly got beat over the top 3 times on that last drive (initial Gronk catch, Vereen drop on the wheel route, final play). Don't get me wrong, I would take him in a second for any of our defensive players, but it goes to show that in the NFL even the best players are susceptible to getting beat.

Btw, does anyone have a .gif of the Devin McCourty "hold" that extended the Panthers winning drive when Greg Olsen hooked his arm and flopped to the ground? I can't seem to find it.

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Kyle Arrington - check. Touchdown - check.

The usual I can only see what the TV shows caveats apply, but I actually thought Arrington had his best game on the outside as a Patriot - he's not Marquice Cole! And this week is now terrifying - Talib is still battling the hip problem, Gregory and Dennard are out, so it's probably McCourty at his weaker CB position with Arrington and Ryan, and Harmon + the horrible Ebner/Wilson combination at safety. I honestly don't see why we don't sign a Nnamdi Asomugha, Perrish Cox, or Ras-I Dowling off the Jets practice squad in place of Cole. And I don't care if Kerry Rhodes is gay, he's better than Nate Ebner and Tavon Wilson at safety (although I like Tavon as a backup for his special teams play.)

[RendeR]

Once the ball is "in the air" you can't have defensive holding. All the comments about "Then they have to call the hold" are inane, they do not relate to this play. Any holding that did happen was after the ball was in flight. So the only call COULD be PI.

With the receiver running AWAY from the ball a defender between the receiver and the player making the interception (remember a defender has the right to hold his ground, hence Gronk would never have gotten anywhere near the player making the pick regardless of the contact.) and the ball being severely under-thrown all add up to the ball being un-catchable by the receiver.

Its a mad-complicated play but in the end they called it right.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by RendeR

With the receiver running AWAY from the ball a defender between the receiver and the player making the interception (remember a defender has the right to hold his ground, hence Gronk would never have gotten anywhere near the player making the pick regardless of the contact.) and the ball being severely under-thrown all add up to the ball being un-catchable by the receiver.

When I watched the replays, Gronk is just starting to come back just as Keuchly hits him and gets carried to the back of the end zone. The ball is picked off pretty close to where Gronk is first hit, as he's trying to slow up for it. Receivers, including good receiving TEs, can stop and come back for those all the time when they aren't hit.

I actually think the entire play went down as both sides wanted it to, except for Brady's ball being slightly underthrown. I think Gronk was running basically a curl, heading towards the back, stopping and coming back to near the goal line to catch the pass. Carolina knew it, had the DB ready to compete / undercut, and because it was the final play told Keuchly to make sure Gronk doesn't catch it (intentional PI to prevent the TD).

Heck, I'd argue if this is an "example" play as Dr. Sak talks about, I could make a case that Keuchly was told to carry Gronk out of the area so the DB could make the pick or at least get a hand on it and nullify the PI. And that's part of my problem with the rule if this was called correctly - it makes that a legitimate play for the defense.

Let me ask this: how high does the ball have to be for this to be ruled PI? 3 feet higher off the ground so the DB can remain standing to pick it off? 6 feet? Actually hit Gronk and Keuchly? Where's the line here?

To answer the opposite question, I think if it clanks before the goal line (say about 5 yards further upfield than where it was picked off), I'd rule it uncatchable.

[gstelmack]

Dean Blandino: Officials made judgment call Monday - NFL.com

Originally Posted by Blandino

"The issue isn't the contact," Blandino said Tuesday. "The issue is the restriction. Does it occur when prior to the ball being touched? And at full speed, the officials made a tight judgment call and they determined that the restriction occurred just as the ball was being touched. And again, at full speed, you could see why they made that call."

So they decided that Keuchly didn't impede Gronk's progress back to the ball until it was already being picked off and that's why it wasn't a penalty? I think I feel worse about this call now.

But I will reemphasize for those who missed it earlier - this would only have lead to one more attempt that may well have failed, and Carolina certainly earned a win, I just hate that it had to end on something like this.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

I think we're losing focus on the fact that the Chiefs suck with all this banter about officials.

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I think we're losing focus on the fact that the Chiefs suck with all this banter about officials.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I think we're losing focus on the fact that the Chiefs suck with all this banter about officials.

No one has said they suck.

Just that their offense is going to have to score more points to go deep in the playoffs.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

No one has said they suck.

Just that their offense is going to have to score more points to go deep in the playoffs.

MBBF is just enjoying his remaining time basking in the glow of the board turning against TroyF and his anti-Chiefs stance.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

No one has said they suck.

Just that their offense is going to have to score more points to go deep in the playoffs.

I'm THRILLED that my team's main issue 10 games into the season is how far they can go in the playoffs. There's roughly about 25-28 other fan bases that would give anything for that problem right now.

[cartman]

This is awesome:

NFL officials feel heat after controversy in 49ers-Saints, Patriots-Panthers

"We as officials have always been taught, for a ball to be uncatchable, it has to be clearly out of the field of play or it has to be a kind of — I probably shouldn't say this — a Tim Tebow-type pass that lands 15 yards in front of you."

[Julio Riddols]

Man, Tebow burned out quick. Can't believe the guy never felt like trying to play TE/H-back with his size. Probably could have actually been a good TE and probably would have started if he was with the Pats. The trick plays Belichick would have drawn up to have the TE/H-back throw the ball would have been fun to see.

As it is, I am glad he is out of the league because he is the guy that officially killed ESPN for me. And to think he did that just by being a guy Skip Bayless defended so vehemently.

[molson]

"We as officials have always been taught, for a ball to be uncatchable, it has to be clearly out of the field of play or it has to be a kind of — I probably shouldn't say this — a Tim Tebow-type pass that lands 15 yards in front of you."

They need to put that example in the rule book, then everyone would understand it.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I'm THRILLED that my team's main issue 10 games into the season is how far they can go in the playoffs. There's roughly about 25-28 other fan bases that would give anything for that problem right now.

I'm the type that I don't want to watch my team go to the playoffs and flame out in the first round because they can't score any points.

[cartman]

Dierdorf is stepping away from the booth after this season.

CBS Sports' Dan Dierdorf to retire after 2013 NFL season - CBSSports.com

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

I'm the type that I don't want to watch my team go to the playoffs and flame out in the first round because they can't score any points.

I KNEW I could get this thread back on track.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I just hate that it had to end on something like this.

Yep.

Thanks for the report from the game, btw. The crowd and atmosphere seemed really, really great on the TV Broadcast, I'm glad to hear from someone who was there that it actually was.

[larrymcg421]

I'm the type that wants my team to always go to the playoffs no matter what, and if they flame out in the first round, that's better than flaming out in week 17, or week 16, or week 15....

I'm also the type that wishes people would quit saying things that make me take MBBF's side.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

Man, Tebow burned out quick. Can't believe the guy never felt like trying to play TE/H-back with his size. Probably could have actually been a good TE and probably would have started if he was with the Pats. The trick plays Belichick would have drawn up to have the TE/H-back throw the ball would have been fun to see.

As it is, I am glad he is out of the league because he is the guy that officially killed ESPN for me. And to think he did that just by being a guy Skip Bayless defended so vehemently.

You had me at Skip Bayless.

[gstelmack]

BTW, my favorite moment from the game was Gostkowski's last FG. The wind was really whipping around, but it died when he kicked it. Where we were sitting in the end zone, it was coming right at us, with the goal post off to one side, a clear miss. Everyone around us is starting to get up to cheer, then the wind comes back, catches it, and pushes it a good 40 degrees off course back just inside the post at the last possible second. All coming right at us.

That was awesome to witness, and not something you really get to experience on TV.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I'm the type that wants my team to always go to the playoffs no matter what, and if they flame out in the first round, that's better than flaming out in week 17, or week 16, or week 15....

I'm also the type that wishes people would quit saying things that make me take MBBF's side.

+1 to all of this!

[molson]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I KNEW I could get this thread back on track.

Ya, if there's one thing this board is lacking it's Missouri sports talk.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by molson

Ya, if there's one thing this board is lacking it's Missouri sports talk.

When you're a state that has multiple NFL and MLB teams, you tend to get talked about a bit more.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I'm THRILLED that my team's main issue 10 games into the season is how far they can go in the playoffs. There's roughly about 25-28 other fan bases that would give anything for that problem right now.

I hate to say it but the Chiefs and Falcons swapped places evidently this year.

Last season, every one was expecting the Falcons to lose in the first round even though they had a great record and the Chiefs only won 2 games. This season the Chiefs have the great record and aren't expected to do much in the playoffs, while the Falcons may only end up with 2 wins this year.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

When you're a state that has multiple NFL and MLB teams, you tend to get talked about a bit more.

Give it another year or two and you may only have one NFL team.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

When you're a state that has multiple NFL and MLB teams, you tend to get talked about a bit more.

Other people making a few posts about some of the less important states and teams won't kill you though.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by cartman

Dierdorf is stepping away from the booth after this season.

CBS Sports' Dan Dierdorf to retire after 2013 NFL season - CBSSports.com

I'll miss him. He makes me think of Monday Night Football back when I was a kid/teenager and watched it religiously.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

When you're a state that has multiple NFL and MLB teams, you tend to get talked about a bit more.

Florida?

[molson]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I'll miss him. He makes me think of Monday Night Football back when I was a kid/teenager and watched it religiously.

It's amazing to me how much hostility people have towards announcers. I don't pay enough attention to know which ones are considered "good" these days, but it seems like any discussion of any announcers brings to the surface a lot of very angry people, per the comments after that article, and a million others I've seen.

But I liked Dierdorf. Of course, I kind of liked Tim McCarver, so I think I just have a very different idea of what these guys are supposed to be doing. I guess I just prefer the older former players, even with their occasional ramblings and misunderstandings of modern ways (and if it were up to me, there would be more confusing old-timey references.)