Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Breaking down the rules on the last play.


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 CelibatePimp

CelibatePimp

    BAMF

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,773 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 03:02 AM

Here's the rule: Rule 8, Section 4, Article 3:

ILLEGAL CONTACT BEYOND FIVE-YARD ZONE

 

 

Contact Beyond Five-Yard Zone. Beyond the five-yard zone, if the player who receives the snap remains in the pocket with the ball, a defender may use his hands or arms only to defend or protect himself against impending contact caused by a receiver. If the receiver attempts to evade the defender, the defender cannot initiate contact that redirects, restricts, or impedes the receiver in any way.

Verdict: Gronk was held while Tom Brady no longer held the ball in the pocket. Therefore, illegal contact cannot be called.

What about defensive holding? That's a hold if I've ever seen one, right?

 

 

Here's the rule: Rule 8, Section 4, Article 6:

DEFENSIVE HOLDING

 

Defensive Holding. It is defensive holding if a player grasps an eligible offensive player (or his jersey) with his hands, or extends an arm or arms to cut off or encircle him.

Fits the fill, right? In every way, shape, and form?

Rule 8, Section 4, Article 7, however rains on the parade:

End of Restrictions.

 

 

If the quarterback or the receiver of the snap demonstrates no further intention to pass the ball (i.e., hands off or pitches the ball to another player, throws a forward or backward pass, loses possession of the ball by a muff that touches the ground or a fumble, or if he is tackled) the restrictions on the defensive team prohibiting illegal contact, an illegal cut block, or defensive holding against an offensive receiver will end.

Which means that once the quarterback throws the ball, the restrictions stopping defensive holding ends.

 

Which leads to pass interference:

Article 1:

 

 

Pass interference is called if a player's ability to catch the ball is impeded while a yard or more beyond the line of scrimmage. Defensive pass interference applies from when the ball is thrown until the ball is touched be a person or the ground (important!).

 

Article 2:

Prohibited Acts:

 

(a) Contact by a player who is not playing the ball that restricts the opponent’s opportunity to make the catch.

© Grabbing an opponent’s arm(s) in such a manner that restricts his opportunity to catch a pass.

(d) Extending an arm across the body of an opponent, thus restricting his ability to catch a pass, and regardless of whether the player committing such act is playing the ball.

(e) Cutting off the path of an opponent by making contact with him, without playing the ball.

 

So it's clear that Panthers linebacker Luke Kuechly violated the above four rulings on pass interference, at the very least.

 

Except:

Article 3:

Permissible Acts:

 

© Contact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the pass is clearly uncatchable by the involved players.

 

The flag was picked up because the pass was deemed uncatchable.

 

credit to the Patriots blog : http://www.patspulpi...-the-final-play

 



#2 EightyNineBottomLine

EightyNineBottomLine

    NOT NEWB

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 54 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 03:18 AM

Thanks for this, I was wondering about the defensive holding part.

 

Also, that guy seems to be basing his opinion on whether the ball was uncatchable on a still photo that shows Luke with his hands on Gronk.

 

BUT, if you look at the actual video...http://d3j5vwomefv46....gif?1384835770

 

...Luke doesn't really *grab* Gronk until Gronk is 3-4 yards behind Lester. Merely having your hands on a guy's chest isn't pass interference.

 

Not a penalty in any way. Lazy work by the media explaining the rule and pandering to the fans of a big-market team.



#3 CelibatePimp

CelibatePimp

    BAMF

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,773 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 03:23 AM

Thanks for this, I was wondering about the defensive holding part.

 

Also, that guy seems to be basing his opinion on whether the ball was uncatchable on a still photo that shows Luke with his hands on Gronk.

 

BUT, if you look at the actual video...http://d3j5vwomefv46....gif?1384835770

 

...Luke doesn't really *grab* Gronk until Gronk is 3-4 yards behind Lester. Merely having your hands on a guy's chest isn't pass interference.

 

Not a penalty in any way. Lazy work by the media explaining the rule and pandering to the fans of a big-market team.

 

Yep, the "holding" was almost close to when there was no way Gronk could make a play on the ball. We have analysts who just cannot read and understand or are too proud to admit they do not know.



#4 EightyNineBottomLine

EightyNineBottomLine

    NOT NEWB

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 54 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 03:27 AM

Yep, the "holding" was almost close to when there was no way Gronk could make a play on the ball. We have analysts who just cannot read and understand or are too proud to admit they do not know.

 

Plus the fact that Steve Young and Trent Dilfer played QB and are probably just upset at non-calls against opposing defenses they've faced over the years.

 

I just wonder, if we were playing, say, Jacksonville or Arizona, would people be this butthurt?

 

There's another NFL board I go to regularly that's usually pretty insightful but tonight the posters there are all involved in this "OMFG HORRIBLE CALL" hivemind. Disappointing to say the least.



#5 Razeyfingers

Razeyfingers

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,651 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 03:36 AM

Translation, Brady lost them the game with an underthrown ball. . . which wouldve been the outcome regardless of a penalty since Lester was sitting there.

 

 

Brady lost them that game. One of the greatest ever? LoL no not without his updownupdownleftrightleftrightABstart.



#6 wareagleflyboy

wareagleflyboy

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 187 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 03:55 AM

The pass is probably picked off regardless, but i hate controversial endings in sports.  A wins is a win and I understand that but something doesn't feel right to me, it didn't feel like it was really fair.  That call is probably upheld 4 out of 5 times.

 

This coming from someone who witnessed the Auburn miracle catch vs Georgia in person on Saturday, so i'v had my fair share of unusual endings this weekend.

 

Regardless it doesn't take away from the fact that the panthers played great, but still wish it had been without controversy.  




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com