[hbk314]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Ultimately, this is the point of contention. I don't think the pass was underthrown. Had Gronk not been interfered with, I believe he would have been at the point of interception at the time of interception. (And in fact, we have a clip from a TV show that shows the physics of the matter which confirm this opinion.)

I understand ignoring interference when the ball is caught 10 yards in front of the interference. I don't agree with ignoring interference that occurs in the immediate vicinity of a catch that allows a second defender an uncontested interception.

As I said before, if they got this right by interpretation, the interpretation is unfair.

Exactly right.