View Single Post
  #197 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 26, 2013, 11:59am
JRutledge JRutledge is offline
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by youngump View Post
If we were to change this up a little bit, and the receiver was not too deep on the pass, but instead the defender just locked him up and drove him sideways and the ball was intercepted by a player standing exactly where he was standing, I think everyone here would have pass interference (with the exception of you?).
I have had several people agree with me about what Gronk was not doing, so do not be so sure I am alone on this one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by youngump View Post
But your argument here would be exactly as applicable. That's a problem for this line of reasoning.
I'm fine with the reasoning because of the interception, he never could have caught this ball anyway, but the argument that he was not interfered with at all because he didn't fight back seems incredibly specious. Am I missing something about what you're positing?
Well then you need to work more college ball or watch the NCAA videos. Because the level of contact and how it affected the play is often talked about. And at least for who I worked with it is not unusual to have a play be reviewed and it suggested that the call was "Too technical" from the supervisors on things like these. And if the action does not fit the specific categories, you will get dinged or downgraded for not following the philosophy. And that is why this discussion is often differnet with guys who primarily work HS and those that work college are often different on these matters.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)