Is this a holding penalty?

[refs]

GIF: Gfycat - jiffier gifs through HTML5 Video Conversion. Fast, simple gif hosting without size limits.

Other angle here: (2nd play) https://twitter.com/chatham58/status/671738940328714240

Exposed on Sports Illustrated cover: http://i.imgur.com/0oO8wya.jpg

Does the fact the DT/DE may have used a "rip technique" completely negate the fact he was held or hooked by the neck after getting beat, and therefore is not called holding?

The hold came first here, did it not?

[HLin NC]

It's a hold if the covering official deems it so. It isn't if he doesn't. If his boss disagrees on Monday he'll hear about it. It isn't for us to say.

Go away fan boy, this site is for real officials. And choosing the name "refs" for you first ever post doesn't make it so.

[Canned Heat]

.....and to boot, when you dissect game footage of one play or two plays or one series by one team and don't look to see what's going on in regards to the other O-line, you're not looking at it subjectively, in my opinion. Same exact thing goes on over on the other side too when they are on the field, you just pretend you don't see it.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

It's a hold if the covering official deems it so. It isn't if he doesn't.

Seems to cover everything. Often film, especially when repeated and studied, can show things not discernible to the human eye in real time, but the same is true for what the human eye can detect, that film will never show.

The objective is to always pursue perfection and consistency, but only a fool actually thinks that combination is catchable. With all it's flaws, the human element has a lot to do with the success of the game.

[refinks]

As a non-football official, just for my own curiosity in case I do start officiating football, in the OPs play in question, how many of you would have called it a hold?

Without knowing what should and shouldn't be a hold, I'd be inclined to hold the flag on this one

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by refinks

As a non-football official, just for my own curiosity in case I do start officiating football, in the OPs play in question, how many of you would have called it a hold?

I would.

[refs]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

Go away fan boy, this site is for real officials. And choosing the name "refs" for you first ever post doesn't make it so.

Yikes! You take the internet a little too seriously buddy. I chose the username because it's relevant to the damn website and nothing more. The fact you seem so bothered over a relatively innocent question and something as petty as a username is pathetic and cringeworthy as hell.

[refs]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Seems to cover everything. Often film, especially when repeated and studied, can show things not discernible to the human eye in real time, but the same is true for what the human eye can detect, that film will never show.

Originally Posted by Canned Heat

.....and to boot, when you dissect game footage of one play or two plays or one series by one team and don't look to see what's going on in regards to the other O-line, you're not looking at it subjectively, in my opinion. Same exact thing goes on over on the other side too when they are on the field, you just pretend you don't see it.

Honestly, I noticed this live on TV as it happened and didn't dissect any film. It was brought further to my attention after seeing the Sports Illustrated cover which confirmed my suspicion that I saw a hold on that play. I just didn't know it was as bad as it seemed (i.e. getting clothes-lined at the neck).

[Welpe]

It was probably a hold and it was probably missed. It happens as much as we try to not let it. It is a lot easier to see something on TV, in a comfortable and relaxed environment, than it is at field level on a cold, snowy field with chaos in front of you.

We don't like missing calls either. I'm amazed at how few NFL officials actually miss.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by refinks

As a non-football official, just for my own curiosity in case I do start officiating football, in the OPs play in question, how many of you would have called it a hold?

Without knowing what should and shouldn't be a hold, I'd be inclined to hold the flag on this one

There is a little more to a hold than what we saw. You have to have a material restriction and you have to have it happen at the point of attack. The NFL wants even more take downs or you will have play after play with some kind of holding. And as an college and high school official, I call holdings when there is likely a take down and material restriction. At the higher levels, players have to do a little more to fight through what looks like holding. When they give up or just accept their position, they do not get the call in their favor.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by refs

Honestly, I noticed this live on TV as it happened and didn't dissect any film. It was brought further to my attention after seeing the Sports Illustrated cover which confirmed my suspicion that I saw a hold on that play. I just didn't know it was as bad as it seemed (i.e. getting clothes-lined at the neck).

Then you haven't paid much attention to football over the years. Check out Oakland's 80 yard TD in SB XV.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by refs

GIF: Gfycat - jiffier gifs through HTML5 Video Conversion. Fast, simple gif hosting without size limits.

Other angle here: (2nd play) https://twitter.com/chatham58/status/671738940328714240

Exposed on Sports Illustrated cover: http://i.imgur.com/0oO8wya.jpg

Does the fact the DT/DE may have used a "rip technique" completely negate the fact he was held or hooked by the neck after getting beat, and therefore is not called holding?

The hold came first here, did it not?

So what do you want to know?