Holding on a Field Goal Try

[Carl Childress]

This is my first post on the football side of The Forum.

Sunday, there was a strange (to me) call in the Saints/Falcons game:

With 6 seconds to play, Atlanta tries a field goal to win the game. The kick is wide.

But wait!

There's a penalty for holding. No big deal: Simply decline it and run off the 6 seconds.

But wait!

The official called holding on a defender!

Isn't that pretty strange?

I suppose the argument is that the Saint held a Falcon so he couldn't block a Saint trying to block the field goal.

Or something like that.

Coach of New Orleans said it was a "chickensh!t" call. He said that several times.

Is this truly an unusual call?

[TXMike]

Over the years defensive teams perfected the "pull and shoot" where 1 defender pulls a blocker out of the way so another defender can get a clear shot to rush and block the kick. The NFL made it a point of emphasis a few years ago to try to clamp down on it. It was also mentioned in this year's NCAA Preseason Guide and umpires were directed to be aware of it. You are right that it is rarely called and I do not know if that is a function of it not being tried that much anymore or of refs just missing it.

[MJT]

TXMike is correct. This is taught at the college, and especially the NFL level. One reason you do not see it called a bunch in cuz teams only do it when they REALLY need a block. The NFL has people who watch EVERY play and give video clips on tendencies and such that the crews watch on the teams for their upcoming games. Plays such as this will be really watched, and brought to the crews attention if they do it often.

Another time they will have defensive holding is when the defensive lineman will pull an offensive lineman down so he cannot scrape to the linebackers. I saw an NFL umpires training video this summer at a camp and they showed many instances of this.

I don't get how a coach can say it is chicken**** call when their special teams coach is teaching it.

[TXMike]

From the Austin Texas newspaper:

The infraction had nothing to do with Peterson's missing the 41-yarder, but Atlanta was allowed to line up for another try nonetheless. Peterson nailed it, leaving Saints Coach Jim Haslett cursing.

"I'm telling you it was a flat-out (expletive) call," Haslett said in a remark that is likely to draw a fine. "They didn't call it last week. We were pulling the guy to the outside and you're allowed to pull as long as you're moving forward."

Referee Bill Carollo stood behind the call.

"It's considered a pull-and-shoot," Carollo said. "By definition of defensive holding on a field goal kick, two things have to happen. First, he has to have defensive holding and the second player has to shoot into the hole. That's what we called."

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by TXMike


From the Austin Texas newspaper:

The infraction had nothing to do with Peterson's missing the 41-yarder, but Atlanta was allowed to line up for another try nonetheless. Peterson nailed it, leaving Saints Coach Jim Haslett cursing.

"I'm telling you it was a flat-out (expletive) call," Haslett said in a remark that is likely to draw a fine. "They didn't call it last week. We were pulling the guy to the outside and you're allowed to pull as long as you're moving forward."

Referee Bill Carollo stood behind the call.

"It's considered a pull-and-shoot," Carollo said. "By definition of defensive holding on a field goal kick, two things have to happen. First, he has to have defensive holding and the second player has to shoot into the hole. That's what we called."

Ok. I'm happy 'cause I was right:

• it is an unusual call
• and I figured out how the defense could gain an advantage even though I'm not a football official.

Thanks everybody for the education.

Don't forget to keep up with Kent Holm's 24-part series on "What They Don't Tell You" over on the paid site.

[AndrewMcCarthy]

Are the NFL guys supposed to comment to the media after games?