Was Polamalu's interception really an interception, or was the referee correct in calling it an incomplete pass?

The only rule that I am aware of on receptions prior to a fumble is that you have to make an athletic move with possession. This "his knee was still on the ground and then lost the ball" is what I view as a creative "hometown" call.
The refs also missed an interference call on Randel El in the 1st half and then what was with the "no call" on the 4th down when Faneca moved (they missed it) and then the Colts went across the neutral zone?

If that is not an interception, the rule needs to be changed. I don't know the football rules that well, so please someone explain to me how that is not an interception.

That play should never have been overturned. But then I am only an umpire (baseball). So you football officials, please explain that one to me.

Oh, and what was up with that do over on the offsides/false start? I don't even know what to say about that.

Had he stayed on the ground it would have been ruled an interception, he then tried to get up and it was ruled an IP, I don't get it. In hs fb that's definitely a pick!

Even more rare than NFL officials making a mistake is when a play gets overturned when it should not have been. They are looking at it and talking to a review man upstairs and discussing the rules related to it the whole time. I think they probalby got it right, whether we agree or not, but we will see. The NFL, more than anyone, will go public when their officials make a mistake. Time will tell.

I'm sure Mike Periera will talk about this on Wed. I look foward to see what he has to say.

I don't get the show, so let us know what they say about it.

According to someone on another board, when a player gains possession of a thrown ball on the ground, he has to come off the ground with possession in order for it to be ruled a catch. Because the player's right knee was on the ground when the ball came loose, it could not be ruled a catch.

Of course, this would be an INT in a HS game.

"In the act of making a catch, if a receiver makes a catch and goes to the ground UNTOUCHED by a defender, the receiver must have secure possession when he gets to his feet or when contacted by an opponent."

I agree with the missed DPI, which was missed a few times!

They may have been in the neutral zone but the ball wasn't snapped. Pittsburgh should have snapped the ball then they would have had them off-sides. But the crew did a bad job with making it a "no call."

That is what I read and it is how all the crews in the NFL have been calling it all year. Samthing happened on a Tampa Bay TD pass that was called IP.

Well then they need to change that rule. If Polomalu stays on the ground for a couple seconds after making the int and then looses the ball as he gets to his feet and by rule that is still an incomplete pass, that is a bad rule.

The man demonstrated possession through a dive and full roll. That should be enough.

Props to the ref for making the right call. Now change the rule.

MJT, its on the web every week... http://www.nfl.com on the right hand side. Look for it late wednesday (maybe thursday).

You can watch the whole show on the web? I'll be looking for that.

No, just certain segments. But you can watch the entire Periera segment.

Rule
 

Can anyone post the NFL rule number AND the rule for the INT / IP yesterday.

Thanks

Re: Rule
 

I have an official NFL rule book from a current NFL official, and cannot find a situation which covers it exactly. I would assume they have a case book of sorts, and being that he was also talking to an official in the replay booth, who has any books they have, I'd assume that even if you didn't like it, they probably got it right. If they did not, the NFL will come out and say so, as they do when mistakes are made.

Offical word from the NFL so far is, "It was the Referee's judgment call."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playof...ory?id=2294309

That article bothered me because I don't think "judgment" and "judgment call" mean the same thing. The NFL said that was his judgment. In court, a judge passes down a judgment.

I think that ESPN is trying to change how it sounds when they manipulate the quote to say it was a judgment call.

And now ESPN has just moved the ground underneath the reader's feet -- that link above used to point to an article headlined "it was a judgment call". Now the link leads to an article that reads the same at the bottom but reads in the headline that it was the wrong call.

Wrong call: NFL issues statement on Polamalu play

New York, NY (Sports Network) - National Football League vice president of officiating Mike Pereira on Monday issued a statement regarding the controversial reversal on Troy Polamalu's interception during Pittsburgh's 21-18 win over Indianapolis in Sunday's AFC divisional playoff game at the RCA Dome.

In the statement, Pereira stated the officiating crew made the wrong call.

"The definition of a catch -- or in this case an interception -- states that in the process of making a catch a player must maintain possession of the ball after he contacts the ground," said Pereira. "The initial call on the field was that Troy Polamalu intercepted the pass because he maintained possession of the ball after hitting the ground.

"The replay showed that Polamalu had rolled over and was rising to his feet when the ball came loose. He maintained possession long enough to establish a catch. Therefore, the replay review should have upheld the call on the field that it was a catch and fumble.

"The rule regarding the performing of an act common to the game applies when there is contact with a defensive player and the ball comes loose, which did not happen here."

BBRef
 

I am NOT slamming you on this. But, please explain how the NFL can double back on this. YOu say he has to have possesion when he gets to his feet OR contact, but he did NOT have possesion when he got to his feet????

Is this the NFL trying to look good?????? The rule in my mind is clear. IF it is in his opinion, then the NFL needs to say that and his opinion need NOT be contradicted.