Super Bowl No Call
 

The Ravens' DB should have been called for holding on San Francisco's 4th down play at the end of the game. They were in the end zone and his left hand was still holding onto the receiver's jersey.

Nope. The WR engaged the DB with extended arms. If anything call a hold and an OPI. But that is not typically how it is called in my eyes.

Peace

Agreed. 100%.

Except we've seen that same play called a hold in same/similar circumstances.

This is true.

And we've seen that same play no called.

That's what I said when I watched it. That has been a hold in the NFL this season. The WR tried to get away from the DB after they engaged and the DB's left hand was still holding the WR's jersey.

That is also never going to be called OPI because as we've seen many times, OPI doesn't have the same threshold for a penalty that DPI does. Offensive players get away with stuff all the time that defensive players get flagged for. There was a play early in the game last night when the WR went over the top of the defensive player and displaced him to knock a ball down that was underthrown with no call.

If the receiver is trying to get by the DB, this call is made. Crabtree turned INTO the DB, they engaged each other, and then Crabtree tried to get away. This is NEVER called - not a 4 minutes in the 1st quarter, not with 2 minutes to go in the 4th. It was as close to a hold as it was to a push off by Crabtree. Good no call.

That was a hold. Arm wrapped around and grabbing the jersey. Maybe the reason Crabtree couldn't get away is he was being held.

Grabbing the jersey alone is not holding.

I do not know that everyone calls everything the same way, but I digress. And it might explain why those guys were working the game, instead of others you saw working during the season.

That being said I have seen that type of play not called at the NFL level and the NCAA level often.

Peace

There's has to be material restriction for there to be a hold (and in this case, pass interference)...a simple grab alone is not enough for a penalty.

This.

Look I'm a huge 49er fan but I think a no call here was the right call.

I wonder if this play may be an excuse to revise the mechanics philosophy for end zone coverage. Moving the near side deep official, over to the far sideline, in the vicinity of the 20 yard line. would give the officials the same magical viewpoint as the visiting coaches have, which seems to provide an absolutely perfect view.

Question for you all as I am not a football official and do not have any knowledge of the mechanics.

From a football fan only perspective, I could agree with a call or a no-call on the play. My question is the positioning of the officials. From what I saw, the two officials who could have had a look at the play were both straight lined and looking through the players. The side official (SJ?) was almost directly behind the receiver and the Back Judge was moving toward the play along the back line of the EZ, looking through the defensive back.

I'd be interested to hear any thoughts that any of you may have on this.

This is not really BJ's call at all - he's moving over to cover a possible back-line call. HL (or LJ) is probably out of the film shot, but in perfect position to help with this call if SJ (or FJ) are unable to see it.

I would have to see the play in question again, but based on what I remember the deep wings (SJ, FJ) and Back Judge were all at the end line at the start of the play. The only ones that would have been behind the play are the short wings (Linesman or Line Judge). As a general rule the outside receiver is the key of the deep wing to that side of the field. Potentially 3 officials could see some part of the play if they have gotten off their key and zone up to cover their angle. The deep wing or back judge would see the entire play if the receiver was their key and then the other official would see it once it was clear the pass was being made to that area. Any one of these 3 officials could have called this foul if they saw it that way, but usually at least one official is with the entire play the entire time if they are doing their job and likely passed because they saw the actions of the receiver and saw both players grasping and holding each other.

Peace

The play was from the 5 -- the deep wings were at the end line, the back judge was on the end line, the short wing went to the pylon as the play developed.

A flag, if there was one considered EARLY in the play, would've likely come from the deep wing -- the outside guy is his key. Not that I'm saying there should've been one -- I don't think that at all.

I was not sure where the ball was snapped from. I thought it was inside the 5 but thanks for the clarification.

Peace

This is a coin flip thread. May I suggest moving non-coin flip discussion to a new thread?

Although it was earlier in this game.

I went ahead and split all of the posts off into their own thread.

No. Grabbing the jersey ALONE was not holding early in the game.

If I'm remembering the same play (and I only remember one DPI being called in the game), then there was clear and material restriction by the 49ers' cornerback on the play.

More food for thought.......
 

Pass interference ... and THEN a hold? I'll mail that Harbaugh a rulebook if the other Harbaugh will reimburse the $80 I lost when he took that ill advised safety.

The ball was snapped from the 5. They was contact within the 5 yards by both players. However, after they crossed the goal line, the DB wraps his arm around Crabtree, grabs his jersey and prevents him from getting to position to make a play on the ball. Not saying he would have caught the ball, but was prevented from the attempt.

He was saying the 2nd down play was DPI and the 4th down play was a hold.

This was a close judgement call that could go either way (and probably would have been supported either way). I go with the guys on the field wearing stripes who have earned the right to be there. They have seen this play hundreds of times in their career. They get paid big bucks to make judgment calls and they did.

and now for something completely different......
 

First, you can't judge the play in slow motion. You need to watch real time speed in order to judge hold/no hold. The game is played at a ceratin speed and officiated at the same speed...when you slow it down, you loose all perspective.


I have the reciever initating contact (rememeber he is still a potential blocker if A is running a sweep to that side). My philosophy has always been that if a reciever wants to be treated as a reciever he needs to avoid contact. He needs to establish that his intention isn't to block. In this particular play, if the reciever tries to avoid contact, I'm more likely to consider holding.

This is my favorite quote:

Could you imagine the outcry in the officiating world if Boger had a flag on this play? Talk about fishing in someone else's pond!