Carolina vs New England last play

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by JasonTX

It takes more than just contact to be considered DPI. He must be impeded. I'm also pretty sure the rules include something to the effect that the receiver must be making a "bona fide" attempt to reach the pass. Take away the contact and Gronks own momentum will still carry him deep. You can see him taking steps on his own that weren't the result of the contact. The contact was minimal. A still photo isn't conclusive. The video shows how minimal the contact was. His shoulders didn't dip, he wasn't twisted or turned. By the time the contact was more than minimum, the pass was intercepted. The speed of the pass was much faster than the speed that would have been required, even without the defender being there, for Gronk to be able to have put himself in a position to catch the pass. The pass was probably travelling at least 75 mph and Gronk would have had to have doubled that speed in order to cover the ground to close the distance from where he ran voluntarily to get back to a position to play the ball. I don't think Gronk can run that fast.

I'm not sure how physically forcing someone six yards through the end zone is "minimal" contact. The contact started within a couple yards of the point of interception and drove him away from the ball.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by hbk314

I'm not sure how physically forcing someone six yards through the end zone is "minimal" contact. The contact started within a couple yards of the point of interception and drove him away from the ball.

The contact didn't force him six yards. His momentum already had him going that direction, and he likely would have ended up in the same place without any contact. That is not he issue here.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

The contact didn't force him six yards. His momentum already had him going that direction, and he likely would have ended up in the same place without any contact. That is not he issue here.

Are you blind? He was clearly making an attempt to play the ball when the defender dragged him through the end zone.

[OKREF]

We will never know if the pass was uncatchable, because Gronk is being pushed away from the ball. This is at least illegal contact past 5 yds or holding.

[Texas Aggie]

This is at least illegal contact past 5 yds or holding.

I don't think you can call that if the pass is in the air.

I've watched the clip a dozen times. At first, I was in the uncatchable camp. Then, I looked closer at the contact and where the receiver was relative to where the ball was intercepted. This muddled the issue. But after more consideration, I'm back in the uncatchable camp. Yes, the contact is significant and impeding, but a very close review of the film should lead you to the conclusion that the secondary defender would have intercepted the ball.

However, if the rule says, "clearly uncatchable," I don't think it meets that standard. If this play happened in an NCAA game, the flag should be picked up.
The NCAA rule says:

A catchable forward pass is an untouched legal forward pass beyond the neutral zone to an eligible player who has a reasonable opportunity to catch the ball. When in question, a legal forward pass is catchable.

The pass would not have been untouched.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

The contact didn't force him six yards. His momentum already had him going that direction, and he likely would have ended up in the same place without any contact. That is not he issue here.

That's how I see it as well.

Originally Posted by OKREF

This is at least illegal contact past 5 yds or holding.

You can't have either with the ball in the air. If the ball is in the air, it is either DPI or nothing (barring a PF which is not a consideration here).

[UES]

In baseball, we go by the saying "Don't take the sh!tty end of the stick". Unfortunately, I think the officials did exactly this for the following reasons:

1. I know football allows officials to "pick up" flags, however, the LAST play of the game is NOT the time that you want something like this to happen.

2. If your going to pick up the flag, please announce a brief explanation (during the game) as to why the flag was picked up - ESPECIALLY on a play of that magnatitude.

3. While the correct call MAY have been made???, since the official threw a flag on the play, I think there would have been A LOT less controversy if they would have just followed through and called at least SOME TYPE of infraction on this play (DPI, holding, etc.). This would have given the offense one more play, letting the players decide the outcome versus the officials

4. If the call could go either way, why give the benefit of the doubt to the defense on this play ... after all, they were the ones that caused this entire mess by "bear-hugging" the receiver???

5. "If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck ... its probably a duck". Most people (other officials, fans, media, etc.) watching that play during the game say thats pass interference ... somethimes it's better to call the expected rather than try to justify the improbable.

Just my thoughts from an experienced baseball umpire who has NEVER officiated a football game in my life

I'm sure people will pick a part some or all of my post but my OVERALL point is, "don't take the sh!tty end of the stick" if you don't have too

[asdf]

Originally Posted by UES

5. "If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck ... its probably a duck". Most people (other officials, fans, media, etc.) watching that play during the game say that's pass interference ... somethimes it's better to call the expected rather than try to justify the improbable.

I could pick every point apart but this one coming from an experienced umpire boggles my mind.