Carolina vs New England last play

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

The problem the people who are arguing for DPI on this play are failing to recognize is the actions by Gronk are largely irrelevant. Don't apply normal DPI logic and categories. As JRut has stated very clearly several times, the philosophy at the NFL level (and I've heard at the NCAA level...not sure if that's extended across all conferences) is this kind of contact is ignored when the pass is underthrown and intercepted. In most cases whether he could recover and get to the ball absent the contact is not relevant. Don't make this harder than it has to be.

If that's indeed the philosophy, it's not in line with the written rule.

You're saying that one defender could tackle the receiver and allow a second defender to make an uncontested interception that the receiver could otherwise have made a play on.

And JRutledge, Gronkowski clearly was changing direction towards the ball until he was shoved and dragged through the end zone.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by hbk314

If that's indeed the philosophy, it's not in line with the written rule.

You're saying that one defender could tackle the receiver and allow a second defender to make an uncontested interception that the receiver could otherwise have made a play on.

And JRutledge, Gronkowski clearly was changing direction towards the ball until he was shoved and dragged through the end zone.

If you think that is clear, then when you make that call I hope you can justify it better than what the supervisors or the video tape training has shown. I can tell you if I make that call for the reason you suggest, I probably will not be working very long at that level. You can take that for what it is worth.

Peace

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If you think that is clear, then when you make that call I hope you can justify it better than what the supervisors or the video tape training has shown. I can tell you if I make that call for the reason you suggest, I probably will not be working very long at that level. You can take that for what it is worth.

Peace

I hope you're not suggesting that he would have ended up in the same spot absent contact.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by hbk314

If that's indeed the philosophy, it's not in line with the written rule.

That's about par for the course.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by hbk314

If that's indeed the philosophy, it's not in line with the written rule.

So what? Philosophies are important. Do you want to see a holding flag on every play?

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by Rich

So what? Philosophies are important. Do you want to see a holding flag on every play?

What does that have to do with anything?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by hbk314

What does that have to do with anything?

Because if you called a foul every time someone wrapped their arms around an opponent, you would not have a play without a penalty. You certainly would have a hold on every single running play, because someone hands are outside of the frame for some period of time and are struggling at some point to get away. But like that part of the game, we consider it a foul when their is clear restriction and the opponent is not just getting beat anymore. And that is where the term, "Stronger legs" comes from. It is clear by the feet of both Gronk and the Panther LB that they were not struggling to move in any direction.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by hbk314

What does that have to do with anything?

The fact that holding philosophies often go against the written rule. As do the philosophies of many rules in many sports. This isn't unique.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by hbk314

What does that have to do with anything?

It's obvious what I meant to anyone who doesn't have tunnel vision on the subject.

Everything we do is guided not only by the written rule, but also by philosophy. You can't be a top official unless you understand and are comfortable with both.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by Rich

It's obvious what I meant to anyone who doesn't have tunnel vision on the subject.

Everything we do is guided not only by the written rule, but also by philosophy. You can't be a top official unless you understand and are comfortable with both.

The rule is fine the way it's written. No need for a separate "philosophy" that only makes it easier to get the call wrong.

Nobody's answered the question of what happens if you have one defender tackle the receiver away from the ball while another defender steps into the void and intercepts it. According to your philosophy, that would be a no call.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by hbk314

...Nobody's answered the question ...

You haven't answered this one:

"So what should the officials have done differently based on the information they had at the time?"

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

You haven't answered this one:

"So what should the officials have done differently based on the information they had at the time?"

Based on the explanation they gave of their call, they made the "right" call based on what they "knew."

Even if you feel they got this call right, they got lucky.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by hbk314

The rule is fine the way it's written. No need for a separate "philosophy" that only makes it easier to get the call wrong.

Nobody's answered the question of what happens if you have one defender tackle the receiver away from the ball while another defender steps into the void and intercepts it. According to your philosophy, that would be a no call.

Not his philosophy, it's the one apparently used by the NFL and college in training. The same as if the defender tackles the receiver while the ball sails twenty yards out of bounds.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by Adam

Not his philosophy, it's the one apparently used by the NFL and college in training. The same as if the defender tackles the receiver while the ball sails twenty yards out of bounds.

So are you saying that philosophy applies to the scenario I stated?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by hbk314

So are you saying that philosophy applies to the scenario I stated?

Uh, yes.

Originally Posted by Adam

(snip) The same as if the defender tackles the receiver while the ball sails twenty yards out of bounds.

If I'm picturing it the way you are.