About that Holding call... or non holding call...

[Rack]

I realize the explanation given by the ref was complete BS, but the fact of the matter is there was no holding on the play.

I may be wrong, but from what I remember of the replay, it didn't look like a hold. I've seen MUCH worse then what that replay showed NOT called. I don't even think Jansen was close enough to Ellis to hold him. Or at least not in good enough position.

Yes the explanation was crap, but I don't think there was a holding there. It would of probably been better if the ref just picked up the flag and said "There was no holding on the play".


That said, since there was a flag on the cowboys as well, and he DID throw the flag, they should of just offset the penalties and replayed the down.

 

[Stautner]

I realize the explanation given by the ref was complete BS, but the fact of the matter is there was no holding on the play.

I may be wrong, but from what I remember of the replay, it didn't look like a hold. I've seen MUCH worse then what that replay showed NOT called. I don't even think Jansen was close enough to Ellis to hold him. Or at least not in good enough position.

Yes the explanation was crap, but I don't think there was a holding there. It would of probably been better if the ref just picked up the flag and said "There was no holding on the play".


That said, since there was a flag on the cowboys as well, and he DID throw the flag, they should of just offset the penalties and replayed the down.

I too questioned whether there really was a hold, but if the official thought there was enough that he was compelled to throw the flag I just don't understand how he could waive it off and provide the explaination he did.

 

[HoustonSucks]

I was about to make my first post of the season about this. Correct me if I'm wrong... but I have NEVER in my whole life EVER heard an official say, "There is no flag b/c the defender ran through the attempt of a hold." I'm paraphrasing, but seriously.... "the attempt of a hold?". Has that EVER been called? I mean, either there's holding or there isn't right? I mean if the defender ran through an "attempt of a chop block" doesn't the chop block still get called? I may be mincing terms... and in the end I don't wanna be Joe Gibbs, but.....I'm just curious as to whether anyone else has heard a penalty/non-penalty described as such. It just seems hypocritical.

One other irritation... the false start called on the Commanders that negated our interception. Why should the penalized team benefit? I've been saying for years that pass Interference should be reviewable.... I also think that false starts should be able to be declined by the opposing team.

Thanks.

 

[Yeagermeister]

I asked one of coworkers who was an OG for Memphis if he'd ever heard of that and he said no.

 

[J-DOG]

I was about to make my first post of the season about this. Correct me if I'm wrong... but I have NEVER in my whole life EVER heard an official say, "There is no flag b/c the defender ran through the attempt of a hold." I'm paraphrasing, but seriously.... "the attempt of a hold?". Has that EVER been called? I mean, either there's holding or there isn't right? I mean if the defender ran through an "attempt of a chop block" doesn't the chop block still get called? I may be mincing terms... and in the end I don't wanna be Joe Gibbs, but.....I'm just curious as to whether anyone else has heard a penalty/non-penalty described as such. It just seems hypocritical.

One other irritation... the false start called on the Commanders that negated our interception. Why should the penalized team benefit? I've been saying for years that pass Interference should be reviewable.... I also think that false starts should be able to be declined by the opposing team.

Thanks.

You bring up a great point.
If a player attempts to hold or to chop block is it a penalty???

Example...It was the 2nd or 3rd play of the game and TO got called for a 15 yard chop block on a db, even though the replay clearly showed that TO did not even touch the guy. The ref still marked off the penalty against us.
Somebody tell me how that is different than what happend against Ellis.

What's even more crazy is that the ref accepted the penalty against us rather than having them offset.
They had to have blown that call.

 

[DallasEast]

One other irritation... the false start called on the Commanders that negated our interception. Why should the penalized team benefit? I've been saying for years that pass Interference should be reviewable.... I also think that false starts should be able to be declined by the opposing team.

Thanks.

By definition, false starts occur before the snap of the ball. In other words, the play is dead.

 

[HoustonSucks]

By definition, false starts occur before the snap of the ball. In other words, the play is dead.

You're right. It just sucks when the penalized team benefits, don't you agree? There was also that ODD false start call last night that was called WAY after the ball was snapped and the play was executed. Remember? I just hate inconsistancy.

 

[CoCo]

You're right. It just sucks when the penalized team benefits, don't you agree? There was also that ODD false start call last night that was called WAY after the ball was snapped and the play was executed. Remember? I just hate inconsistancy.

I'm pretty sure I could hear the whistle blowing before that play started. But it was faint and obviously the players didn't respond. Some of the refs probably didn't even hear it.

 

[DallasEast]

You're right. It just sucks when the penalized team benefits, don't you agree? There was also that ODD false start call last night that was called WAY after the ball was snapped and the play was executed. Remember? I just hate inconsistancy.

I agree with you somewhat, but I have greater issues with the refs throwing flags, picking them off the ground and saying, "There was no flag on the play".

I'll bet that if some of those flags were sewn into their briefs, they would give greater thought before throwing a flag. That's just my opinion, though...

 

[Stautner]

I agree with you somewhat, but I have greater issues with the refs throwing flags, picking them off the ground and saying, "There was no flag on the play".

I'll bet that if some of those flags were sewn into their briefs, they would give greater thought before throwing a flag. That's just my opinion, though...

I strongly disagree with this. Refs have to make quick decisions on penalties - they don't have time to stop and mull over the play before making a call. The fact that they can think about a play afterward, discuss it with other officials and decide if the call should stand or not is necessary to the game. It's important that if there is any doubt they have an out after discussing the play - and since humans are making the calls there will always be doubt at times.

This happens in baseball all the time where umpires can choose to get help from a collegue.

 

[DallasEast]

I strongly disagree with this. Refs have to make quick decisions on penalties - they don't have time to stop and mull over the play before making a call.

So, what's your explanation for those situations when a ref throws a REALLY late flag?

 

[jazzcat22]

By definition, false starts occur before the snap of the ball. In other words, the play is dead.

Yes, true. However, he was saying the defense should have the option to decline. It would be basically a free play. Just like the offense gets a free play for offsides on the defense. They get the right to decline that. But since it's an offense oriented league, they give the offesnse a break.

Just like the kick-off penalty. I believe it is changed now. If the KO team was offsides, say on an onside kick. For some reason they got to kick it again. Therefore giving them another chance to recover.

 

[DallasEast]

Yes, true. However, he was saying the defense should have the option to decline. It would be basically a free play. Just like the offense gets a free play for offsides on the defense. They get the right to decline that. But since it's an offense oriented league, they give the offesnse a break.

That would give a huge advantage to the offense, so it'll never happen. Every time an offense needed a big play, all someone would need to do is flinch to draw the defense offside, the refs would blow the whistle, the defense would freeze, and the quarterback would only have to lob the ball downfield to a wide open receiver. It'l be like arena football every weekend.

Just like the kick-off penalty. I believe it is changed now. If the KO team was offsides, say on an onside kick. For some reason they got to kick it again. Therefore giving them another chance to recover.

The kickoff team re-kicks, but they also are penalized with loss of yards and backed up before the re-kick. That's not really an advantage to the kickoff team.

 

[LeonDixson]

So, what's your explanation for those situations when a ref throws a REALLY late flag?

You mean like in the Philly game yesterday? That was the latest flag I've ever seen thrown. I believe the call was right but the flag wasn't thrown until the crowd scared the ref into throwing it. It must have been 10 or 15 seconds after the play was over.

 

[DallasEast]

You mean like in the Philly game yesterday? That was the latest flag I've ever seen thrown. I believe the call was right but the flag wasn't thrown until the crowd scared the ref into throwing it. It must have been 10 or 15 seconds after the play was over.

Yep.