Patriots @ Panthers. Monday Night Game

[DOUBLE WING]

I'll be curious to see how the media handles Tom Brady cursing out the refs as they walk off the field.

When Dez Bryant does something like that, he's an unruly, uncoachable team cancer.

When Tom Brady does it......?

I'm guessing something along the lines of, "Look how badly he wants to win!" or "When you have the skins on the wall that Brady has, you deserve an explanation."

 

[romomania]

I'll be curious to see how the media handles Tom Brady cursing out the refs as they walk off the field.

When Dez Bryant does something like that, he's an unruly, uncoachable team cancer.

When Tom Brady does it......?

I'm guessing something along the lines of, "Look how badly he wants to win!" or "When you have the skins on the wall that Brady has, you deserve an explanation."

Somewhat true...but he did it after the game. Dez got a penalty when he took off his helmet to argue with the ref.

 

[Hook'em#11]

Put another tack on the board that the NFL is rigged. Sorry, that BS "non Call" at the end of the game for PI? About as BS as the so called "holding" call on that Pats DB when greg olsen is HOLDING the guys arm to his body.

Man, I wouldn't last a week in this NFL as a coach or player.. Not because I can't do either. LOL, but, if I could , I wouldn't last. Brady had all the right in the world to do what he did..Bryant, take notes son...

 

[khiladi]

No, terrible call and should have been defensive holding at the very least. Your bias shows because you hate the Patriots, but if Witten had been held like that would you still think it was a good call. The NFL is dirty with officiating bias.

Uh no.. maximum it could have been defensive holding.. but the flag wasn't even thrown for that and it wasn't catcheable, and Brady underthrew it by like five feet and he threw it into double coverage.. only a phantom homer for Gronk would think he could have caught it for it to be PI... BTW, you see plays like that in hail mary's all the time..

and yes I hate the Patriots.. and to think they are at the end of the ref 'bias' is as hilarious as it comes... the masters of the art of cheating and the Tuck Rule and breathe on Brady, you get ten.. and phantom illegal facemask on the DE of the Panthers on that 3rd down to keep heir drive going.. please...

 

[Hook'em#11]

Uh no.. maximum it could have been defensive holding.. but the flag wasn't even thrown for that and it wasn't catcheable, and Brady underthrew it by like five feet and he threw it into double coverage.. only a phantom homer for Gronk would think he could have caught it for it to be PI... BTW, you see plays like that in hail mary's all the time..

and yes I hate the Patriots.. and to think they are at the end of the ref 'bias' is as hilarious as it comes... the masters of the art of cheating and the Tuck Rule and breathe on Brady, you get ten.. and phantom illegal facemask on the DE of the Panthers on that 3rd down to keep heir drive going.. please...

Defensive holding?

Okay, you DEFINITELY have to pass and stop puffing. The dude was WRAPPED around the TE bear hugging him. It wasn't 5 yards away, and who cares. We will never know. The fact that the LB BLATANTLY impeded the TE's progress to get try and get back to the ball is INTERFERENCE.

How about the HOLD by Greg Olson that was called Defensive holding on the PAT's DB to "extend" the Panthers TD drive just before.. Olsen was holding the guys arm to his body. Hockey players do it all the time to draw a penalty too. Too bad, the refs are morons and fall for it.

Be biased man, hate a team, whatever, don't be blind.

 

[khiladi]

Defensive holding?

Okay, you DEFINITELY have to pass and stop puffing. The dude was WRAPPED around the TE bear hugging him. It wasn't 5 yards away, and who cares. We will never know. The fact that the LB BLATANTLY impeded the TE's progress to get try and get back to the ball is INTERFERENCE.

How about the HOLD by Greg Olson that was called Defensive holding on the PAT's DB to "extend" the Panthers TD drive just before.. Olsen was holding the guys arm to his body. Hockey players do it all the time to draw a penalty too. Too bad, the refs are morons and fall for it.

Be biased man, hate a team, whatever, don't be blind.

Uh sorry.. You can't call impeding the pass when Gronk is running a slant, he gives up the route, Brady under throws it by five feet and the Other LB is also in the direction if the pass for an int... PI is only if catchable.. No amount of spinning can make that catchable.

The irony is It's absolutely hilarious that your arguing PI on Olson, when what the DB did is even a worse example of what your claiming the Panthers LB did on Gronk in the very same thread...

Contradict yourself much?

 

[Hook'em#11]

Uh sorry.. You can't call impeding the pass when Gronk is running a slant, he gives up the route, Brady under throws it by five feet and the Other LB is also in the direction if the pass for an int... PI is only if catchable.. No amount of spinning can make that catchable.

The irony is It's absolutely hilarious that your arguing PI on Olson, when what the DB did is even a worse example of what your claiming the Panthers LB did on Gronk in the very same thread...

Contradict yourself much?

It wasn't PI on the Olsen play, it was called defensive holding. And, it shouldn't of been.

Contradiction nothing. Blind much? I think so. A worse example. Yeah...

I don't care what route the TE was running. The defensive player cannot wrap his arms around the player, not looking at the ball even, and not get call for a penalty.. Fine, Defensive holding , works fine. But, to call something and pick up the flag in that scenario is BS. If Gronk is running a come back route, it is impeding.. That call is called every game, every Sunday, Monday, and Thursday.

And, it will be called on the Cowboys one day. You best not be crying then when it happens.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

It probably was PI but if I recall, the Patriot DBs used to get away with murder against the Colts in the 00s so I guess turnabout is fair play.

 

[JPM]

http://img11.*************/img11/4491/4mwl.jpg

 

[Tabascocat]

The word coming out of Little Italy, NY is the Gambino family had tons of money on Caroline -3 and the under 46.5. I guess they made the refs an offer that they could not refuse

 

[WoodysGirl]

Mike Pereira ‏@MikePereira 14h
My thoughts..Since the flag was thrown they should have stayed with the call. There was clear contact before the ball was intercepted. More.
You could make a case that the pass might have been uncatachable, but the flag was thrown and you should stay with it. My thoughts
@JacobTamme it depends on what your definition of "well in front" is, to me, he wasn't that far in front.
@tdphillipsjr >>can't have holding when the pass is in the air. It is pass interference or nothing.

Another former NFL ref account
Jim Daopoulos ‏@RefereeJimD 15h
Why would you throw the flag if there is no foul?
That is a foul and should have been penalized... The pass was catchable...
The pass was catchable..not illegal contact since ball was in the air...contact on 87 occurs prior to interception. It's a foul and called!
Austin is incorrect with his explanation...that ball was catchable and saying it was uncatchable is incorrect

Football Zebras.com ‏@footballzebras 13h
Updated post: @RefereeJimD summarizes the "defensive pass interception" call http://refs.ws/53

 

[khiladi]

It wasn't PI on the Olsen play, it was called defensive holding. And, it shouldn't of been.

Contradiction nothing. Blind much? I think so. A worse example. Yeah...

I don't care what route the TE was running. The defensive player cannot wrap his arms around the player, not looking at the ball even, and not get call for a penalty.. Fine, Defensive holding , works fine. But, to call something and pick up the flag in that scenario is BS. If Gronk is running a come back route, it is impeding.. That call is called every game, every Sunday, Monday, and Thursday.

And, it will be called on the Cowboys one day. You best not be crying then when it happens.

So thank you for contradicting yourself..

So your saying the DB shouldn't have been called fo defensive holding against Olsen, and Olsen should have been called for an offensive penalty, but the Carolina LB should have been called for 'minimum' holding against Gronk for doing the same thing that the Patriots DB was doing, to a much lesser degree?

Didn't I say that MAXIMUM it could have been called for holding, but even then, that wasn't even the flag?

 

[khiladi]

Mike Pereira ‏@MikePereira 14h
My thoughts..Since the flag was thrown they should have stayed with the call. There was clear contact before the ball was intercepted. More.
You could make a case that the pass might have been uncatachable, but the flag was thrown and you should stay with it. My thoughts
@JacobTamme it depends on what your definition of "well in front" is, to me, he wasn't that far in front.
@tdphillipsjr >>can't have holding when the pass is in the air. It is pass interference or nothing.

Another former NFL ref account
Jim Daopoulos ‏@RefereeJimD 15h
Why would you throw the flag if there is no foul?
That is a foul and should have been penalized... The pass was catchable...
The pass was catchable..not illegal contact since ball was in the air...contact on 87 occurs prior to interception. It's a foul and called!
Austin is incorrect with his explanation...that ball was catchable and saying it was uncatchable is incorrect

Football Zebras.com ‏@footballzebras 13h
Updated post: @RefereeJimD summarizes the "defensive pass interception" call http://refs.ws/53

Wait, NFL referees on a regular basis don't pick up their flags and say, after discussing with each other, "There was no flag on the play"...

As fa as catchable, does Gronk have an amazing ability to change course through full speed to come back five feet for the ball, and that too, around the guy that was 'holding' him?

 

[khiladi]

Sorry, anybody that thinks Gronk could have made a play for that is just wallowing in Patriots love.. not even close to catcheable, especially considering that ball was 58s from as soon as it was released.. Gronk would have had to actually knock down the LB that INT it, let alone come back to the ball..

Patriots homerism at it's finest

 

[Hook'em#11]

And still complete blindness from a Cowboys fan. There's a shock..

We will agree to disagree..

 

[BoysFan4ever]

I think that was an obvious penalty but I'll let the mucky mucks worry about it.

Every team in the league gets bad calls & then a play that helps them along.

 

[arglebargle]

I think that was an obvious penalty but I'll let the mucky mucks worry about it.

Every team in the league gets bad calls & then a play that helps them along.

But an obvious foul on the last play of the game, a call which would seriously affect the outcome of the game: That is a worst case scenario for refs. And rather than deal with it, they just said, 'oops'.

 

[khiladi]

And still complete blindness from a Cowboys fan. There's a shock..

We will agree to disagree..

When you wish upon a star... keep dreaming..

I guess Gronk has the power to stop full speed and come back 5 feet, and not only that fight through the LB 58 who already broke to make a play for that ball, because it "clearly" was catcheable.. turn on a dime, come back full speed, and head straight through the Lb sitting on the bad throw by Brady...

Oh yeah, and Olson should have been called for PI, not the DB for holding...

Patriots fans.. got to love em... Brady gets breathed on, 15 yards...

 

[joseephuss]

When you wish upon a star... keep dreaming..

I guess Gronk has the power to stop full speed and come back 5 feet, and not only that fight through the LB 58 who already broke to make a play for that ball, because it "clearly" was catcheable.. turn on a dime, come back full speed, and head straight through the Lb sitting on the bad throw by Brady...

Oh yeah, and Olson should have been called for PI, not the DB for holding...

Patriots fans.. got to love em... Brady gets breathed on, 15 yards...

It isn't clear that Gronk would catch the ball. It is clear that he wasn't able to at least make an attempt at catching the ball because of the holding/pass interference. It was a bad call or decision to pick up the flag. I don't have to be a fan of the Pats(I'm not) to know when a bad call has occurred. It doesn't matter if it happens on the last play of the game or in the first quarter, that was a bad decision by the refs. I don't like bad calls. They can even happen to teams I hate and I would still think there is no place for bad calls. I really can't stand them when they happen to the Cowboys.

 

[khiladi]

As I said before... maximum it can be called is holding and no ref called a holding, which was insignificant, it only looked bad in slow motion, because the LB never really wrapped his arm around Gronk and ket his arms from hugging him. It was originally thrown for PI.

PI is only ruled if the ball is catcheable... This is why Steve Young flip-flopped after the commercial. First he said it was face-guarding, but there is no penalty for face guarding. He didn't think it was holding either. After the commercial, the whole story changed to Gronk not being allowed to make a play on the ball and it being 'catcheable', because they were trying to argue PI. No mention of face-guarding was said again, though it was stated multple times before commercial break.

It is absolutely CLEAR that Gronk wouldn't have caught the ball on physic alone. Again, 58 already broke to the ball, while Gronk was still going away from the ball slowing down. Before Gronk, by some miraculous law of physics cld shift his momentum, 58 had already broken past him before the white LB really even started to grab him.

It has all the relevance in the world if the ball was catchable or not if the original ref was ruling PI...

You get that much contact in a hail mary anyways.. slow motion makes the 'grab' look worse than it really was anyways... Brady threw a duck, the end. If the guy didn't touch him, 58 still had the INT. He read it the whole way.