What's with this feigned ignorance about the PI call?

[BrAinPaiNt]

Right or wrong
Ticky Tack or not

I will take it.

 

[MonsterD]

Bad call, honestly can't blame any Giants fans for feeling like they got hosed.

 

[blindzebra]

I've watched the play many times and see none of what you're talking about. There was no hold, no impeding. It was a terrible call, and I love it.

They only showed the view the ref had once, and at the 2 Cromartie grabbed his right shoulder and pulled Williams.

 

[Doomsday101]

Hate to say it but it is part of the game. I don't think Refs are trying to help one team over another but like players make mistakes, coaches make mistake as all humans make mistakes why would anyone think refs should be perfect? Fact is giants fans can cry about it but the Giants should have been able to overcome it and failed. I would have said the same had the shoe been on the other foot and have done so in the past when a questionable or bad calls has happened to the Cowboys.

 

[Eric_Boyer]

super ticky tack PI.

but what was also super ticky tacky was the 15 yard penalty on Carr that moved the Giants into field goal range.

honestly, I see the Giants tanking at this point. They were so lucky that this game was close. They are just a really bad team IMO.

 

[Bleu Star]

The hold on the shoulder that takes the receiver off stride and prevents him from jumping for the ball was well executed, but it is still there for all to see. They played a great angle on it last night (the one you're not seeing on all the talk shows) and yet Collinsworth acted like it was insignificant. I know the media loves to generate conflict and controversy but c'mon now,,,

Exactly. People tried to say it was nothing. Cromartie tried to sneak in a slick grab and got caught. End of story.

 

[Wayne02]

Some of you guys are blind as bats. Like the OP said the grab prevented Terrance from making his leap for the ball. I could cover a WR if I was allowed to do that.

Williams wasn't grabbed, and you couldn't cover a WR if you were allowed to do that. Either way, it's over, and I'm sure we'll get screwed over in the future, so it is what it is.

 

[NoLuv4Jerry]

Some of you guys are blind as bats. Like the OP said the grab prevented Terrance from making his leap for the ball. I could cover a WR if I was allowed to do that.

I usually hate going this route....but I will. I don't think they are blind. I think they have never played a sport. If you are pumping your arms running....and someone grabs your arm/shoulder and holds it....you lose speed/momentum. Therefore it disrupts the timing of a play. Romo put the ball where he expected Williams to be under the assumption Williams progress would NOT be impeded....his progress was impeded....which is why Williams was not there....and the ref saw it and called it. Do the refs catch this every time? No. This time they did!

 

[aikemirv]

Some of you guys are blind as bats. Like the OP said the grab prevented Terrance from making his leap for the ball. I could cover a WR if I was allowed to do that.

Yes they are. Definitely impeded Williams and slowed his stride!

 

[speedkilz88]

Williams wasn't grabbed, and you couldn't cover a WR if you were allowed to do that. Either way, it's over, and I'm sure we'll get screwed over in the future, so it is what it is.

You are wrong. Like I said, blind as bats. He grabbed the right shoulder which knocked him off stride to jump for the ball. The ref saw it clear as day since he was on that side.

 

[Wayne02]

You are wrong. Like I said, blind as bats. He grabbed the right shoulder which knocked him off stride to jump for the ball. The ref saw it clear as day since he was on that side.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it, I think you and the ref were wrong. That's my opinion and I'm entitled to it, and I'm glad that you and the ref were wrong.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

That was a terrible call. There was no turn of the shoulder. IT was terrible. I'm not taking away from the win by admitting that and IMO, there were poor calls on both sides but that one was terrible.

 

[JD_KaPow]

I usually hate going this route....but I will. I don't think they are blind. I think they have never played a sport. If you are pumping your arms running....and someone grabs your arm/shoulder and holds it....you lose speed/momentum.

Nobody's arguing with that. If there was a grab, sure, it was PI. But there was no grab. You guys are seeing what you want to see.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

You are wrong. Like I said, blind as bats. He grabbed the right shoulder which knocked him off stride to jump for the ball. The ref saw it clear as day since he was on that side.

I have to say if you aren't allowed to defend like that then I don't see how quarterbacks don't throw for 500 yards every week. You literally can't defend these guys anymore.

 

[speedkilz88]

Nobody's arguing with that. If there was a grab, sure, it was PI. But there was no grab. You guys are seeing what you want to see.

 

[SultanOfSix]

Well, grabbing the shoulder of the receiver's dominant arm and then pulling it to help prevent him from making a catch for a ball that is in the air is technically pass interference. Was it necessary for him to make the play on the ball? Who knows, but the penalty is there because the probability is higher than not that it might do so. Besides, the same corner back got away with holding Dez down by the hips in the end zone in the first quarter in a similar manner.

 

[Zman5]

It was a make up call for not calling two muggings by Princess on Dez.

 

[AdamJT13]

That call was really ticky tacky. You're allowed to grab the shoulder or put your hand on their waist as long as you don't turn them. He didnt turn him at all.

No, you're not. Don't listen to the babbling heads -- they don't know what they're talking about, and they got all in a bunch about the call over replays that weren't even showing the part of the play where the interference occurred. (The first several replays shown were in the end zone -- the foul occurred at the 2.)

There are seven types of pass interference that are specified in the rule book (they are listed as "including, but not limited to," so other acts could also be PI). ONE of those is hooking the receiver and turning him. (The correct interpretation of the rule IS NOT "if you don't turn him, it's not pass interference," it is "if you DO turn him, it is pass interference." If you don't turn him, it can STILL be pass interference if you're restricting his opportunity to make the catch.

Here is the list of actions that are deemed to be an automatic PI --

(a) Contact by a player who is not playing the ball that restricts the opponent’s opportunity to make the catch.
(b) Playing through the back of an opponent in an attempt to make a play on the ball.
(c) Grabbing an opponent’s arm(s) in such a manner that restricts his opportunity to catch a pass.
(d) Extending an arm across the body of an opponent, thus restricting his ability to catch a pass, and regardless of whether the player committing such act is playing the ball.
(e) Cutting off the path of an opponent by making contact with him, without playing the ball.
(f) Hooking an opponent in an attempt to get to the ball in such a manner that it causes the opponent’s body to turn prior to the ball arriving.
(g) Initiating contact with an opponent by shoving or pushing off, thus creating a separation in an attempt to catch a pass.


Grabbing the receiver's shoulder and restricting him *without turning him* is just as much pass interference as grabbing the back of the receiver's jersey and pulling on it *without turning him.* If the ball is in the air, either of those actions is PI.

The call was absolutely correct.

 

[Future]

Technically, yea, it was probably PI.

Was it drastic and did it need to be called, no. But they should have called the one on Dez in the endzone, so whatever.

 

[ElGatoGrande]

They only showed the view the ref had once, and at the 2 Cromartie grabbed his right shoulder and pulled Williams.

That's what I'm talking about, the media's omission of that angle is deliberate so they can more effectively deliver a controversy to the unwashed masses.