virtually, the same exact play happened: Defensive pass interference on SF / Defensive Holding on BAL. Called vs SF, let go vs BAL. No doubt about it. This is one time I'm so glad the Eagles or Vikings didn't make the SB. I don't think I could handle either of my fav teams getting ripped off like that. I'm not even a 49ers fan & I still can't believe it. Disgusting.
Last edited by Bernie Parent 1974: 02-04-2013 at 08:15 AM.
I'll preface this with I don't know the rules of the NFL 100% but even if the ball was "uncatchable" it doesn't matter because the penalty should have been defensive holding. It doesn't matter if the ball is uncatchable, it would for PI but not for holding.
I have another question about rules in the NFL. If their is a hold in the end zone, I know it is a safety, but are yards enforced on the ensuing "punt-off"?
__________________
"I Came Here To Bury Caesar, Not Praise Him" - Roy Halladay
I'll preface this with I don't know the rules of the NFL 100% but even if the ball was "uncatchable" it doesn't matter because the penalty should have been defensive holding. It doesn't matter if the ball is uncatchable, it would for PI but not for holding.
I have another question about rules in the NFL. If their is a hold in the end zone, I know it is a safety, but are yards enforced on the ensuing "punt-off"?
No, I'm pretty sure the penalty is that you lose 2 pts and you lose the ball. It basically becomes a "spot" foul and the spot is in the EZ, hence it's a safety.
It's funny how people blame the refs for interfering too much in games, and blame them for doing too little. Coming from a neutral standpoint, I thought they did a great job of letting the players decide the game. There's touching and grabbing like that on almost every play, in a game of this magnitude. It's only when the game is on the line that people make a big deal about it. If they've been letting it go all game, you gotta adjust accordingly. Who wants to see an outcome determined by zebras? If they had made the call, the media would be talking about how they should have let that call go. They need something to talk about.
Kinda like the non calls on the 9ers that involved late hit out of bounds on the QB, taunting, and multiple personal fouls.
I thought one of the worst calls of the game was the running into the kicker call on the Ravens that lead to the Akers re-kicking the ball. I watched the replay a bunch and it looked like to me the guy on the Ravens never touched him but after the kick Akers fell on top of him. Anyone else notice that or did I miss something?
I thought it was a great game. The non-call at the end could have easily been called illegal contact or pass interference or gone uncalled IMO (as it did), and I know this is a double-edged sword, but I would rather see the game decided on a questionable non-call than a questionable call. The play looks a lot worse in slo-mo than it did in full speed.
I thought one of the worst calls of the game was the running into the kicker call on the Ravens that lead to the Akers re-kicking the ball. I watched the replay a bunch and it looked like to me the guy on the Ravens never touched him but after the kick Akers fell on top of him. Anyone else notice that or did I miss something?
I thought it was a great game. The non-call at the end could have easily been called illegal contact or pass interference or gone uncalled IMO (as it did), and I know this is a double-edged sword, but I would rather see the game decided on a questionable non-call than a questionable call. The play looks a lot worse in slo-mo than it did in full speed.
At first it looked like a good acting job by Akers but I haven't seen another replay since.
Another thing I question is how Cary Williams wasn't tossed from the game. I've seen players thrown out for doing far less to a ref.
I thought one of the worst calls of the game was the running into the kicker call on the Ravens that lead to the Akers re-kicking the ball. I watched the replay a bunch and it looked like to me the guy on the Ravens never touched him but after the kick Akers fell on top of him. Anyone else notice that or did I miss something?
I thought it was a great game. The non-call at the end could have easily been called illegal contact or pass interference or gone uncalled IMO (as it did), and I know this is a double-edged sword, but I would rather see the game decided on a questionable non-call than a questionable call. The play looks a lot worse in slo-mo than it did in full speed.
If you watch a slow-mo of the Akers thing, the defenders arm/shoulder rolls into and through Akers' plant leg (right around the ankle) which is what causes him to fall. The reason why some people are saying Akers flopped is because they are unfamiliar with the fact that after kicking the ball, pretty much all kickers take a large hop forward onto their plant leg, which is what makes it look like Akers is off balance, but it's a normal thing for him. After he takes that "hop" forward is when the defender rolls through his ankle. Look at the defenders hand in a slo-mo and you'll see clearly he does make contact.
As for the no-call, it looked bad in slow-mo and in full-speed. I've watched Crabtree a ton this season and I know what his normal acceleration looks like. He was significantly impeded by a 2-handed grab of his jersey and an arm-bar from Smith. It was blatant, it had a profound effect on the play, and it was textbook pass interference or at the very least defensive holding/illegal contact.
But you know what? There was an easy out for the referees here. If you're too chicken s*** to "decide" the game on a penalty, then you call defensive pass interference and offensive pass interference. The penalties offset, you replay 4th down, and then you REALLY LET THE PLAYERS DECIDE THE GAME.
Oh, and by the way, those saying that the game would've been decided by the refs had a pass interference call been made clearly haven't been watching football in the past 5 years. Assuming the 49ers scored on the next play from the goal-line, the Ravens would've had roughly 1:40 and THREE TIMEOUTS to get into field goal range to either tie or win the game (depending on whether or not SF's 2 point conversion was good). 1:40 is an absolute ETERNITY in the modern NFL game with 3 timeouts to your name too. If Flacco couldn't have gotten his team into FG range w/ that much time left, then the Ravens didn't deserve to win the Super Bowl.
If you watch a slow-mo of the Akers thing, the defenders arm/shoulder rolls into and through Akers' plant leg (right around the ankle) which is what causes him to fall. The reason why some people are saying Akers flopped is because they are unfamiliar with the fact that after kicking the ball, pretty much all kickers take a large hop forward onto their plant leg, which is what makes it look like Akers is off balance, but it's a normal thing for him. After he takes that "hop" forward is when the defender rolls through his ankle. Look at the defenders hand in a slo-mo and you'll see clearly he does make contact.
I wasn't saying he flopped, just that it looked to me like he wasn't touched and when he fell it happened to be on a Ravens player, which at full speed to the ref may have led to the call. I'll have to watch the replay again but I didn't say any contact when I watched it last night.
Quote:
As for the no-call, it looked bad in slow-mo and in full-speed. I've watched Crabtree a ton this season and I know what his normal acceleration looks like. He was significantly impeded by a 2-handed grab of his jersey and an arm-bar from Smith. It was blatant, it had a profound effect on the play, and it was textbook pass interference or at the very least defensive holding/illegal contact.
Most of the experts (real experts, not people claiming to be experts because they have a blog) seem to be ok with the call. Their take was that there was contact in the five yards then incidental contact after that. Could have gone either way. People would be complaining that it was a bad call if it was called. It was toss up.
Quote:
But you know what? There was an easy out for the referees here. If you're too chicken s*** to "decide" the game on a penalty, then you call defensive pass interference and offensive pass interference. The penalties offset, you replay 4th down, and then you REALLY LET THE PLAYERS DECIDE THE GAME.
Also a potential outcome. But it really seems like a situation that could have gone any of the three ways where people would be unhappy. Noncalls and bad calls are equally annoying.
Quote:
Oh, and by the way, those saying that the game would've been decided by the refs had a pass interference call been made clearly haven't been watching football in the past 5 years. Assuming the 49ers scored on the next play from the goal-line, the Ravens would've had roughly 1:40 and THREE TIMEOUTS to get into field goal range to either tie or win the game (depending on whether or not SF's 2 point conversion was good). 1:40 is an absolute ETERNITY in the modern NFL game with 3 timeouts to your name too. If Flacco couldn't have gotten his team into FG range w/ that much time left, then the Ravens didn't deserve to win the Super Bowl.
Meh. I had no problem with the way the game turned out. I agree the Ravens certainly would have had a chance to get another field goal and win it (or tie it, depending on the outcome of the 2pt conversion after the would-be TD). I had no dog in the fight and would have been happy with either team winning. I'm guessing from your posts that you wanted the 49ers to win, and your disdain for the noncall is understandable, but at the same time the Ravens supporters would likely be crying foul if a call was made (even the offsetting penalties). Lets also not forget the 35 minute blackout that seemed to give new life to the 49ers. In reality who knows what would have really happened, but it sure seemed like the delay took something out of the Ravens and lit a fire under the collective ass of the 49ers. Obviously this was not under the control of anyone invovled like a non-call or bad call, but both teams caught breaks throughout the game. Best Super Bowl I can remember in a while.
Another thing I question is how Cary Williams wasn't tossed from the game. I've seen players thrown out for doing far less to a ref.
Yeah I thought he was gone for sure. I mean, my guess is he wasn't intending to push the ref and just thought it was a 9ers player, but I have seen guys get tossed for WAY less than that. I would not have been surprised and I doubt anyone would have complained if he got the boot at that point.
I had no dog in this fight. I didn't really care who won and I wasn't rooting for the 49ers. I just wanted to see a great game and a great finish and the refs deprived us of that.
As for the "experts" that you've seen talking about this, they're all morons. And I say that with 100% certainty because anyone bringing up the "within 5 yards" on this doesn't understand NFL rules. The whole "contact within 5 yards" thing goes out the window when the ball is in the air. Doesn't matter if the QB takes 1 step and throws within 0.01 seconds or if he runs around in the pocket for 7 seconds before throwing, when the ball is in the air, any significant contact that impedes the WR is pass interference. This was blatant defensive pass interference. The ball was in the air while Smith was holding Crabtree with both hands and while he was armbaring Crabtree. It was clear-cut defensive pass interference.
The only reason I even brought up illegal contact or holding is because if the refs didn't want to give SF the ball at the 1 yard line, those would've been other options. While illegal contact technically would've been an incorrect call, it would've been acceptable IMO as a compromise.
Also, holding anywhere on the field is illegal as a member of the defense. You cannot grab hold of a receiver's jersey and impede his progress, even within 5 yards. Within 5 yards you can hit the WR, you bump the WR, you can hand-fight with the WR, but you 100% cannot hold him.
No matter how you slice it, no matter when you think the ball went into the air, no matter what any of the would-be expert bloggers or what the pundits say, this was clear-cut defensive pass-interference and/or defensive holding by the letter of the NFL law.
It was unacceptable for the game to essentially end on that play. At worst, the refs should've called offsetting Offensive and defensive pass interference, and there's a very solid case for that because Crabtree did try to push off. And indeed, I think that was probably the best solution. Don't give the 49ers a new set of downs, don't give them an easy TD, make it 4th and goal again from the 7 and give the 49ers a fair chance to get into the endzone without the other team breaking the rules and given the Ravens a chance to stop them fairly without breaking the rules.
It should've been one final FAIR play to decide the game. Instead, we were deprived of that by the refs. Offsetting penalties on 4th down are ALWAYS better than no-calls when there was significant contact that significantly affected the outcome of the play.
I had no dog in this fight. I didn't really care who won and I wasn't rooting for the 49ers. I just wanted to see a great game and a great finish and the refs deprived us of that.
As for the "experts" that you've seen talking about this, they're all morons. And I say that with 100% certainty because anyone bringing up the "within 5 yards" on this doesn't understand NFL rules. The whole "contact within 5 yards" thing goes out the window when the ball is in the air. Doesn't matter if the QB takes 1 step and throws within 0.01 seconds or if he runs around in the pocket for 7 seconds before throwing, when the ball is in the air, any significant contact that impedes the WR is pass interference. This was blatant defensive pass interference. The ball was in the air while Smith was holding Crabtree with both hands and while he was armbaring Crabtree. It was clear-cut defensive pass interference.
The only reason I even brought up illegal contact or holding is because if the refs didn't want to give SF the ball at the 1 yard line, those would've been other options. While illegal contact technically would've been an incorrect call, it would've been acceptable IMO as a compromise.
Also, holding anywhere on the field is illegal as a member of the defense. You cannot grab hold of a receiver's jersey and impede his progress, even within 5 yards. Within 5 yards you can hit the WR, you bump the WR, you can hand-fight with the WR, but you 100% cannot hold him.
No matter how you slice it, no matter when you think the ball went into the air, no matter what any of the would-be expert bloggers or what the pundits say, this was clear-cut defensive pass-interference and/or defensive holding by the letter of the NFL law.
It was unacceptable for the game to essentially end on that play. At worst, the refs should've called offsetting Offensive and defensive pass interference, and there's a very solid case for that because Crabtree did try to push off. And indeed, I think that was probably the best solution. Don't give the 49ers a new set of downs, don't give them an easy TD, make it 4th and goal again from the 7 and give the 49ers a fair chance to get into the endzone without the other team breaking the rules and given the Ravens a chance to stop them fairly without breaking the rules.
It should've been one final FAIR play to decide the game. Instead, we were deprived of that by the refs. Offsetting penalties on 4th down are ALWAYS better than no-calls when there was significant contact that significantly affected the outcome of the play.
At least one of the experts that you say is a moron is former VP of officiating...
Quote:
Tough play that is really close both ways. Good job not calling anything.
A former official supports the current officials' controversial call on the biggest stage in sports. Wow, I'm shocked!!
Sorry for being sarcastic, but this is an expected result. Pereira is NEVER going to criticize the guys he used to work with for a controversial call in the biggest NFL game of the season. It's just not something that ever happens. Officials generally stick with officials. Especially when going against them would create a s***storm of controversy and bad press for the NFL.
A former official supports the current officials' controversial call on the biggest stage in sports. Wow, I'm shocked!!
Sorry for being sarcastic, but this is an expected result. Pereira is NEVER going to criticize the guys he used to work with for a controversial call in the biggest NFL game of the season. It's just not something that ever happens. Officials generally stick with officials. Especially when going against them would create a s***storm of controversy and bad press for the NFL.
Oh ok. Good point. All the times he was on TV in the past or quoted in articles since assuming his position as the Rules Expert/Analyst for Fox where he said the refs got it wrong were clearly based on the same bias that is clouding his judgment on this one.
I'll preface this with I don't know the rules of the NFL 100% but even if the ball was "uncatchable" it doesn't matter because the penalty should have been defensive holding. It doesn't matter if the ball is uncatchable, it would for PI but not for holding.
But then the argument is that the WR initiated by committing illegal contact/illegal hands to the face, with penalties offsetting at best for the offense.
there were bad calls both ways, and anyone saying the refs are the reason the niners didnt score is hilarious. Instead of blaming the refs like Jim Harbaugh always does, how about he comes up with a good excuse for why those 4 plays were terrible. Gore just ripped off a 33 yard run and then didnt touch the ball? Why not try a QB draw or rollout with a guy who is built like a linebacker and has the speed of a rb? Those are the reasons the niners lost.
what is wrong with brain dawkins? why is he so in love in vick? he's making excuses over the bad oline and foles played with that and he played better behind them, there's no excuses, he's not a good qb, i dont get it anymore.
there were bad calls both ways, and anyone saying the refs are the reason the niners didnt score is hilarious. Instead of blaming the refs like Jim Harbaugh always does, how about he comes up with a good excuse for why those 4 plays were terrible. Gore just ripped off a 33 yard run and then didnt touch the ball? Why not try a QB draw or rollout with a guy who is built like a linebacker and has the speed of a rb? Those are the reasons the niners lost.
This is all true, but you still have to make that call. It was so blatant. It was the NFL equivalent of a take down at the blue line in OT to stop a breakaway. It has to be called. They also looked like they got away with pass interference on the play before. I thought overall the refs did a good job of letting a lot go, and not interfering too much. However, there you just call offsetting penalties and replay the down.
This is all true, but you still have to make that call. It was so blatant. It was the NFL equivalent of a take down at the blue line in OT to stop a breakaway. It has to be called. They also looked like they got away with pass interference on the play before. I thought overall the refs did a good job of letting a lot go, and not interfering too much. However, there you just call offsetting penalties and replay the down.
Those refs werent calling very much all game. There were pretty blatant penalties on both sides that werent called that in the regular season most likely would have (such as the the db grabbing Torey Smith's on a ball in the endzone in the 1st that could have resulted in a TD and the when Carey Williams shoved the ref and wasnt ejected) . I liked how they let them play.
