Why The Patriots Got Screwed By The Non-Call At The End Of The Monday Night Game (Tsk! Tsk!)

Yahoo Finance ^ | 11/19/13 | Tony Manfred

[AngelesCrestHighway]

The New England Patriots lost to the Carolina Panthers 24-20 after a controversial ending on Monday Night Football. On the final play of the game, an official threw a flag after Carolina linebacker Luke Kuechly appeared to interfere with New England tight end Rob Gronkowski in the end zone. If the pass interference penalty was called, the Patriots would have had one untimed play from the one-yard line to win the game. But the officials ended up picking up the flag, declaring the game over, and running off the field without an explanation. Tom Brady was furious after the game, chasing down the officials and cursing them out in the tunnel. There was a ton of confusion about this. ESPN's in-house refereeing consultant said it wasn't pass interference, but everyone else seemed to think it was a clear penalty.

[eyedigress]

F the pats.

[Steve_Seattle]

"Except it was an obviously catchable ball"

It was not obviously catchable except by the guy who intercepted it. Gronkowski was about five yards past the ball, and his momentum was carrying him away from the ball even without the interference. I am not a rules expert, but you can argue that it was not pass interference because Gronkowski almost certainly could not have caught the pass - he would have had to go through the defender to get it (the pass was low, not one that Gronkowski could have used his height advantage on).

But holding is another thing - Gronkowski was clearly held - and in that case it might not matter whether the ball was catchable or not.

[rlmorel]

I used to go out to Buffalo every year on a road trip with 20 guys to watch the game when the Pats went out there beginning in 1994. Last time I went with that whole group was in 2006, but have gone back a few times since.

I have nothing but praise for Buffalo fans as a football town.

We have beaten them more than they us, but I never got any more than good-natured ribbing while tailgating with Patriots gear. Quite the opposite, they were knowlegeable about both their own team and their opponent, and there have been many times they have shared alcohol and food with us...and vice versa.

All things run in cycles, and someday they will be the ones on top, and I expect them to be just as gracious.

[Steve_Seattle]

"The ball could not have been caught by Gronkowski because it was too low and behind his back."

Brady admitted as much after the game - it was a terrible throw, and Gronk didn't have a chance for it - it was low, and the defender was between him and the ball. Dilfer was all wrong, and looked goofy recreating the play during the post-game show. If Brady had made the usual high throw where Gronk uses his height to make the catch at the back of the end zone, it would clearly have been pass interference because he was clearly held.

Which raises the distinction between holding and pass interference - USUALLY, holding is not predicated on whether the ball was catchable. So I don't know what the right call is, but I am certain that Gronkowski could not have caught that ball.

[dead]

Has any New England team ever lost a game without their fan base crying about the officiating?

[kevkrom]

The other rule I hate, probably IMHO the stupidest idea the NFL ever came up with, is the “crossing the plane of the end zone” bs. Unless the ball carrier/receiver steps one foot into the end zone, or as he goes down, the ball ends up being in the end zone, it should not be considered a TD. The “crossing the plane” thing is just stupid... I’ve seen multiple plays where the guy runs OOB at about the one yard line and holds the ball way out over the pylons. That IS NOT a TD!!!!!!

Uh, yes, it is. The entire game, as far as determining down and distance, is based on the position of the ball, not the person carrying it. "Breaking the plane" is a TD because if the ball were to be spotted for the next down, it would be in the end zone; same reason why the entire ball has to be out of the end zone to avoid a safety.

[Labyrinthos]

The guy gets paid millions and still he needs to whine, grow up.

Since when does chasing the referees into the tunnel while using "colorful" language to make an arguably valid point about a game-changing call constitute whining? If I was paying my quarterback millions of dollars and he didn't have something to say after a controversial call like that, then he would soon be my ex-quarterback. This is about team leadership, and if Brady had simply said "awe shucks" and walked off the field, then he would have lost the respect of his teammates, management, fans, and opposing teams.

BTW -- As a Jets fan, I despise Brady and the Pats.

[Labyrinthos]

It was not obviously catchable except by the guy who intercepted it.

It was arguably catchable to the referee who immediately threw the flag otherwise he never would have thrown the flag in the first place.

[haroldeveryman]

The Gronkster was run off of the ball!

[Buckeye McFrog]

If Brady had not underthrown his receiver by at least five yards, he might have a case.

[gas_dr]

You are correct you are not a referee. In order for defensive pass interference to be called there must be a legal forward pass that is catchable. Defensive pass interferenvce Only can be called ionize the ball is tossed. Before that defensive holding can be considered.

[kenmcg]

Bellichick and his Pats have been cheating for years. What goes round comes around and the chickens have come home to roost.

[privatedrive]

Yep - gay. Can anyone watch this and not think he’s gay? Even gays say Brady is gay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Px6FCu7BQ0

[dfwgator]

Well he’s got a heckuva “beard”, then.

[Steve_Seattle]

It’s hard for the ref to watch the play on the receiver and the flight of the ball - that never got to the receiver - at the same time. He probably threw the flag based on what he saw happen to the receiver, and then the other refs ruled the ball was uncatchable. But as I said in my post, pass interference and holding are two different penalties, and if the penalty is holding it might be irrelevant whether the ball was catchable. Holding often occurs early in a route, before it is even possible to establish whether the ball would have been catchable.

[privatedrive]

“Uh, yes, it is. The entire game, as far as determining down and distance, is based on the position of the ball, not the person carrying it.”

Unless it’s in the back of the end zone, in which case the ball doesn’t have to break the plane in the field of play at all. Furthermore, even if it does, and the player doesn’t maintain control of the ball all the way to the ground, it’s ruled incomplete. I agree with the guy who said the ‘breaking the plane’ rule is stupid, and wildly inconsistent!

[Labyrinthos]

I understand what you are saying, but after having watched the play again and again from every angle, the call should have been interference. The issue is not whether he would have caught the ball, but whether he would have had an opportunity to catch the ball if not for the contact. Forget about the fact that this is Gronk who has a long history of catching uncatchable balls; in my opinion any decent TE/WR would have had a legitimate shot at making the catch if not for the mugging. Again, I am a Jets fan. I'm glad the Pats lost. But the refs got this one wrong.

[rlmorel]

Ah, yes. The slander used by liberals everywhere to deface someone they dislike, a particularly egregious form of hypocrisy, since many of them doing the slandering are homosexuals themselves.

[TruthFactor]

Per the video, that was definitely interference. He was prevented from returning to the vicinity of the ball.

With that said, I really don't care.

[CatherineofAragon]

LOL, that makes Justin Bieber look masculine in comparison!