You know, the one on Mahomes’ interception. The refs called pass interference, announced the call, and then huddled together and voluntarily overturned their own call after they announced it.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen that before. Someone explain how that happens without a challenge. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DanT:
Do you believe that what happened on the field was pass interference? I'm not disputing that pass interference was called. I'm asking you whether in your opinion that play should have been called pass interference? In my opinion, it clearly was not pass interference. To me, it is completely plausible that one of the officials on the field, when he heard the announced call that it was pass interference, felt that this was a bad mistake and he took steps to fix it. Indeed, calling pass interference on that play was ridiculous, because there was no way that Kelce was going to catch that ball. There can't be pass interference committed against a receiver who would otherwise had not been able to catch the pass. This is very basic and common football knowledge. It would have been wrong for the officials to call that play pass interference. They did call it that at first, but they corrected the egregious call afterward. That's all they could do. They can't say, "well, we're wrong to call it pass interference, but it was illegal contact or it was holding." That wasn't an option, given the rules. What was an option was to correct the bad call, which is what they did.
Originally Posted by DanT:
Do you believe that what happened on the field was pass interference? I'm not disputing that pass interference was called. I'm asking you whether in your opinion that play should have been called pass interference? In my opinion, it clearly was not pass interference. To me, it is completely plausible that one of the officials on the field, when he heard the announced call that it was pass interference, felt that this was a bad mistake and he took steps to fix it. Indeed, calling pass interference on that play was ridiculous, because there was no way that Kelce was going to catch that ball. There can't be pass interference committed against a receiver who would otherwise had not been able to catch the pass. This is very basic and common football knowledge. It would have been wrong for the officials to call that play pass interference. They did call it that at first, but they corrected the egregious call afterward. That's all they could do. They can't say, "well, we're wrong to call it pass interference, but it was illegal contact or it was holding." That wasn't an option, given the rules. What was an option was to correct the bad call, which is what they did.
their mistake was calling it DPI which it wasn’t. it was holding or illegal contact. [Reply]
Originally Posted by SAUTO:
Yes, it was. But that’s not reviewable... they said on the field it was during the pass and we can’t ask to review that.
So, they just give the ball to the Texans, even though they threw the flag in the first place, which indicates "free play" to the QB?
It was never reviewed, period. They didn't review it themselves. They listened to their little earpiece. If they can just be like "our bad, it's not DPI", then they can change it to illegal contact.
But they didn't - they seized the opportunity to get Houston back in the game.
They should've went with the call on the field and made Houston challenge the DPI call. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DanT:
They can't say, "well, we're wrong to call it pass interference, but it was illegal contact or it was holding." That wasn't an option, given the rules. What was an option was to correct the bad call, which is what they did.
why can't they?
If they can change it to what it ISN'T - a no-call interception - with no challenge, they can change it to what it really was - illegal contact. [Reply]
it wasn’t DPI. they said it was, but it wasn’t. it was either holding or illegal contact. the ball was not thrown to Kelce so it can’t be DPI. like i said, they called it wrong. [Reply]
Originally Posted by rabblerouser:
So, they just give the ball to the Texans, even though they threw the flag in the first place, which indicates "free play" to the QB?
It was never reviewed, period. They didn't review it themselves. They listened to their little earpiece. If they can just be like "our bad, it's not DPI", then they can change it to illegal contact.
But they didn't - they seized the opportunity to get Houston back in the game.
Well since it wasn’t pass interference then ummm yeah it was an interception.
There was nothing to review. The pass didn’t go to kelce and they said the contact happened while the ball was in the air. So nothing is reviewable by rule.
Pat should have thrown the ball at Kelce if he wanted the call. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mosbonian:
So....if a DB wants to trip, grab, tackle or otherwise physically harass a receiver to whom the ball is not being thrown there is no penalty?
I know what I would be telling my players.....once the ball is in the air and you see it isn't coming to the guy you are covering, knock the crap out of him.
As I said, after the ball has become a forward pass, the DB can do to a receiver who is not able to get to the ball anything that the DB can do to any other offensive player. There are things that defenders can do to offensive players that can put those offensive players on the ground legally and there are things that can't be done. That's how the game has always been played, in terms of defense vs. offense. It's also true that DB and receivers will sometimes be unduly kind to one another and choose not to engage in what would be legal contact, but there is nothing outlawing that. If DBs made a point of taking out receivers when they could do it legally, they would protect themselves against hook-and-ladder plays and the like.
Kelce, a 6'5" 250 lb tight end, ended up on the ground, after getting locked up with a Lonnie Johnson, Jr., a 6'2" 213 lb DB. The initial contact happened within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage, making it legal at that moment. There appears from the replay that there was also contact beyond five yards that might have been while Mahomes still had the ball and which would have thus, by the strict letter of the law, represented illegal contact, but that's the kind of thing that happens routinely in the NFL and often is not called. It's arguable that it should be called, as Mahomes didn't throw at Kelce and Kelce's engagement with that defender kept that defender occupied, seemingly at Kelce's discretion because there isn't really any fuckin' reason for a player as big as Kelce to let himself be manhandled by a smaller DB.
Personally, I don't want to watch football games where ticky-tack fouls get called. That's not football.
According to Mahomes comments after the game, Kelce got locked up while doing a designed "double move" that, had it been successful, would have put Kelce in the vicinity of the ball. In other words, Mahomes is claiming that Kelce was the intended target and that he threw the ball to where he did because he saw Kelce begin to execute the double move, https://www.kansascity.com/sports/nf...236092143.html
If that's true, then that clearly establishes that Mahomes was not "taking a shot" downfield because he saw a flag. It also invites the question, would any reasonable football fan want to have a pass like that be considered catchable by Kelce. I sure wouldn't. Kelce was nowhere near the football. I don't like when refs give teams yards they didn't actually earn. I would have liked it better had the refs called illegal contact, but I can see what they didn't and non-calls like that happen all of the time. That call is not why the Chiefs lost that game yesterday. [Reply]
Originally Posted by rabblerouser:
So, they just give the ball to the Texans, even though they threw the flag in the first place, which indicates "free play" to the QB?
It was never reviewed, period. They didn't review it themselves. They listened to their little earpiece. If they can just be like "our bad, it's not DPI", then they can change it to illegal contact.
But they didn't - they seized the opportunity to get Houston back in the game.
They should've went with the call on the field and made Houston challenge the DPI call.
if it was rigged then why wouldn’t the want KC to win? Mahomes is reigning MVP and people turn their channel to watch him. people thinking the NFL is rigged are a bunch of wimps [Reply]
Originally Posted by rabblerouser:
why can't they?
If they can change it to what it ISN'T - a no-call interception - with no challenge, they can change it to what it really was - illegal contact.
Once again, the ref explained this, they said the contact happened while the ball was in the air. That was the call on the field. They were probably wrong BUT that’s not reviewable.
He even said “ the contact happened while the ball was in the air, so it’s not d holding”... [Reply]
Originally Posted by rabblerouser:
why can't they?
If they can change it to what it ISN'T - a no-call interception - with no challenge, they can change it to what it really was - illegal contact.
The NFL has specific rules about what kind of plays are and are not reviewable. Certain kinds of judgment calls are not reviewable, including making illegal contact with a receiver. The list is available here, https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules...lebook/#rule15
Here are things that can be reviewed
Originally Posted by 2019 NFL Rules:
The Replay System will cover the following play situations:
Plays involving possession (see Section 3, Article 2).
Plays involving touching of either the ball or the ground (see Section 3, Article 3).
Plays governed by the goal line (see Section 3, Article 4).
Plays governed by the boundary lines (see Section 3, Article 5).
Plays governed by the line of scrimmage (see Section 3, Article 6).
Plays governed by the line to gain (see Section 3, Article 7).
Number of players on the field at the snap (see Section 3, Article 8).
Game administration (see Section 3, Article 9).
Penalty enforcement.
Proper down.
Spot of a foul.
Status of the game clock.
Pass interference (see Section 3, Article 10).
Disqualification of a player (see Section 3, Article 11).
Other reviewable plays (see Section 3, Article 12).
Here are some things that can not be reviewed
Originally Posted by 2019 NFL Rules:
SECTION 4 - NON-REVIEWABLE PLAYS
The following aspects of plays are not reviewable:
Whether an erroneous whistle sounded;
Whether a ball was illegally batted or kicked;
Whether a passer intentionally grounded a pass;
Whether an ineligible receiver was downfield before a pass;
Whether a receiver was illegally contacted;
The spot of a loose ball crossing the sideline;
Whether a block was illegal; and
Any aspect of a play not listed as reviewable in Section 3 of this Rule.
Originally Posted by ljmhawk:
if it was rigged then why wouldn’t the want KC to win? Mahomes is reigning MVP and people turn their channel to watch him. people thinking the NFL is rigged are a bunch of wimps
Because they hyped the Mahomes v Watson match up all week like it was Ali v Frazier, and CBS was BROADCASTING IT TO 95% OF THE COUNTRY.
They don't give a fuck if the Chiefs win or lose, they just want close games in the 4th qtr.
People who don't see the manipulation are monosyllabic rubes. [Reply]
For 2019, the NFL made pass interference calls and non-calls reviewable. This was notable because pass interference is a judgment call and judgment calls are the sort of thing that is hard to make reviewable in a way that seems transparent and fair and without disrupting what fans have come to expect as OK and not OK. [Reply]
The unanswered question is what prompted them to change the call after they had huddled, announced the call, moved the ball forward and chiefs were preparing for the next snap. [Reply]