ADVERTISEMENT

Packers - Bucs NFC Championship game thread

Don't disagree that he grabbed the Jersey (do disagree that it was more blatant than the grab by the TB defender that enable him to make the INT in first half) - however, the call made was PI, which was a bad call because the ball was not catchable (rule says ball has to be catchable to be a "PI" penalty which is what they called). Watch the replay, the ball was not only way in front of receiver but was also way, way high - it was not catchable and therefore a PI penalty should not have been called (or at the very least should have been reviewed where if it would have been deemed uncatchable it could have been waived off).
Then it would have been holding. Auto first down.
 
damn, PI on GB for the 1st down.

a legit call, IMHO

GB should have milked more clock, and then gone for it on 4th down.
they didn't call holding or PI on a number of plays that were, IMHO, legitimate fighting for the ball players. The hold on that play was too blatant to not call. Had the DB let go really quickly, it's probably not called, but that's not what happened. The ref had no choice.


I’m certainly no Brady fan and I jumped out of my chair at first on the late flag but once you saw the replay, the defender grabbed the jersey and stretched it out, holding the receiver up for a little bit, it was a penalty. Like Tom said, maybe if it was a hand on the hip or hand fighting, it gets let go....but probably not since it’s “Brady” LOL....but that was a penalty.
 
Respectfully, I disagree. There was plenty of holding that was blatant through the game that they let go.

I don’t disagree he held at the end. My problem is the refs have to be consistent. Either you swallow the whistle and “let them play” or you enforce the rules. You can’t change how you call the game in the final 2 minutes. It’s just a consistency issue for me. If they would have called it tight all game then it would not have been an issue.
I agree, the hold on Lazard in the first half was just as blatant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psu00
Don't disagree that he grabbed the Jersey (do disagree that it was more blatant than the grab by the TB defender that enable him to make the INT in first half) - however, the call made was PI, not holding, which was a bad call because the ball was not catchable (rule says ball has to be catchable to be a "PI" penalty which is what they called). Watch the replay, the ball was not only way in front of receiver but was also way, way high - it was not catchable and therefore a PI penalty should not have been called (or at the very least should have been reviewed where if it would have been deemed uncatchable it could have been waived off).
Holding or DPI really doesn’t matter, both are an automatic first down. The only difference is field position, which is irrelevant at that point of the game.
 
Guessing a younger Rodgers runs it in or gets blown up trying. Maybe didn't think he could make it.

Don't disagree he might not have made it, but he gets very close if he doesn't. GB almost certainly goes for it from the goal line. Still say there's a good chance he scores if he runs away from pursuit (nobody near him when he threw) toward front-right flag. Gets very close at the very least, if he doesn't score on play outright.
 
Then it would have been holding. Auto first down.

Nope, they can't change the call on review. The penalty called, which was PI, could have -and should have - been waived off as the ball was clearly not catchable, which is part of the definition of the penalty (i.e., PI Penalty mandates that ball must be catchable for there to be a penalty).
 
Unfortunately reminded me of the end of Kentucky - PSU when Franklin kicked the FG and kicked the game away hoping for a stop.
 
Chalk flew up when he pulled the jersey. LOl
The call was WAY LATE, which is indicative that maybe it should not have been made in the first place. They let them play all game long, but when it really mattered, Brady got the call.
 
The call was WAY LATE, which is indicative that maybe it should not have been made in the first place. They let them play all game long, but when it really mattered, Brady got the call.
So then the call that didn’t get made for the Saints last year was okay as long as they hadn’t called many penalties all game?
 
Nope, they can't change the call on review. The penalty called, which was PI, could have -and should have - been waived off as the ball was clearly not catchable, which is part of the definition of the penalty (i.e., PI Penalty mandates that ball must be catchable for there to be a penalty).
So, using your logic a defender can hold a receiver, impeding his progress making what would otherwise be a catchable ball uncatchable, and there’s no penalty? Doesn’t work that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sluggo72
Am I the only one who saw GB not get a play off on their last drive with no penalty? It wasn't close. Not as bad as the osu FG, but at least a full second. GB picked 7 on 2nd & 10 from the 30 with 3 mins left.
 
Am I the only one who saw GB not get a play off on their last drive with no penalty? It wasn't close. Not as bad as the osu FG, but at least a full second. GB picked 7 on 2nd & 10 from the 30 with 3 mins left.
yeah it was pretty bad but it might be one of those things where the official time isn't exactly the shown time dealies
 
So, using your logic a defender can hold a receiver, impeding his progress making what would otherwise be a catchable ball uncatchable, and there’s no penalty? Doesn’t work that way.

Wrong, what occurred does not change the trajectory of the ball - the ball was way, way over the head of both the receiver & defender which had zippo to do with the jersey pull. BTW, the PI Rule saying the ball must be catchable to be a penalty is not "my logic", it's the actual rule.
 
The call was WAY LATE, which is indicative that maybe it should not have been made in the first place. They let them play all game long, but when it really mattered, Brady got the call.
Winners make their own luck.
 
Holding or DPI really doesn’t matter, both are an automatic first down. The only difference is field position, which is irrelevant at that point of the game.

Yea, but the fact the call made was PI does make a huge difference because a PI Penalty can be waived off if It is deemed that the pass was not catchable.
 
Wrong, what occurred does not change the trajectory of the ball - the ball was way, way over the head of both the receiver & defender which had zippo to do with the jersey pull. BTW, the PI Rule saying the ball must be catchable to be a penalty is not "my logic", it's the actual rule.
But they don’t define what an uncatchable ball is. If an official thinks it’s only uncatchable because the receiver’s jersey was pulled, they can call the penalty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pocono Lion
Watch the replay, the ball was not only way in front of receiver but was also way, way high - it was not catchable and therefore a PI penalty should not have been called (or at the very least should have been reviewed where if it would have been deemed uncatchable it could have been waived off).
Pass Interference isn’t reviewable.
 
But they don’t define what an uncatchable ball is. If an official thinks it’s only uncatchable because the receiver’s jersey was pulled, they can call the penalty.

In this case, the ball was way over their heads as well. The call could have - and probably should have (given the way the rest of game was called) - been overturned. Ball was clearly not catchable, jersey-pull or not.
 
In this case, the ball was way over their heads as well. The call could have - and probably should have (given the way the rest of game was called) - been overturned. Ball was clearly not catchable, jersey-pull or not.
It wasn’t as uncatchable as you’re making it out to be. If his jersey hadn’t been pulled it would have looked a heck of a lot more catchable.
 
Close game. The two things that swayed it for the Buccaneers was Tom Brady and a more physical defense.
 
Now you’re scrambling. Was it not a penalty because the ball was uncatchable or because they weren’t calling it all game? Which is it??

I'm scrambling? You're saying a clear and blatant PI on a catchable ball that results in an ILLEGAL interception (i.e., not only no PI despite blatant holding, but you reward the defense with a possession takeaway on a clearly illegal interception). But on an identical tug by a GB defender, on an obvious uncatchable ball, you should reward the offense with a bs penalty and extra possession (given it was a failed 3rd Down) that effectively ends the game??? And I'm the one scrambling and reaching in defending the absurd and inconsistent officiating in this game. LMAO.
 
Last edited:
I'm scrambling? You're saying a clear and blatant PI on a catchable ball that results in an ILLEGAL interception (i.e., not only no PI despite blatant holding, but you reward the defense with a possession takeaway on a clearly illegal interception). But on an identical tug by a GB defender, on an obvious uncatchable ball, you should reward the offense with a bs penalty and extra possession (given it was a failed 3rd Down) that effectively ends the game??? And I'm the one scrambling and reaching in defending the absurd and inconsistent officiating in this game. LMAO.
The tug by GB was far more clear and blatant than the one by TB.
 
Not remotely equivalent. The PI was called because defender pulled the jersey with separation from receivers back for 3 steps and a dive. The interception call was on a very brief hand on the shoulder that was easily not seen or not deemed impactful to the play.
 
Not remotely equivalent. The PI was called because defender pulled the jersey with separation from receivers back for 3 steps and a dive. The interception call was on a very brief hand on the shoulder that was easily not seen or not deemed impactful to the play.

Yea, he just "touched his shoulder" LMAO.







By the way, on the very same play the Officials let this beyond obvious penalty go:







Here's a link to the entire article:


In the article, former NFL Coach and now commentator, Tony Dungey, says the officiating was horrendously inconsistent.
 
Last edited:
Not remotely equivalent. The PI was called because defender pulled the jersey with separation from receivers back for 3 steps and a dive. The interception call was on a very brief hand on the shoulder that was easily not seen or not deemed impactful to the play.

Gee, this article would also tend to diametrically disagree with you and agree with what I stated near identically - go figure! :

 
Not remotely equivalent. The PI was called because defender pulled the jersey with separation from receivers back for 3 steps and a dive. The interception call was on a very brief hand on the shoulder that was easily not seen or not deemed impactful to the play.

to add: The pull went on so long the defender Had time to switch hands on the jersey.
 
Yea, he just "touched his shoulder" LMAO.







By the way, on the very same play the Officials let this beyond obvious penalty go:







Here's a link to the entire article:


In the article, former NFL Coach and now commentator, Tony Dungey, says the officiating was horrendously inconsistent.
You could find pictures like this for any team playing any game if you’re looking for it. You could find far more against the Bills in the next game and none of those were called. Either you’re a big Green Bay fan or you hate Brady to be this obsessed with one call that was the right call.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT