Re: Now the controversy moves to the Gronkowski interference call
 

Actually the Pats have been involved in 3 controversial plays to end games.

The Jets game had that penalty on the missed FG by the Jets allowing them to kick it again and win in OT.

Re: Now the controversy moves to the Gronkowski interference call
 

It's history and moot at this point.

Re: Now the controversy moves to the Gronkowski interference call
 

Yeah, and I agree with the "uncatchable" argument (somewhat) that prompted the stripes to reverse the call, but I had NE in this one, :pissed:.

Re: Now the controversy moves to the Gronkowski interference call
 

My point is remove the subjective PI and you still have two penalties. Holding and illegal contact. Ever seen those calls on the line during a pass play? Same rules they were just closer to the point of reception. What Gronk did or didn't do doesn't negate those penalties. You can't wrap a receiver period. If you could we would just wrap them on the snap and be done with it.

Re: Now the controversy moves to the Gronkowski interference call
 

I agree no PI, but illegal contact at least.

Did you hear Brady screaming at the ref after the game? He was screaming and throwing a huge fit. I understand that he was fired up but I've seen him throw too many tantrums for it not to be annoying.

Re: Now the controversy moves to the Gronkowski interference call
 

Not really Karma for us though, we get screwed twice by a undeserved loss and a division rivsl winning

Re: Now the controversy moves to the Gronkowski interference call
 

That's where I'm having a problem with the call/non-call ... I heard something about the PI being reversed because the interception was an invalidating action and the ball was uncatchable, et... and I'll accept that, but the way Kuechly was wrapping Gronk up woulda' been criminal in a civilian court, so they're shoulda' been some kind of call, IMO.

And what about the point that the ball was in the air, so it couldn't be anything but PI, which has already been negated by the interception?

It's a very confusing call to me, as these kind usually are. :neutral:

Re: Now the controversy moves to the Gronkowski interference call
 

The problem with illegal contact (i.e., defensive holding) is that it must occur before the pass is in the air. The illegal contact came after the ball is released. So that penalty is off the table.

The PI is the real question mark here. I just think Gronk needed to fight through the bear hug and he didn't sell it. It cost them the penalty and a chance to win the game.

Re: Now the controversy moves to the Gronkowski interference call
 

The biggest thing for me is that it wasn't the ref who threw the flag who reversed it, it was that country bumpkin Clete Blakeman who picked up the flag and gave no real explanation for the non-call...you just can't get away with holding of that magnitude on an endzone play.

Re: Now the controversy moves to the Gronkowski interference call
 

From this it looks like Gronk plants his right foot as if he is gonna break on the ball...clearly he is obstructed by Kuechly though. I think this one came straight from vegas.