Why the final Niners play was definitely NOT holding

[ExiledInIllinois]

Although roughing the kicker is sometimes called when the kicker is perceived to be vulnerable to injury (i.e., when the kicker's foot is still in the air), there is nothing in the NFL rule book that states this. Ultimately it is up to the referee's judgement to determine the severity of contact and potential for injury. There also is no mention of "malicious intent" by the way. This from the NFL rule book...

 

 

 

So, I guess it is debatable...

 

Another "push."

 

[NoSaint]

 

 

 

 

Although roughing the kicker is sometimes called when the kicker is perceived to be vulnerable to injury (i.e., when the kicker's foot is still in the air), there is nothing in the NFL rule book that states this. Ultimately it is up to the referee's judgement to determine the severity of contact and potential for injury. There also is no mention of "malicious intent" by the way. This from the NFL rule book...

 

 

 

So, I guess it is debatable...

 

Post rule 12 article 9 section 2 item 2(b)

 

It specifically defines running into the kicker as sliding under the raised leg so the kicker can't cleanly complete the motion

 

Item 1(b) defines roughing as contacting the plant leg in that situation

 

Seems to me 2(b) is the best definition here, as Akers came down without actual contact with the guy under his leg.... Using the complete rule typically helps clarify the debates. I'd imagine this is further defined in the case book but I don't think there's a ton of debate here.

Edited February 5, 2013 by NoSaint

[NewEra]

The refs were the best I've seen all season. They let the players play. I applaud them.

[Kemp]

Anyone who could not see that a flag should have been thrown on that pass is clearly not paying attention or had a rooting interest. If that exact scenario happened to the Bills, the opinion of the original poster would have done a 180.

[RkFast]

Anyone who could not see that a flag should have been thrown on that pass is clearly not paying attention or had a rooting interest. If that exact scenario happened to the Bills, the opinion of the original poster would have done a 180.

 

And if the Bills lost another Super Bowl on a borderline judgement call flag, youd be committing Hari Kari right about now.

 

The refs are NOT going to throw a flag there unless the receiver gets mugged so bad its indisputable. Will never happen in that situation nor should it. And moreso, the refs were allowing that kind of contact all game. Suddenly, on the last play they are going to change? No way.

[Section242]

Flacco was hit out of bounds earlier in the 4th. I just think of the pass interference @ New England where the ball was no where near being catchable and a flag was thrown.

[LynchMob23]

The holding (such as it was) occurred after the ball was released, which is interference. From the 5 to the 1, they were each battling each other, with Crabtree clearly pushing off. For anyone who thinks that ball was catchable, watch it again. If "catchable" mains that the greatest catch in super bowl history is made, then yes, it was catchable. Seriously, though - please. Kaepernick released the ball even before Crabtree had reached the end zone, and when Kaepernick released it Crabtree was over ten yards from where the ball actually landed (out of bounds near the right corner). The laws of physics would have to be pretty pliable for that ball to be catchable by a human.

 

On the Niners side, Kaepernick said that they saw the blitz and checked to a back shoulder fade. The Ravens however, also said post-game they knew that when Kaepernick tapped the back of his helmet, that was the signal for a back-shoulder fade and covered accordingly. For all of the talk of this call, very few Niners fans have admitted they got away with a killshot on Flacco a yard plus out of bounds the third down prior for Ravens.

[Maury Ballstein]

It's holding....in the first half.....or if it was buffalo playing d

 

Not the bills playing so don't really care but disagree w the OP refs easily coulda have thrown flag

 

 

[Homey D. Clown]

http://www.nfl.com/v...ay-s-last-stand

 

Watch it again. In particular, watch where Crabtree is when the ball is released. He's at the 1 - four yards from the LOS. Given the five yard rule, Smith was basically within in his rights. More importantly, after the ball is released, the call - assuming you're going to make one -- BY DEFINITION has to be interference, not defensive holding. (You don't see this much because rarely will you see a pass released so quickly. Great defensive call by the Ravens there). And, since it could only be interference, there was no call to make because it was clearly and obviously uncatchable, landing out of bounds and far from any potential receiver even if there had been no contact. It was, after all, a desperation heave. Case closed. And no, I'm not a Ravens fan. Just a relatively impartial observer.

 

Wrong.

 

You can't hold at any yard line, and if you actually watch the play again, you'll see the defender's hand grabbing the backside of Crabtree's jersey, actually pulling the #5 to his side. That's illegal whether it's within 5 yards or not.

[Dibs]

It doesn't matter. The question is not about how deep they dug a hole for themselves. The question is: Did the refs fail to enforce the rules? The answer is yes. On two distinct and blantant plays. The refs are not to decipher the game. They are there to call and judge every moment and play and then move on to the next forgetting what happened in the past. Was there holding on 4th down? Yes. Was there holding on the safety play? Yes. What seems to be the problem......

 

Very well put.

[Dante]

What about the blatant helmet to helmet hit on the previous play. No unecessary roughness? no flag for that?

 

The game was great, and was about to go down in history until the refs decided to turn their collective heads and give Ray Lewis a going away present. A terrible end to an exciting game.

Jerome Bettis syndrome all over again? At this level of event the refereeing should be impeccable.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

Very well put.

 

the problem with it all coming down to one play and 'it should have been called' v. 'it should not have been called' is the same one you have as a team when you let it come down to one or two plays: the game is 60 minutes long and it's unreasoanble to look at one call-non-call without looking at the game as a whole. additionally, there are several elements all being looked at the same time---pushing off/holding/interference/catchable ball--and that's just on the players involved. how many calls were missed earlier in the game, a game where most acknowledge you can find a hold/penalty on every play in every game. how many of those missed calls might have tipped the game one way or the other?

 

in the end, the niners lost in large part because they were cold early and got hot too late, and the hole that they dug required just about everything to go their way for the remainder of the game. complaining about the officiating in that case is understandable but shortsighted, especially in light of the fact that a call doesn't guarantee them the win anyway.

 

and yes, if it's the bills of buffalo, i'm on the window ledge of a one story building if it goes against us, and typing exactly what i typed above if it goes for us.

Edited February 5, 2013 by timmo1805

[All_Pro_Bills]

I find it hilarious the 49ers are complaining about an iffy non-called pass intereference penalty when the reason they likely got to the super Bowl in the first place was because they themselves got away with an absolutely blatant pass interefence penalty against the Falcons on a 4th and 4 play deep inside the red zone at the end of their game.

 

The 49ers LB held Julio Jones virtually the entire time as he ran across the middle of the field, then literally tackled him before the ball got there, causing an incomplete pass. Yet, they have the nerve to complain about a totally iffy call to begin with? Talk about hypocrites.

Bowman was mugging Roddy White on that play in the NFC Championship. So the saying goes live by the sword, die by the sword.

 

IMO, given the 'guidelines' the ref's had set for reciever/defender play during the game they made the correct call by not throwing the flag. The message was this is the way we're going to call the game.

 

In the strictest interpretation of the rules it was definitely holding. But again it wasn't an absolute question of whether it was a hold or not. Was the play within the context of how they called the entire game? I think yes.

 

Let's face it, that's a no win situation for the officials. If they throw the flag we end up with a bunch of bitching session threads whinning about how the ref's decided the outcome of the game.

[NoSaint]

Anyone who could not see that a flag should have been thrown on that pass is clearly not paying attention or had a rooting interest. If that exact scenario happened to the Bills, the opinion of the original poster would have done a 180.

 

or do you have a rooting interest against the refs after all these years?

 

if it were the bills i would have been frustrated (as a bills fan that isnt reasonable) but not shocked by the call based on the context of how that game was called and that penalty is called (as a fan of the game) -- but mostly upset by the fact that the QB used a check that the defense had already figured out to get to a throw that hes not very good at, to a receiver that blew his route.

Edited February 5, 2013 by NoSaint

[Lurker]

Those players were TOLD to hold. That is not right.

You may not think it's "right" but it was a brilliant call by the Ravens coaching staff. They used the rule book, as written today, in a completely appropriate manner.

 

As an aside with regard to the OP, when the no-call on the fourth down was made, my first thought was "...if it had been the Bills in that same goal line stand situation in any of their SBs, how likely would it have been that they'd been flagged...and we'd be talking about how the refs determined the outcome of the game?"

[Rubes]

I feel like I'm in the twilight zone reading this thread.

 

Wrong.

 

You can't hold at any yard line, and if you actually watch the play again, you'll see the defender's hand grabbing the backside of Crabtree's jersey, actually pulling the #5 to his side. That's illegal whether it's within 5 yards or not.

 

If you read through the entire thread, you'll realize that's not what he's saying. If you grab and hold someone, yes, it is illegal. But if you grab and hold someone before the ball is thrown, it is "holding." If you grab and hold someone after the ball is thrown, it is "pass interference."

 

In cases of pass interference, however, the refs have the ability to make a judgment call on whether the ball was catchable or not. If they think not, they don't have to throw the flag. This is what Dave is arguing: that it was pass interference, not holding, but that since the ball was not catchable, there was no foul.

 

The problem I have with that argument is that we rarely see the "non-catchable ball" called on the field anymore. One could argue that the ball was non-catchable explicitly because the receiver was held and prevented from getting to it. I'm not saying that was the case here, but I fully expected to see the flag thrown on that play because there was clear contact, and because we hardly ever see them rule that the ball is not catchable anymore.

 

Either way, I don't really care -- it was fine with me. I'd rather see no call in those situations.

Edited February 5, 2013 by Rubes

[KD in CA]

How would a flag have helped the 49ers? A flag would not have put time back on the clock. Also a hold in the end zone is a safety = same result.

 

The Ravens were smart. In that situation, they recognized they could hold with impunity and did so accordingly.

Exactly right. Excellent coaching by the Ravens there. People are really grasping at straws crying about that play; refs simply didn't bother to call holding since the result of the play was exactly the same.

 

 

That no holding calls on the Ravens on the safety play cost them almost 10 seconds.

WTF are you talking about? Since when do they put time back on the clock when someone is flagged for offensive holding?

[Doc]

The ball was uncatchable anyway.

[Dibs]

.....how many calls were missed earlier in the game.....how many of those missed calls might have tipped the game one way or the other?

 

.....complaining about the officiating in that case is understandable but shortsighted, especially in light of the fact that a call doesn't guarantee them the win anyway.

 

I believe that every obvious penalty that occurs should incur a flag. It just happens that the play being discussed was at the end of the game....hence the opinion that it should have been flagged.....just like any other obvious penalty.

 

That being said however....penalties(or non called penalties) are actually more important for the refs to get correct, as the effected team has no chance to overcome the ref's error, unlike during a mid game ref stuff-up.

 

I would be spitting chips if I was a 49ers fan.

(Is that a purely Aussie expression?)

Edited February 5, 2013 by Dibs

[Ray]

It was a great no call. Crabtree could have been called for offensive interference too. Offensive players are NOT allowed to grab the facemask of the defensive player and throw him to the ground. Jim Harbaugh looks like a whiner by continually crying about that play.

The intial assessment of this thread was correct. They are engaged at the 1 yard line the ball is thrown and is uncatchable a couple yards out of the end zone. Let them play. It was a bad offensive play call letting Colin K do what he does worst which is touch passes. He is not a good thrower on short passes. Harbaugh should look at himself and relaize you have one, if not the best running QB in the game and have one play from inside the 5 and you have him throw a fade route? Bad choice. Put players in position to do what they do best, and that is what he does worst. Bad coaching, not bad referee calling.