Final TD hold against Hughes

[The Big Cat]

Like I said before. The argument for offensive holding can be made on just about every play of every game if you want to go by the letter of the law. I could watch the game again and spot two dozen "holding" penalties like the one being argued about here that Bills linemen committed that didn't draw a flag either. At some point, they have to let them play and only call the blatantly obvious holding penalties. Something like this rarely gets called. Especially when it's late in the game.

 

And like several people responded before: fine. That approach works so long as you don't bail them out on the previous play with a ticky tack PI call. How in god's name do you reconcile that?

[Kelly the Dog]

And like several people responded before: fine. That approach works so long as you don't bail them out on the previous play with a ticky tack PI call. How in god's name do you reconcile that?

Right. And a lot of the "there is holding on every play" calls don't directly affect the play like this one did, and are not done because the defender beat you off the snap like this one was.

[KDS73]

 

And like several people responded before: fine. That approach works so long as you don't bail them out on the previous play with a ticky tack PI call. How in god's name do you reconcile that?

 

So then complain about the ticky tack PI call instead of the no-call on ticky tack "holding." And the level-headed people will still contend that the Bills never should have been in the position to have one bad call decide the game in the first place, and they only have themselves to blame for it. Bad calls are part of the game. And if you don't want to be the victim of one bad call deciding the game against a really bad team, then don't keep handing the ball to them. Bills lost because of Bills mistakes man. Torturing yourself and others with stuff like this isn't going to change that.

Edited October 28, 2015 by KDS73

[The Big Cat]

 

So then complain about the ticky tack PI call instead of the no-call on ticky tack "holding." And the level-headed people will still contend that the Bills never should have been in the position to have one bad call decide the game in the first place, and they only have themselves to blame for it. Bad calls are part of the game. And if you don't want to be the victim of one bad call deciding the game against a really bad team, then don't keep handing the ball to them. Bills lost because of Bills mistakes man. Torturing yourself and others with stuff like this isn't going to change that.

 

You don't seem to follow.

 

They were both bad calls. They both potentially cost the Bills the game.

 

You can be a hardass and talk about how the Bills should win in spite of the refs, and that's fine and all, but it doesn't eliminate the reality that both calls were atrocious. I'm not precisely sure why you're trying to talk fans out of the reality.

[bisonbrigade]

The Bills lost because Roman decided to ride the passing arm of Manuel on 4th and one.

Like I said before. The argument for offensive holding can be made on just about every play of every game if you want to go by the letter of the law. I could watch the game again and spot two dozen "holding" penalties like the one being argued about here that Bills linemen committed that didn't draw a flag either. At some point, they have to let them play and only call the blatantly obvious holding penalties. Something like this rarely gets called. Especially when it's late in the game.

Same goes for pass interference. But they did not follow that on the PI call on 3rd and fifteen.

[KDS73]

 

You don't seem to follow.

 

They were both bad calls. They both potentially cost the Bills the game.

 

You can be a hardass and talk about how the Bills should win in spite of the refs, and that's fine and all, but it doesn't eliminate the reality that both calls were atrocious. I'm not precisely sure why you're trying to talk fans out of the reality.

 

Being a hardass? Is that what you think I'm doing? lol, ok. I'd rather just own up to the fact that the Bills losing was their own fault instead of whining about the refs and making excuses. If that means I'm being a "hardass", then so be it I guess.

[Kelly the Dog]

Being a hardass? Is that what you think I'm doing? lol, ok. I'd rather just own up to the fact that the Bills losing was their own fault instead of whining about the refs and making excuses. If that means I'm being a "hardass", then so be it I guess.

 

This is like a semantic argument though. You are assigning the major reason as the only reason. There are other reasons the Bills lost. The defense giving up that TD is one of them. The calls may or may not be one of them. But you are treating this is as something absolute when I think most of the posters you're arguing with would agree with you that mistakes were the major reason. Like, for example, in a multiple choice question of which of the following is the MOST true, the Bills lost because of their own mistakes, the Bills lost because of bad calls, the Bills lost because of poor coaching, etc, the vast majority would choose a) because of their own mistakes. But it doesn't mean they could not have won even with those mistakes or other factors led to the loss.

[Beerball]

 

Dude, he clearly did (2), in several ways.

 

And it's patently obvious to everyone but you.

This happened: Use his hands or arms to materially restrict an opponent or alter the defender’s path or angle of pursuit.

[dave mcbride]

But he very much used his arms to restrict an opponent or alter the defenders path or angle. And of course the list said "not limited to."

All blockers use their arms to alter the defender's path or angle. It's called "blocking." Jeez!! If you read that line literally, anything except straight up blocking in a vertical direction would be outlawed.

 

The bottom line: that sort of block happens all of the time and the refs don't call holding on it. Watch Thursday's game and you'll see it. I only mention the Thursday game because it's occurring the soonest, and it'll put this debate to rest.

Edited October 28, 2015 by dave mcbride

[JohnC]

 

You don't seem to follow.

 

They were both bad calls. They both potentially cost the Bills the game.

 

You can be a hardass and talk about how the Bills should win in spite of the refs, and that's fine and all, but it doesn't eliminate the reality that both calls were atrocious. I'm not precisely sure why you're trying to talk fans out of the reality.

There is no doubt that that non-call on holding against Hughes and the phantom PI call affected the game for us. What's disturbing is that the officiating in general (for all teams) is so arbitrary and capricious. I hate it when marginal holding calls are flagged away from the play when they have no bearing on the play. The pick play is randomly called.

 

It has gotten to the point where the games are very difficult to watch because of the excessive number of penalties and reviews that affect the continuity of the game. What is the solution? When the league office instructs the officials to concentrate on a particular infraction they go overboard to the point that it becomes nonsensical. How do you tell officials to use good judgment, especially situational judgment, when the officials on the field lack good judgment in general?

 

The problems with the officiating seem to get worse. Maybe the review system is making the officials become lazy? I wish I had some constructive recommendations to make the officiating get better but I don't. I haven't heard any good suggestions that would help make the officiating less exasperating.

[Beerball]

All blockers use their arms to alter the defender's path or angle. It's called "blocking."

Common Dave...Read "C" the header to 1, 2 & 3.

[dave mcbride]

 

And like several people responded before: fine. That approach works so long as you don't bail them out on the previous play with a ticky tack PI call. How in god's name do you reconcile that?

I agree that the PI was an atrocious call, but the non-PI call on Gilmore was arguably a bad non-call. That receiver most likely gets to the ball (or very near it) if he's not held up by Gilmore and driven to the ground. It was a high throw and he's a fast receiver.

[JohnC]

All blockers use their arms to alter the defender's path or angle. It's called "blocking." Jeez!! If you read that line literally, anything except straight up blocking in a vertical direction would be outlawed.

 

The bottom line: that sort of block happens all of the time and the refs don't call holding on it. Watch Thursday's game and you'll see it. I only mention the Thursday game because it's occurring the soonest, and it'll put this debate to rest.

I respectfully disagree. That type of holding usually does get called.

[dave mcbride]

Common Dave...Read "C" the header to 1, 2 & 3.

See what I added immediately above. Watch a game and focus on this issue. You'll see that it happens all of the time. I can't believe that so many are so exercised by this play. It was garden-variety and a good no-call.

I respectfully disagree. That type of holding usually does get called.

No it doesn't. Again, watch a game and focus on it.

[Kelly the Dog]

All blockers use their arms to alter the defender's path or angle. It's called "blocking." Jeez!! If you read that line literally, anything except straight up blocking in a vertical direction would be outlawed.

 

The bottom line: that sort of block happens all of the time and the refs don't call holding on it. Watch Thursday's game and you'll see it. I only mention the Thursday game because it's occurring the soonest, and it'll put this debate to rest.

You seem to be disregarding the element that Hughes beat him bad off the snap. So bad in fact that there was another JAG that Hughes went around and still beat Joekel bad. It is only when Hughes is already halfway around the LT that the LT engages him at all. That is why it's not "inside." Edited October 28, 2015 by Kelly the Dog

[The Big Cat]

See what I added immediately above. Watch a game and focus on this issue. You'll see that it happens all of the time. I can't believe that so many are so exercised by this play. It was garden-variety and a good no-call.

No it doesn't. Again, watch a game and focus on it.

 

When a defender has his back to a blocker and his momentum suddenly halts, it's called 99% of the time.

[Beerball]

See what I added immediately above. Watch a game and focus on this issue. You'll see that it happens all of the time. I can't believe that so many are so exercised by this play. It was garden-variety and a good no-call.

 

It happens all of the time and it's frequently called. This one wasn't. I'm not in the least "exercised" by this, but, you are ignoring how the rule is written. The lineman wasn't blocking him, he was "barring" him IMO.

[dave mcbride]

We are going to have to agree to disagree. I think you guys are living in a dreamworld with regard to the call, and I think you're reacting like a bunch of homers (which is no surprise given that this is a Bills board). After all, many of the same people were irate three short weeks ago about the Urbik holding call, and that certainly looked like more of a hold than this one. And I thought that one was likely an unfair call (although understandable given his reaction; also, whatever outrage I had was mitigated by the fact that Henderson's clear hold had a material effect on the play). The simple fact is that the vast majority of holding calls result from grabs of the jersey on the outside part of the shoulders or clear jersey yanks anywhere on the torso. Even if they're ticky-tack, they're usually called (if seen). If a guy keeps his hands in and doesn't grab, it ain't getting called regardless of what the rule does or doesn't say about the technical details.

Edited October 28, 2015 by dave mcbride

[Kelly the Dog]

We are going to have to agree to disagree. I think you guys are living in a dreamworld with regard to the call, and I think you're reacting like a bunch of homers (which is no surprise given that this is a Bills board). After all, many of the same people were irate three short weeks ago about the Urbik holding call, and that certainly looked like more of a hold than this one. And I thought that one was likely an unfair call (although understandable given his reaction; also, whatever outrage I had was mitigated by the fact that Henderson's clear hold had a material effect on the play).

 

I'm just calling it as I see it. It was a hold. I don't think it cost us the game or it was an egregious error or part of a conspiracy or that they don't miss those calls all the time. It was just a missed call. The Robey one was the bad call.

[GaryPinC]

You seem to be disregarding the element that Hughes beat him bad off the snap. So bad in fact that there was another JAG that Hughes went around and still beat Joekel bad. It is only when Hughes is already halfway around the LT that the LT engages him at all. That is why it's not "inside."

I don't agree that Joekel got beat. Yes, Hughes had outside position on him but the key is Joekel maintained leverage on Hughes and was moving his feet well. Also key is Hughes never tried to change his path (bull rushing) until he turned around after Bortles ran by. He was easily able to turn around but stumbled because he was off balance. Good play by Joekel. The Robey PI was bullcrap and called by the official who was screened by the receiver's body.