Horse collar tackle in the pocket not a penalty???? And Mike Pereira

[Billsfan1972]

Just now, Simon said:

 

I just don't think it's a particularly dangerous play when the guy getting dragged down is almost stationary.

But in the interests of consistency, yeah it should probably be a penalty everywhere or nowhere.

Not enough injuries in the NFL?

[The Dean]

1 hour ago, Billsfan1972 said:

The point is it a penalty because it is a dangerous play.

 

Please tell me the announcers made up that comment?   

 

Also thank you Mike Pereira for telling them that final PI call was correct, where again the announcers tried to convince fans it was the wrong call!!!

 

Both were correct calls. Learn the rules.

 

The INT was BS, but it counted, ergo an INT.

 

The other weird call was the Unsportsmanlike Conduct on Josh?  I was nothing that amounted to that. Did he say a fineable word, or suggest the ref's mother has some bizarre sexual practices?

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

2 minutes ago, The Dean said:

 

Both were correct calls. Learn the rules.

 

The INT was BS, but it counted, ergo an INT.

 

The other weird call was the Unsportsmanlike Conduct on Josh?  I was nothing that amounted to that. Did he say a fineable word, or suggest the ref's mother has some bizarre sexual practices?

I think Allen should have a ***** with Bradys head on it and throw it at the officials after any bad calls.

[Simon]

2 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

Not enough injuries in the NFL?

 

It typically only results in an injury when a guy gets collared from behind AND the defender lands on his legs.

I just don't like seeing it called when a defender is fighting off a block and lunges out to get a piece of whatever he can and it turns out to be the back of jersey. It's not all that dangerous of a play if you aren't intentionally trying to hurt people like Williams (and eventually others) was when they outlawed it.

It's not a hill I'm willing to die on though.

[K-9]

1 hour ago, Maynard said:

So what do you guys think about the PI? I’m arguing with folks that it indeed was and they saying it was BS! 

It was illegal contact instead of PI. Should have been 5 yards and an automatic first. 
 

Which wouldn’t have made ANY difference given where they were in the field.

[Simon]

1 minute ago, K-9 said:

It was illegal contact instead of PI. Should have been 5 yards and an automatic first. 
 

 

Yeah if you're going to call it, I'd have called it contact also.

I didn't think the ball was in the air when he disengaged.

[Kmart128]

With all the injuries that happen in a game its hard to believe a dirty dangerous play like that is considered legal. Josh Allen and McDermott needs to talk to NFL about that. That could break someones neck 

[K-9]

Just now, Simon said:

 

Yeah if you're going to call it, I'd have called it contact also.

I didn't think the ball was in the air when he disengaged.

The CB was engaged from the snap of the ball from what I saw; held him the entire route basically. 

[The Dean]

2 minutes ago, K-9 said:

The CB was engaged from the snap of the ball from what I saw; held him the entire route basically. 

 

 

I think Pereira was right. But that's just saying the call was "defensible".  But given the refs have been told to only call "clear and obvious" fouls, one can question if it should have been called. I considered it consolation  after the awful INT call. 

[Billsfan1972]

Just now, The Dean said:

 

 

I think Pereira was right. But that's just saying the call was "defensible".  But given the refs have been told to only call "clear and obvious" fouls, one can question if it should have been called. I considered it consolation  after the awful INT call. 

You mean the call that changed the entire complexion of the game????😆 

[The Dean]

Just now, Billsfan1972 said:

You mean the call that changed the entire complexion of the game????😆 

 

I'd say they BOTH had a huge impact.

[K-9]

1 minute ago, The Dean said:

 

 

I think Pereira was right. But that's just saying the call was "defensible".  But given the refs have been told to only call "clear and obvious" fouls, one can question if it should have been called. I considered it consolation  after the awful INT call. 

It was defensive holding the entire route. It was a penalty, but the wrong penalty was called. 

[BuffaloBaumer]

I can't remember ever being this mad about a call after we won the game. There is absolutely no defense 2 reasoning on why that was an interception. It changed the entire game and there is no question about it. Terrible terrible call and borderline Shady doings if I don't say so myself.

[Freddie's Dead]

2 hours ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

I had to look this one up, because it makes no sense to me that a defender is allowed to horse collar a QB if they are in the pocket.

 

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/horse-collar/#:~:text=Rule Summary View Official Rule&text=No player shall grab the,who is in the pocket.

 

No player shall grab the inside collar of the back or the side of the shoulder pads or jersey, or grab the jersey at the name plate or above, and pull the runner toward the ground. This does not apply to a runner who is in the tackle box or to a quarterback who is in the pocket.

 

They got it right. No idea why the rule is written that way

 

Props to @GunnerBill for properly pointing this out in the GDT.  Ridiculous, but it's right there in black and white.

[Alaska Darin]

How about the fact that Donald's initial point of contact was Allen's facemask?  When did hitting the QB in the head become OK?

[Sherlock Holmes]

2 hours ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

I had to look this one up, because it makes no sense to me that a defender is allowed to horse collar a QB if they are in the pocket.

 

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/horse-collar/#:~:text=Rule Summary View Official Rule&text=No player shall grab the,who is in the pocket.

 

No player shall grab the inside collar of the back or the side of the shoulder pads or jersey, or grab the jersey at the name plate or above, and pull the runner toward the ground. This does not apply to a runner who is in the tackle box or to a quarterback who is in the pocket.

 

They got it right. No idea why the rule is written that way

Should be the same with facemasks then... Josh Allen got hosed

[JerseyBills]

2 hours ago, Maynard said:

So what do you guys think about the PI? I’m arguing with folks that it indeed was and they saying it was BS! 

Of course they are. They're acting off emotion , that game almost gave me a heart attack lol. That last drive was amazing.

When the All 22 drops, there'll be no debate. Clear pass interference.  Defender panicked in a HUGE moment. 

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

I can live with it, but it's crazy to me that up into the DPI it looked like the refs would call any little thing on the Bills and give every benefit to the Rams.

 

The DPI was one of those ticky tak calls that drove me crazy in the last twenty years, but that is clearly the direction that the NFL has chosen to go to. I think it should be fixed but until it is we play by those rules.

[Orlando Tim]

3 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said:

Yes you can....  But the point is it is a dangerous play....

 

No player shall grab the inside collar of the back or the side of the shoulder pads or jersey, or grab the jersey at the name plate or above, and pull the runner toward the ground. This does not apply to a runner who is in the tackle box or to a quarterback who is in the pocket.

Thanks for posting- I was really upset by that play not being called but they apparently did get it correct 

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, JerseyBills said:

Of course they are. They're acting off emotion , that game almost gave me a heart attack lol. That last drive was amazing.

When the All 22 drops, there'll be no debate. Clear pass interference.  Defender panicked in a HUGE moment. 

 

The calls on that final drive were correct. Both the facemask against Josh and the PI against the Rams.