Faceguarding (1 Viewer)

[AB in DC]

Saw the refererence on PFT and was just about to post the same thing.

 

[Gamblor]

You should watch more of your nfl package because it has been called the same all year. I'm not 100% sure which game it was but the exact same thing happened and the flag was thrown on the right corner of the endzone, I'm thinking it was a cowboys game. Also, the penalty on Hobbs was the easiest play to call. Hobbs did not look at the ball, he got beat so he ran through Wayne with his hands up. This is faceguarding. It was not at all the slightest bit controversial of a call. You can dislike the rule, although I don't see how, but it's the rule and it's how the game is going to be called.

Please know the rule before you make a post like this. For the last time. Faceguarding IS legal. In order for pass interference to be called there HAS to be contact.

LMAO!Faceguarding is certainly not LEGAL, please know the rule before you accuse someone else of not knowing it, and secondly there was contact, but faceguarding isn't legal LMAO.

Faceguarding use to be legal, I'm not sure exactly when they made the change, I can only find rules information upto 2003... It's also been called a couple times this season and if it was legal, the refs would have informed. Hobbs puts his arms up does not look back at the ball and runs right through Wayne, I have no idea why people are making a big deal out of such an easy call. I'm not a ref, but when the play happened about 10 other people that was watching almost simultaneously said faceguarding even pats fans. I'd be more mad at rache caldwell dropping passes and tom brady's interception at the end than anything else.

THERE WAS NO CONTACT WITH WAYNE

He brushes up against him... and finally YOU DONT NEED CONTACT. I know quote me that face guarding is legal...http://www.nfl.com/fans/rulesschool120501.html

This is the typical response, quotes from 2001 or 2003. Face Guarding is ILEGAL now. I know googling something makes you an expert on it... I imagine there will be an "official review" on nfl total access, hopefully that will silence some of the ignorant folk.

Ok yeah actual refs quoted when???

Just watch nfl total access, I'm sure there will an official review segment and then you can have one of those moments.

Yeah because it's from 2001... and alot of people want to quote this because it's like the first one if you google nfl face guarding lol. Face guarding is pass interference, I don't care if you believe me or not, I'm sure it'll come up on nfl total access, if it does I'll post a celebratory topic.

Lata

lol Matt can you tell us if you have watched this on nfl total access yet? I dont want to miss your celebratory topic.

Lata

 

[bryhamm]

You should watch more of your nfl package because it has been called the same all year. I'm not 100% sure which game it was but the exact same thing happened and the flag was thrown on the right corner of the endzone, I'm thinking it was a cowboys game. Also, the penalty on Hobbs was the easiest play to call. Hobbs did not look at the ball, he got beat so he ran through Wayne with his hands up. This is faceguarding. It was not at all the slightest bit controversial of a call. You can dislike the rule, although I don't see how, but it's the rule and it's how the game is going to be called.

Please know the rule before you make a post like this. For the last time. Faceguarding IS legal. In order for pass interference to be called there HAS to be contact.

LMAO!Faceguarding is certainly not LEGAL, please know the rule before you accuse someone else of not knowing it, and secondly there was contact, but faceguarding isn't legal LMAO.

Faceguarding use to be legal, I'm not sure exactly when they made the change, I can only find rules information upto 2003... It's also been called a couple times this season and if it was legal, the refs would have informed. Hobbs puts his arms up does not look back at the ball and runs right through Wayne, I have no idea why people are making a big deal out of such an easy call. I'm not a ref, but when the play happened about 10 other people that was watching almost simultaneously said faceguarding even pats fans. I'd be more mad at rache caldwell dropping passes and tom brady's interception at the end than anything else.

THERE WAS NO CONTACT WITH WAYNE

He brushes up against him... and finally YOU DONT NEED CONTACT. I know quote me that face guarding is legal...http://www.nfl.com/fans/rulesschool120501.html

This is the typical response, quotes from 2001 or 2003. Face Guarding is ILEGAL now. I know googling something makes you an expert on it... I imagine there will be an "official review" on nfl total access, hopefully that will silence some of the ignorant folk.

Ok yeah actual refs quoted when???

Just watch nfl total access, I'm sure there will an official review segment and then you can have one of those moments.

Yeah because it's from 2001... and alot of people want to quote this because it's like the first one if you google nfl face guarding lol. Face guarding is pass interference, I don't care if you believe me or not, I'm sure it'll come up on nfl total access, if it does I'll post a celebratory topic.

Lata

lol Matt can you tell us if you have watched this on nfl total access yet? I dont want to miss your celebratory topic.

Lata

matt =

 

[Pat Patriot]

NFL: Hobbs call was correct

By Mike Reiss and Ron Borges, Globe Staff | January 28, 2007

NFL vice president of communications Greg Aiello clarified remarks regarding the pass interference call against Patriots cornerback Ellis Hobbs in the third quarter of the AFC Championship game.

The penalty -- which came on a second and 7 from the Patriots' 19-yard line -- gave the Colts a first down at the 1, and they subsequently scored, and made a 2-point conversion, to tie the score at 21-21.

Aiello said the penalty was the correct call because there was contact made by Hobbs. Had Hobbs not made contact, there should have been no penalty called for "face-guarding," which was the explanation given by CBS announcer Phil Simms.

"There is no such thing as face-guarding," Aiello said. "There must be contact to have a foul."

After the game, Hobbs said he had not made contact.

"I never touched him and the ball hit me in the back of the arm," Hobbs said.

Basically reaffirms everything said in this thread. There MUST be contact for it to be a foul. The rest is CRAP. As Yudkin said, he reviewed it 100 times from different angles and Hobbs never touched Wayne.

 

[PMENFAN]

NFL: Hobbs call was correctBy Mike Reiss and Ron Borges, Globe Staff | January 28, 2007NFL vice president of communications Greg Aiello clarified remarks regarding the pass interference call against Patriots cornerback Ellis Hobbs in the third quarter of the AFC Championship game.

This is a CYA statement. They've already admitted to the wrong call, and why it was wrong, so now they have to say Hobbs made contact, to make it right; or at least make it appear right. It was a wrong call. Hobbs made the play. There was a lot of ball left to play, and maybe they score and get the 2pter there anyway. I think they 'thought' they saw contact and made the call. My bigger issue remains that they didn't make the call on the Caldwell play in the 4th, which was essentially the same play, where the DB sees the ball thrown, because he's peeking in the backfield, then sees he's beat, adn never plays the ball, but the receiver all the way, (same scenario) and tackles Caldwell in the endzone, and no call. Colts get first and goal, we settle for 3. That's at a minimum a 4 point swing, maybe 9, maybe more. At least they've definitively settled the faceguarding issue, as though there should have been any doubt. Hobbs made a great play. Bad break, but there were still other opportunities left on the field.

 

[Gamblor]

Bad break, but there were still other opportunities left on the field.

This is the key. NE had their chance, and choked.

 

[Godsbrother]

Bad break, but there were still other opportunities left on the field.

This is the key. NE had their chance, and choked.

I wouldn't say NE choked but they definitely had plenty of opportunities to put the game away and they couldn't. The Pats got screwed on a couple calls but the Colts deserved the win.The one thing I will commend the Patriots for is not blaming the loass of the officials like lard butt Mike Holmgren did after the Super Bowl.

 

[CalBear]

It was a wrong call. Hobbs made the play. There was a lot of ball left to play, and maybe they score and get the 2pter there anyway. I think they 'thought' they saw contact and made the call. My bigger issue remains that they didn't make the call on the Caldwell play in the 4th, which was essentially the same play, where the DB sees the ball thrown, because he's peeking in the backfield, then sees he's beat, adn never plays the ball, but the receiver all the way, (same scenario) and tackles Caldwell in the endzone, and no call. Colts get first and goal, we settle for 3. That's at a minimum a 4 point swing, maybe 9, maybe more.

The Caldwell play was definitely not the same scenario; the defender was looking at the QB when contact began, and turned around and looked at the ball before it got there. I thought it should have been called interference, but the play was totally different from the Hobbs/Wayne situation.

 

[switz]

It was a wrong call. Hobbs made the play. There was a lot of ball left to play, and maybe they score and get the 2pter there anyway. I think they 'thought' they saw contact and made the call. My bigger issue remains that they didn't make the call on the Caldwell play in the 4th, which was essentially the same play, where the DB sees the ball thrown, because he's peeking in the backfield, then sees he's beat, adn never plays the ball, but the receiver all the way, (same scenario) and tackles Caldwell in the endzone, and no call. Colts get first and goal, we settle for 3. That's at a minimum a 4 point swing, maybe 9, maybe more.

The Caldwell play was definitely not the same scenario; the defender was looking at the QB when contact began, and turned around and looked at the ball before it got there. I thought it should have been called interference, but the play was totally different from the Hobbs/Wayne situation.

No need to reply to him... it's just Pats fans always need an excuse when they lose.

 

[PMENFAN]

It was a wrong call. Hobbs made the play. There was a lot of ball left to play, and maybe they score and get the 2pter there anyway. I think they 'thought' they saw contact and made the call. My bigger issue remains that they didn't make the call on the Caldwell play in the 4th, which was essentially the same play, where the DB sees the ball thrown, because he's peeking in the backfield, then sees he's beat, adn never plays the ball, but the receiver all the way, (same scenario) and tackles Caldwell in the endzone, and no call. Colts get first and goal, we settle for 3. That's at a minimum a 4 point swing, maybe 9, maybe more.

The Caldwell play was definitely not the same scenario; the defender was looking at the QB when contact began, and turned around and looked at the ball before it got there. I thought it should have been called interference, but the play was totally different from the Hobbs/Wayne situation.

No need to reply to him... it's just Pats fans always need an excuse when they lose.

That would be a good posting if only the patriot fans were seeing it that way. Sorry the Pats have won 3 superbowls. Did it hurt your feelings?

 

[switz]

It was a wrong call. Hobbs made the play. There was a lot of ball left to play, and maybe they score and get the 2pter there anyway. I think they 'thought' they saw contact and made the call. My bigger issue remains that they didn't make the call on the Caldwell play in the 4th, which was essentially the same play, where the DB sees the ball thrown, because he's peeking in the backfield, then sees he's beat, adn never plays the ball, but the receiver all the way, (same scenario) and tackles Caldwell in the endzone, and no call. Colts get first and goal, we settle for 3. That's at a minimum a 4 point swing, maybe 9, maybe more.

The Caldwell play was definitely not the same scenario; the defender was looking at the QB when contact began, and turned around and looked at the ball before it got there. I thought it should have been called interference, but the play was totally different from the Hobbs/Wayne situation.

No need to reply to him... it's just Pats fans always need an excuse when they lose.

That would be a good posting if only the patriot fans were seeing it that way. Sorry the Pats have won 3 superbowls. Did it hurt your feelings?

The fact this thread is 5 pages long is enough evidence that Pats fans are the biggest whiners in the world.The Colts have gotten robbed more than once in the playoffs, and I don't recall 5 page thread about those calls.

 

[David Yudkin]

It was a wrong call. Hobbs made the play. There was a lot of ball left to play, and maybe they score and get the 2pter there anyway. I think they 'thought' they saw contact and made the call. My bigger issue remains that they didn't make the call on the Caldwell play in the 4th, which was essentially the same play, where the DB sees the ball thrown, because he's peeking in the backfield, then sees he's beat, adn never plays the ball, but the receiver all the way, (same scenario) and tackles Caldwell in the endzone, and no call. Colts get first and goal, we settle for 3. That's at a minimum a 4 point swing, maybe 9, maybe more.

The Caldwell play was definitely not the same scenario; the defender was looking at the QB when contact began, and turned around and looked at the ball before it got there. I thought it should have been called interference, but the play was totally different from the Hobbs/Wayne situation.

No need to reply to him... it's just Pats fans always need an excuse when they lose.

That would be a good posting if only the patriot fans were seeing it that way. Sorry the Pats have won 3 superbowls. Did it hurt your feelings?

The fact this thread is 5 pages long is enough evidence that Pats fans are the biggest whiners in the world.The Colts have gotten robbed more than once in the playoffs, and I don't recall 5 page thread about those calls.

You're right. The Colts whining threads were 10+ pages long. But that was partly due to the "whiny tools" brigade of Patriots Nation pouring salt on their wounds.At least for me, this thread was about clarifying what the official rules are and whether they were enforced properly.Even without the aid of the Hobbs PI penalty, the Colts could very well have scored a TD anyway on that drive. And the Patriots certainly could have done a heck of a lot more to win the game and none of this would really have mattered.

 

[switz]

You're right. The Colts whining threads were 10+ pages long. But that was partly due to the "whiny tools" brigade of Patriots Nation pouring salt on their wounds.

That was funny

 

[Pat Patriot]

It was a wrong call. Hobbs made the play. There was a lot of ball left to play, and maybe they score and get the 2pter there anyway. I think they 'thought' they saw contact and made the call. My bigger issue remains that they didn't make the call on the Caldwell play in the 4th, which was essentially the same play, where the DB sees the ball thrown, because he's peeking in the backfield, then sees he's beat, adn never plays the ball, but the receiver all the way, (same scenario) and tackles Caldwell in the endzone, and no call. Colts get first and goal, we settle for 3. That's at a minimum a 4 point swing, maybe 9, maybe more.

The Caldwell play was definitely not the same scenario; the defender was looking at the QB when contact began, and turned around and looked at the ball before it got there. I thought it should have been called interference, but the play was totally different from the Hobbs/Wayne situation.

No need to reply to him... it's just Pats fans always need an excuse when they lose.

That would be a good posting if only the patriot fans were seeing it that way. Sorry the Pats have won 3 superbowls. Did it hurt your feelings?

The fact this thread is 5 pages long is enough evidence that Pats fans are the biggest whiners in the world.The Colts have gotten robbed more than once in the playoffs, and I don't recall 5 page thread about those calls.

You're right. The Colts whining threads were 10+ pages long. But that was partly due to the "whiny tools" brigade of Patriots Nation pouring salt on their wounds.At least for me, this thread was about clarifying what the official rules are and whether they were enforced properly.Even without the aid of the Hobbs PI penalty, the Colts could very well have scored a TD anyway on that drive. And the Patriots certainly could have done a heck of a lot more to win the game and none of this would really have mattered.

Explain how the Colts ever got screwed in a Playoff game during the Manning era? The Patriots beat the Colts 24-14 picking off Manning 4 times and sacking him 4 times. Anyone who watched the game knows the score could have been much worse but the Pats kicked 5 short FG's that game.Then the Pats beat the Colts 20-3 and held the ball for 22 minutes of the 2H. How did the Colts get screwed in that game?How about the game with the Steelers last year. Close game. Only close because the Colts BENEFITED BIG TIME from a bogus reversal of an interception.I dont think many if any Pats fans have said that calls cost them this game but tell me the playoff game where bad calls cost the Colts and they were above it all and didnt whine?This thread is so long because SO MANY people didnt know and werent willing to accept that there is no penalty for faceguarding.

 

[My_Favorite_Team_is]

You're right. The Colts whining threads were 10+ pages long. But that was partly due to the "whiny tools" brigade of Patriots Nation pouring salt on their wounds.

That was funny

Laughing at ourselves are we?

 

[David Yudkin]

It was a wrong call. Hobbs made the play. There was a lot of ball left to play, and maybe they score and get the 2pter there anyway. I think they 'thought' they saw contact and made the call. My bigger issue remains that they didn't make the call on the Caldwell play in the 4th, which was essentially the same play, where the DB sees the ball thrown, because he's peeking in the backfield, then sees he's beat, adn never plays the ball, but the receiver all the way, (same scenario) and tackles Caldwell in the endzone, and no call. Colts get first and goal, we settle for 3. That's at a minimum a 4 point swing, maybe 9, maybe more.

The Caldwell play was definitely not the same scenario; the defender was looking at the QB when contact began, and turned around and looked at the ball before it got there. I thought it should have been called interference, but the play was totally different from the Hobbs/Wayne situation.

No need to reply to him... it's just Pats fans always need an excuse when they lose.

That would be a good posting if only the patriot fans were seeing it that way. Sorry the Pats have won 3 superbowls. Did it hurt your feelings?

The fact this thread is 5 pages long is enough evidence that Pats fans are the biggest whiners in the world.The Colts have gotten robbed more than once in the playoffs, and I don't recall 5 page thread about those calls.

You're right. The Colts whining threads were 10+ pages long. But that was partly due to the "whiny tools" brigade of Patriots Nation pouring salt on their wounds.At least for me, this thread was about clarifying what the official rules are and whether they were enforced properly.Even without the aid of the Hobbs PI penalty, the Colts could very well have scored a TD anyway on that drive. And the Patriots certainly could have done a heck of a lot more to win the game and none of this would really have mattered.

Explain how the Colts ever got screwed in a Playoff game during the Manning era? The Patriots beat the Colts 24-14 picking off Manning 4 times and sacking him 4 times. Anyone who watched the game knows the score could have been much worse but the Pats kicked 5 short FG's that game.Then the Pats beat the Colts 20-3 and held the ball for 22 minutes of the 2H. How did the Colts get screwed in that game?How about the game with the Steelers last year. Close game. Only close because the Colts BENEFITED BIG TIME from a bogus reversal of an interception.I dont think many if any Pats fans have said that calls cost them this game but tell me the playoff game where bad calls cost the Colts and they were above it all and didnt whine?This thread is so long because SO MANY people didnt know and werent willing to accept that there is no penalty for faceguarding.

Back in the day, the complaint from Colts fans (and even the Colts management) was that the Indy receivers were mugged on almost every play and that almost certainly they were due pass interfence or defensive holding calls on many occassions.That's what made the pass interference call on Hobbs even more ironic. The Pats never had been called for pass interference against the Colts in any of their playoff games before then, and the refs called it on a play when there was no contact.

 

[thesurfshop19]

I've rooted for the Patriots against the Colts every time, but I think saying "they got 4 INTs and 4 sacks, obviously the defense dominated!" isn't a very good argument if the reason they got those sacks and INTs was because the receivers were being mugged downfield!

When it was 21-14 -- and of course it should have been worse, but it wasn't -- Manning threw incomplete on 3rd and 4th down, both when there was clear contact, the exact textbook reason they have PI in the rule book. It's one thing to say the Patriots played better and deserved to win, but to dismiss that the Colts, despite being dominated, had at least an outside chance to tie it and two huge no-calls went against them is a bit too much.



At the very least, can't Patriots fans just call it even at this point?

 

[Godsbrother]

I've rooted for the Patriots against the Colts every time, but I think saying "they got 4 INTs and 4 sacks, obviously the defense dominated!" isn't a very good argument if the reason they got those sacks and INTs was because the receivers were being mugged downfield!

When it was 21-14 -- and of course it should have been worse, but it wasn't -- Manning threw incomplete on 3rd and 4th down, both when there was clear contact, the exact textbook reason they have PI in the rule book. It's one thing to say the Patriots played better and deserved to win, but to dismiss that the Colts, despite being dominated, had at least an outside chance to tie it and two huge no-calls went against them is a bit too much.



At the very least, can't Patriots fans just call it even at this point?

Not a Pats or Colts fan and I remember watching this game and being quite disgusted with the officials. The Pats defenders were absolutely mugging the Colts receivers and getting away with it. I don't blame the Pats for doing it because they weren't being called but to then whine about one or two calls in this year's AFC Championship game is .Sometimes the calls break your way and sometimes they don't. Pats fans should forget about it and look forward to next year...

 

[switz]

You're right. The Colts whining threads were 10+ pages long. But that was partly due to the "whiny tools" brigade of Patriots Nation pouring salt on their wounds.

That was funny

Laughing at ourselves are we?

Laughing at the funny comeback... but I can laugh at myself too

 

[Pat Patriot]

I've rooted for the Patriots against the Colts every time, but I think saying "they got 4 INTs and 4 sacks, obviously the defense dominated!" isn't a very good argument if the reason they got those sacks and INTs was because the receivers were being mugged downfield!

When it was 21-14 -- and of course it should have been worse, but it wasn't -- Manning threw incomplete on 3rd and 4th down, both when there was clear contact, the exact textbook reason they have PI in the rule book. It's one thing to say the Patriots played better and deserved to win, but to dismiss that the Colts, despite being dominated, had at least an outside chance to tie it and two huge no-calls went against them is a bit too much.



At the very least, can't Patriots fans just call it even at this point?

Not a Pats or Colts fan and I remember watching this game and being quite disgusted with the officials. The Pats defenders were absolutely mugging the Colts receivers and getting away with it. I don't blame the Pats for doing it because they weren't being called but to then whine about one or two calls in this year's AFC Championship game is .Sometimes the calls break your way and sometimes they don't. Pats fans should forget about it and look forward to next year...

I have not seen much of Patriots fans whining about this game. The Pats defense got worn down and couldnt get the job done. Peyton Manning played great in the 2H and continued to put the pressure on the Pats. I think the "mugging" the Pats gave the Colts in the 24-14 AFC Championship Game is a bit of revisionist history. I thought I read recently that the no contact after 5 yards rule was implemented the following season. I dont recall it simply being a "reinforcement" of an existing rule because the Refs ignored that rule all game.

Their have been 2 threads started about clarification of NFL rules. This one reinforcing that there MUST be contact for PI to be called and the thread about the clarification of the Neutral Zone infraction. The fact that so many supposed hardcore NFL fans were so wrong about the "faceguarding" non-rule validates this 5 page thread. I cant believe how many times Maurile and Yudkin had to post the actual link to the PI rules before some would believe that CONTACT is required for PI.

 

[dparker713]

I think the "mugging" the Pats gave the Colts in the 24-14 AFC Championship Game is a bit of revisionist history. I thought I read recently that the no contact after 5 yards rule was implemented the following season. I dont recall it simply being a "reinforcement" of an existing rule because the Refs ignored that rule all game.

Boston GlobeDirect from the hometown paper.

 

[switz]

I think the "mugging" the Pats gave the Colts in the 24-14 AFC Championship Game is a bit of revisionist history. I thought I read recently that the no contact after 5 yards rule was implemented the following season. I dont recall it simply being a "reinforcement" of an existing rule because the Refs ignored that rule all game.

Boston GlobeDirect from the hometown paper.

Exactly... 5 yard chuck was put in the rule books back in the late 70s... the Pats just ignored that rule and got away with it against the Colts in that game.The Oats fans are the ones guilty of 'revisionist history' if their trying to say the NFL created that rule as a response to the Pats mauling the Colts WRs.

 

[suspected]

Didn't read this whole thread so this may already have been asked.

If the rule states there must be contact to have a penalty, could Belichick have thrown the challenge flag claiming there was no contact? Seems to me that if the replays clearly show there was no contact prior to the ball hitting Samuel the call should be reviewable and reversible.

 

[David Yudkin]

Exactly... 5 yard chuck was put in the rule books back in the late 70s... the officials just ignored that rule for years, especially in the Pats/Colts game(s).

Fixed.At this point, very few people will argue that the Patriots secondary took a physical approach to try to combat the Colts' air attack (and other opponents as well). However, it's the officials' job to enforce the rules, not the Patriots. How can the Patriots then be accused of cheating if the refs never called them for a single pass interference penalty in those games aganist the Colts? I can't remember if they got called for illegal contact or defensive holding in those games, but I do know that pass intereference was not called on the Pats.Given that playoff football is normally officiated in a manner that involves fewer penalties and more contact, IMO the Colts needed to adjust to the game conditions and how plays were being called. They had the ability to adjust on defense and manhandle the Patriots' receiving corps but did not. It's not like New England benefitted from a ton of defensive penalties on the Colts while the Pats' defense never was flagged. The game was called the same on both sides.

 

[David Yudkin]

Didn't read this whole thread so this may already have been asked. If the rule states there must be contact to have a penalty, could Belichick have thrown the challenge flag claiming there was no contact? Seems to me that if the replays clearly show there was no contact prior to the ball hitting Samuel the call should be reviewable and reversible.

Nope. Penalties are not reviewable.

 

[My_Favorite_Team_is]

You're right. The Colts whining threads were 10+ pages long. But that was partly due to the "whiny tools" brigade of Patriots Nation pouring salt on their wounds.

That was funny

Laughing at ourselves are we?

Laughing at the funny comeback... but I can laugh at myself too

Put down the salt shaker...

 

[suspected]

Didn't read this whole thread so this may already have been asked. If the rule states there must be contact to have a penalty, could Belichick have thrown the challenge flag claiming there was no contact? Seems to me that if the replays clearly show there was no contact prior to the ball hitting Samuel the call should be reviewable and reversible.

Nope. Penalties are not reviewable.

I believe there are some exceptions however. I think penalties that are reviewable by replay include illegal forward pass from beyond the line of scrimmage, illegal touching of a forward pass by an ineligible receiver and twelve men on the field by either team. It seems to me you should also be able to challenge that there was "no contact" on a pass interference call since that could potentially be "proven" beyond any doubt on replay. I don't think you should be able to challenge whether contact is "significant" because that involves much more judgement.

 

[thesurfshop19]

I don't understand the defensiveness about the 2003 AFC title game.

The Patriots bent the rules and got away with it. They caught some breaks. A couple blatant, textbook penalties were not called in a crucial situation. The NFL looked at that game and focused on the areas where the refs weren't doing their jobs. What's wrong with admitting that? This isn't anything personal, these are facts!

As a Broncos fan, I freely admit that the offensive line plays dirty and gets away with some illegal stuff. It's not like that's a reflection of me or my personality, so I have no problem talking about it.

 

[thesurfshop19]

I believe there are some exceptions however. I think penalties that are reviewable by replay include illegal forward pass from beyond the line of scrimmage, illegal touching of a forward pass by an ineligible receiver and twelve men on the field by either team. It seems to me you should also be able to challenge that there was "no contact" on a pass interference call since that could potentially be "proven" beyond any doubt on replay. I don't think you should be able to challenge whether contact is "significant" because that involves much more judgement.

IIRC the NFL has looked at making PI reviewable and always comes back with the conclusion that it'd add 1 challenge on average per game and would slow the game down too much.I personally think that an extra 3 minutes a game is fine in order to look at something that can change a game, especially if they word it the way you're saying (i.e. the only thing reviewable is whether or not there was contact; if there's ANY contact it will not be reversed and you lose the challenge; and you can't review non-PI calls to add PI) ... but the NFL probably doesn't.

 

[David Yudkin]

Didn't read this whole thread so this may already have been asked.

If the rule states there must be contact to have a penalty, could Belichick have thrown the challenge flag claiming there was no contact? Seems to me that if the replays clearly show there was no contact prior to the ball hitting Samuel the call should be reviewable and reversible.

Nope. Penalties are not reviewable.

I believe there are some exceptions however. I think penalties that are reviewable by replay include illegal forward pass from beyond the line of scrimmage, illegal touching of a forward pass by an ineligible receiver and twelve men on the field by either team. It seems to me you should also be able to challenge that there was "no contact" on a pass interference call since that could potentially be "proven" beyond any doubt on replay. I don't think you should be able to challenge whether contact is "significant" because that involves much more judgement.

The most recent list of reviewable plays that I could find are located HERE.

Reviewable Plays: The Replay System will cover the following play situations only:

A) Plays Governed by Sideline, Goal Line, End Zone, and End Line:

1. Scoring plays, including a runner breaking the plane of the goal line.

2. Pass complete/incomplete/intercepted at sideline, goal line, end zone, and end line.

3. Runner/receiver in or out of bounds.

4. Recovery of loose ball in or out of bounds.

B) Passing Plays:

1. Pass ruled complete/incomplete/intercepted in the field of play.

2. Touching of a forward pass by an ineligible receiver.

3. Touching of a forward pass by a defensive player.

4. Quarterback (Passer) forward pass or fumble.

5. Illegal forward pass beyond line of scrimmage.

6. Illegal forward pass after change of possession.

7. Forward or backward pass thrown from behind line of scrimmage.

C) Other Detectable Infractions:

1. Runner ruled not down by defensive contact.

2. Forward progress with respect to first down.

3. Touching of a kick.

4. Number of players on the field.

I bolded the ones pertaining to penalties.