PDA

View Full Version : Was There Pass Interference Against Tony Gonzalez in the End Zone?


Amnorix
11-24-2004, 06:39 AM
I'm posting a link to the highlights of the Pats/KC game, and at about the 1:00 mark they show the play that resulted in the Rodney Harrison interception of Trent Green.

http://originwww.patriots.com/mediacenter/index.cfm?ac=nflfilmclips

Now, first, it's clearly a horrible idea for Green to have thrown it in there at all. Second, as Dick Vermeil said, if anything the ball should have been thrown much higher. BUT, both Green and Gonzalez have complained publicly since then that it was clearly pass interference and should have been called.

I don't see it as anything more than tight coverage by Harrison (37) and Roman Phifer (95). Please let me know what you think, since I'll admit I'm not unbiased...

cadmonkey
11-24-2004, 06:42 AM
Get out of here you Patriots troll!!! Oh wait........ ROFL

beer bacon
11-24-2004, 06:44 AM
I'm posting a link to the highlights of the Pats/KC game, and at about the 1:00 mark they show the play that resulted in the Rodney Harrison interception of Trent Green.

http://originwww.patriots.com/media...ac=nflfilmclips (http://originwww.patriots.com/media...ac=nflfilmclips)

Now, first, it's clearly a horrible idea for Green to have thrown it in there at all. Second, as Dick Vermeil said, if anything the ball should have been thrown much higher. BUT, both Green and Gonzalez have complained publicly since then that it was clearly pass interference and should have been called.

I don't see it as anything more than tight coverage by Harrison (37) and Roman Phifer (95). Please let me know what you think, since I'll admit I'm not unbiased...

It looked like to me that the guy that was covering TG on the inside was all over him. The thing is, much like O-linemen holding, you see something like this almost every play of every game and it is really just up to the refs to call it or not. TG is constantly manhandled by defenses and despite the new supposed new rule enforcement, he almost never gets PI calls in his favor.

In closing, I voted yes, but with the caveat that their is defensive PI a lot more then it is called.

Amnorix
11-24-2004, 06:44 AM
Get out of here you Patriots troll!!! Oh wait........ ROFL

ROFL Hey! We both resemble that remark...

Ari Chi3fs
11-24-2004, 06:45 AM
Tony gets mauled week in and week out... I dont remember that last time he got a call going his way.

We have just become used to it... I really thought with the new 5 yard rule that Gonzo would have a huge year, but not one call that I can remember has gone his way... and he is constantly getting owned outside of 5 yards.

Amnorix
11-24-2004, 06:46 AM
It looked like to me that the guy that was covering TG on the inside was all over him. The thing is, much like O-linemen holding, you see something like this almost every play of every game and it is really just up to the refs to call it or not. TG is constantly manhandled by defenses and despite the new supposed new rule enforcement, he almost never gets PI calls in his favor.

He gets mauled inside the 5 yard chuck limit, then breaks free, with Phifer running right in front of him (between him and Green). You're saying he was hit, held or interfered with after the 5 yards?

Amnorix
11-24-2004, 06:46 AM
Tony gets mauled week in and week out... I dont remember that last time he got a call going his way.

We have just become used to it... I really thought with the new 5 yard rule that Gonzo would have a huge year, but not one call that I can remember has gone his way... and he is constantly getting owned outside of 5 yards.

Maybe so, I dunno. Let me know what you think of THIS play.

jspchief
11-24-2004, 06:50 AM
At the very least it looks like illegal contact by Phifer near the goal line. Unfortunately, the contact had nothing to do with the interception.

Coach
11-24-2004, 06:52 AM
At the very least it looks like illegal contact by Phifer near the goal line. Unfortunately, the contact had nothing to do with the interception.

Actually, if there was a flag thrown, and if the officials call it defensive holding, the INT is wiped out, and we get half the distance to the goal, and new set of downs.

beer bacon
11-24-2004, 06:53 AM
He gets mauled inside the 5 yard chuck limit, then breaks free, with Phifer running right in front of him (between him and Green). You're saying he was hit, held or interfered with after the 5 yards?

The outside man hand hands on TG past the five yard limit. Although you can't see it that well from that view, the inside man has hands on hands on TG all the way into the endzone, and something like that can matter a lot in the endzone. Despite this, it would not have been a problem if Green would have thrown a jump ball instead of throwing it so low.

Redcoats58
11-24-2004, 06:56 AM
Well if you pause the video right when Gonzo is crossing the goal line you can see Harrison into the body of Tony G. in which we all know is illegal because he is 5 yards past the chuck zone. It's not that it really matters anyway I believed our season was over two weeks ago. I also agree with the others that Tony usually gets molested most games and nothing is ever called unless it is offensive pass interference on him. Oh well there is always next year(the motto of a Chief fan).

King_Chief_Fan
11-24-2004, 06:58 AM
Of course not.........if it was, it would have been called, right?:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

ROYC75
11-24-2004, 06:59 AM
P.I. ? Nope

Illegal Contact ... very possible, I would have to look at it again, I've been to depressed to look or watch the tape again...

Should Green have forced the pass.... No way, bad decision , unless he wanted a penalty called, which in this case he didn't get it.

BTW, I didn't vote...... If you had put up on the poll a bad decision on Green, I would have voted.

Coach
11-24-2004, 07:00 AM
Oh well there is always next year(the motto of a Chief fan).

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v39/SwedeCarlson/Chiefs/Cubschiefs.jpg

beer bacon
11-24-2004, 07:00 AM
Of course not.........if it was, it would have been called, right?:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

That reminds me. Nearly everytime I see a big run by an RB that starts out as just a run up the middle, there is always at least one O-linemen holding the front of a D-linemen's jersey/shoulderpads right around where the hole is formed. It is really starting to aggravate me.

beer bacon
11-24-2004, 07:01 AM
P.I. ? Nope

Illegal Contact ... very possible, I would have to look at it again, I've been to depressed to look or watch the tape again...

Should Green have forced the pass.... No way, bad decision , unless he wanted a penalty called, which in this case he didn't get it.

BTW, I didn't vote...... If you had put up on the poll a bad decision on Green, I would have voted.

He should have thrown that pass, but way higher.

Tuckdaddy
11-24-2004, 07:06 AM
By the rule, you ar not allowed to touch a reciever passed 5 yards. Now this happens every play and is done by everyone. All corners do it and LB's do it. They have cut down on the mauling but there is still contact. Did they tough and claw at Tony in the end zone? Yes they did plain as day. That is PI. Should have been 1st and goal from the one.

BigRedChief
11-24-2004, 07:09 AM
Yeah, so what if he did. No more than other no calls. The Chiefs need to quit whining about the refs. Do they think they will get a make up call if they argue or complain to their bosses about how poorly they do their job?
Grow TFU and quit sounding like a wuss team.

cadmonkey
11-24-2004, 07:15 AM
Of course not.........if it was, it would have been called, right?:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


See, now there is someone who sees the light.

Wile_E_Coyote
11-24-2004, 07:26 AM
Is this the same kinda thing Indy stomped their feet about after last years playoff game

cdcox
11-24-2004, 07:27 AM
The angle of the highlight clip doesn't really show the extent to which Gonzo was harrassed by Phifer. Harrison initially did a good job of slowing TG's release from the LOS and cleanly released him within the 5 yrd zone. Phifer's made brief, but illegal contact thereafter. Then he made contact again in the endzone when the ball was in the air. If the official had not been focused on Harrion (due to him making the pick) I do think Phifer would have been flagged for PI.

Nevertheless, the pass should have never been thrown. Furthermore, defensive backfield calls are extremely inconsistent. It is just part of the game.

Cochise
11-24-2004, 07:33 AM
I was sitting in that end zone and to me it looked like one of the defenders was tangling up his arms while Harrison came around to intercept the pass.

It's nothing new, every team knows they can gangrape him and it won't get called.

dirk digler
11-24-2004, 07:34 AM
There was definitely illegal contact on the play but no PI. I think Trent threw the pass thinking he would get an easy call.

Coach
11-24-2004, 07:34 AM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7920119

Officiating Mood Swing

Earlier in the season, yours truly complained that officials seemed to be over-enforcing the new rule on defensive contact, calling too much pass interference. Now, in my opinion, the pendulum has swung the other way. In recent weeks, I've noticed several obvious pass interference penalties that have not been flagged. Last night, Kansas City trailing 17-10 with 54 seconds remaining in the first half, the Chiefs had third-and-goal on the Flying Elvii 9. Tony Gonzalez was open in the end zone, Trent Green delivered a perfect pass; not one but two New England defenders grabbed Gonzalez while the ball was in the air; the Patriots intercepted, ending the half, and the Chiefs went on to lose by a touchdown. There was nothing arguable about the pass interference, yet zebras just looked on. Officials sometimes say they don't want to be the ones to decide games, and officials can be prone to favor a defending champion, if only subconsciously -- assuming that if a team is a defending champion, that must be because it plays better than other teams. But failing to call pass interference on a decisive play near the goal line is "deciding the game" in every sense, just deciding it in favor of the team that committed the penalty. Players will tell you that if you lose on your own, you accept defeat. If you match the defending champs on the field and lose because the officials let the champs commit a decisive penalty at the goal line, it hurts in a way that's hard to describe.

Phobia
11-24-2004, 08:02 AM
That wasn't a penalty, Gonzo always gives free piggyback rides in the endzone. If asked nicely, he'd have given PIfer an autograph as well.

Lzen
11-24-2004, 08:06 AM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7920119

Officiating Mood Swing

Earlier in the season, yours truly complained that officials seemed to be over-enforcing the new rule on defensive contact, calling too much pass interference. Now, in my opinion, the pendulum has swung the other way. In recent weeks, I've noticed several obvious pass interference penalties that have not been flagged. Last night, Kansas City trailing 17-10 with 54 seconds remaining in the first half, the Chiefs had third-and-goal on the Flying Elvii 9. Tony Gonzalez was open in the end zone, Trent Green delivered a perfect pass; not one but two New England defenders grabbed Gonzalez while the ball was in the air; the Patriots intercepted, ending the half, and the Chiefs went on to lose by a touchdown. There was nothing arguable about the pass interference, yet zebras just looked on. Officials sometimes say they don't want to be the ones to decide games, and officials can be prone to favor a defending champion, if only subconsciously -- assuming that if a team is a defending champion, that must be because it plays better than other teams. But failing to call pass interference on a decisive play near the goal line is "deciding the game" in every sense, just deciding it in favor of the team that committed the penalty. Players will tell you that if you lose on your own, you accept defeat. If you match the defending champs on the field and lose because the officials let the champs commit a decisive penalty at the goal line, it hurts in a way that's hard to describe.


Yup. :thumb:

Lzen
11-24-2004, 08:08 AM
That play was a penalty. I don't care what anyone else says. It should've been called. The refs screwed the Chiefs on that. They should've given the penalty so the Chiefs could've tied it up at half time and pissed away the game some other way later on.

headsnap
11-24-2004, 08:09 AM
Just be thankful they didn't call it on Tony. :rolleyes:

Radar Chief
11-24-2004, 08:13 AM
That wasn't a penalty, Gonzo always gives free piggyback rides in the endzone. If asked nicely, he'd have given PIfer an autograph as well.

Stuff like that wouldn’t bother me nearly as much if it were called, or in this case non-called, evenly but it’s not. Earlier in the first half, Bartee got flagged for interference and even Madden said while viewing the replay, “if you’re not allowed to do that you can’t play corner. The league is going to run press corners right out of existence with penalties like that.”

DenverChief
11-24-2004, 08:16 AM
That angle doesn't do it justice....I was watching at the ESPN Zone with Rain man and when looking from the sideleine and/or the opposite endzone you can clearly see hands all over him

Cochise
11-24-2004, 08:18 AM
Just be thankful they didn't call it on Tony. :rolleyes:

Right, we actually got a break from the refs. Normally when Gonzalez gets handcuffed and assraped by 2 DB's he gets called for holding. We were lucky it was a non-call.

The officials are part of the game, unfortunately they can't find a consistent way to make these calls. It seems to me like if you're a cornerback on a wideout, it's like you're playing a game of Operation; the slightest touch and the flag comes out. But if you're covering a tight end then all's fair.

2bikemike
11-24-2004, 08:21 AM
I watched it several times on the DVR and the MNF crew replayed it a couple times. You could see Phifer bumping TG back which allowed Harrison to get in front of TG. I think if TG was not being knocked out of the way he would have been able to make a play on the ball. I think he and RH would have collided going for it.

That is my take on it.


I also want to add that Tony was bumped and pushed from about the 4 yard line to the middle of the endzone. Clearly more than 5 yds from scrimmage.

shakesthecat
11-24-2004, 08:22 AM
Nice to see Anmorix has decided to adopt the Taco John style of posting.

philfree
11-24-2004, 08:26 AM
There was contact while the ball was in the air so it was clearly PI. It don't matter if it was a good or bad pass. What kills me is there were several PI calls against the Chiefs that were declined because the pass was completed anyway. So the officials are calling it on us but when it's PI in the endzone against the Pats it's not called. As far as Trint's pass being low and into coverege I think he threw it at Tony because he could see the PI going on and was hoping for the call. I'm not saying that was smart but I have seen that done more then once in the NFL. :shrug: Oh well we weren't virgins anyway. We've already been screwed by the officials several times over.

PhilFree :arrow:

2bikemike
11-24-2004, 08:28 AM
There was contact while the ball was in the air so it was clearly PI. It don't matter if it was a good or bad pass. What kills me is there were several PI calls against the Chiefs that were declined because the pass was completed anyway. So the officials are calling it on us but when it's PI in the endzone against the Pats it's not called. As far as Trint's pass being low and into coverege I think he threw it at Tony because he could see the PI going on and was hoping for the call. I'm not saying that was smart but I have seen that done more then once in the NFL. :shrug: Oh well we weren't virgins anyway. We've already been screwed by the officials several times over.

PhilFree :arrow:

I was thinking the same thing about trying to get the PI penalty. But he still needed to put some more air underneath the ball.

Phobia
11-24-2004, 08:29 AM
That angle doesn't do it justice....I was watching at the ESPN Zone with Rain man and when looking from the sideleine and/or the opposite endzone you can clearly see hands all over him

Does his wife know?

Brock
11-24-2004, 08:31 AM
The word moot comes to mind.

philfree
11-24-2004, 08:33 AM
was thinking the same thing about trying to get the PI penalty. But he still needed to put some more air underneath the ball.

Perhaps so. IMO it looked like it was gonna be a comeback route except the the LB just kept pushing Gonzo to the back of the endzone. That of course was the PI.


PhilFree :arrow:

morphius
11-24-2004, 08:34 AM
My take, without reading everyone else's here. Their was obviously illigal contact, anyone who doesn't see that Gonzo is being pushed every farther backward by the defender is just blind, so at least holding/illigal contact should have been called. From my understanding from what Green said, he saw that Gonzo was getting mugged, and knows that the only way to get the call is to throw it to him, which is what he did. Of course at this point, Green should know that we never get that call and only get that called against us...

Its that kind of season.

DenverChief
11-24-2004, 08:36 AM
Does his wife know?

:spock: that he watches football ?

InChiefsHell
11-24-2004, 08:39 AM
Is this the same kinda thing Indy stomped their feet about after last years playoff game

I think so. In fact, wasn't that game the reason why it was decided that the chuck-rule would be more inforced? Chuck rule. Tuck rule. What's next, the Patriot inspired f@#$ rule??

ck_IN
11-24-2004, 08:42 AM
There was some minor jostling but no big deal. Not enough to flag. Green and Gonzo are just whining as the Chiefs usually do when they don't get their way.

The ball would've been intercepted even if Gonzo had been untouched. It was a jump ball thrown belt high.

DenverChief
11-24-2004, 08:45 AM
jump ball thrown belt high.:spock: oxymoron anyone?

InChiefsHell
11-24-2004, 08:45 AM
That play was a penalty. I don't care what anyone else says. It should've been called. The refs screwed the Chiefs on that. They should've given the penalty so the Chiefs could've tied it up at half time and pissed away the game some other way later on.
REP

Sydd
11-24-2004, 08:56 AM
On one of the replay angles, you can see the ref in the back of the endzone put his hand on the flag. As soon as the ball is intercepted he puts his hand down and starts running to follow the play. I guess he didn't need to call Gonzo for a push off at that point. :rolleyes:

KCTitus
11-24-2004, 09:02 AM
I don't see it as anything more than tight coverage by Harrison (37) and Roman Phifer (95)...

'Tight' coverage is a relative term that means different things for different teams. Teams like KC one of the league leaders in penalties and known for having a poor defense get flagged on play like that. Teams like NE get the BOTD on many close calls.

I wouldnt say it was of the AFC Championship variety last year, but clearly the teams suffering from the 'new' rules enforcement are the ones that typically didnt play 'tight' as the good defenses to begin with.

InChiefsHell
11-24-2004, 09:04 AM
On one of the replay angles, you can see the ref in the back of the endzone put his hand on the flag. As soon as the ball is intercepted he puts his hand down and starts running to follow the play. I guess he didn't need to call Gonzo for a push off at that point. :rolleyes:

I didn't notice the hand on the flag, but the contact went on RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM...I'm blind, I'm deaf, I wanna be a ref...
:rolleyes:

Sydd
11-24-2004, 09:08 AM
I didn't notice the hand on the flag, but the contact went on RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM...I'm blind, I'm deaf, I wanna be a ref...
:rolleyes:


There was one replay angle where you can see his hand move for the flag then drop away from it. Maybe it was just the way his arm moved, but it sure looked like he was going for the flag. One of my co-workers thought the same. Oh well, not like it matters at this point anyways.

Chiefnj
11-24-2004, 09:47 AM
The problem I have with the non-call was that up to that point the refs were calling a very tight game and were flagging the Chiefs for similar, if not even more minor, infractions. If the refs were consistent they would have thrown a flag.

Had the flag been thrown I still think the Pats would have gone on to win. They are a better team and are better coached.

LiL stumppy
11-24-2004, 10:06 AM
Yes it was,but its not the reason we lost the game.They shouldn't of put them selves in that position.

vckcchiefs04
11-24-2004, 10:22 AM
Tony got molested in the end zone without a doubt..... but even if we got the call and got the TD we probably would have found another way to get the defense back on the field and crew it up. The refs screwed us again... but what else is new.

Hydrae
11-24-2004, 10:26 AM
When it happened I turned to my wife and calmly (yeah, right) stated that Tony and Phifer were "bodied up". I would have to look at it again though to determine who initiated the contact before deciding if it was offensive or defensive.

Braincase
11-24-2004, 10:29 AM
Doesn't matter. One thing I will say though, the league implemented the new rules regardng contact to aid tight ends like Tony G. Has he benefitted from a single call this season?

Hydrae
11-24-2004, 10:36 AM
When it happened I turned to my wife and calmly (yeah, right) stated that Tony and Phifer were "bodied up". I would have to look at it again though to determine who initiated the contact before deciding if it was offensive or defensive.


Having checked out the film, the call could have gone either way. I will say that if Trent had thrown it to the back of the end zone it would have been a touchdown.

Ah well, we knew the season was over anyway. It just put us that much higher in the draft next spring.

jettio
11-24-2004, 10:45 AM
Gonzalez could see the ball and was trying to get to it and was physically impeded by Phifer who had no idea where the ball was and was physically contacting Gonzalez and forcing him away from where he was trying to go.

Obvious pass interference on Phifer. That play was akin to a moving screen in basketball.

Green is however showing a 2001 and sometimes 2002 tendency of choking on goal line or fourth down pass plays. Holding the ball too long or not reading the defense.

Something about the Patriots style of play that discourages officials from calling penalities.

Chiefs are very sportsmanlike due to Vermeil's influence, but get called for a lot of penalties even though they rarely or never have an intent to injure penalty or they never seem to try to cheat.

Pretty clear that the Patriots style of sustained aggressiveness gives them an advantage with the officiating compared to the Chiefs gentlemanly naughtiness.

Chiefs might set the record for team penalties and every team they play will tell you that they play clean and respectful football.

Patriots are simply a great team with a lot of real football players, but it does seem to me that for flow of the game penalties like holding, hands to the face, and contact with receivers and defensive backs, they challenge the rules more than most.

Of course, the farce of the AFC championship game in which the only post snap penalty was when the Colts punter was called for an illegal kick on the loose ball snapped over his head, influences my opinion about that.

Two teams fighting for a championship and only one game action penalty is called the entire game. Every penalty called is for false start or offsides.

Amno, you have a great team, but they challenge the rules and do it in the way that the officials let them get away with it.

Just enjoy it without bothering anybody with some BS analysis of the fortunate circumstance.

Phifer should have been called for Pass Interference. If he had been called for it, there would have been no mention of it or discussion about it afterwards. It was that clear. There would not have been one person on the Pats board or anywhere else saying that it was a horrible call.

Bill Belicheck or Romeo Crennel would not have made a peep about it if the penalty had been called, and that is because the call was warranted.

Straight, No Chaser
11-24-2004, 10:57 AM
Amno...Just enjoy it without bothering anybody with some BS analysis of the fortunate circumstance.
...

Second.
C'mon it's nearly 48 hours since Gonzalez was jobbed and you're the one bringing it up --again. The Pats didn't have to face Holmes and won't have to face Lewis either (a two week pass). Shouldn't you be at a Ravens board pimping your "...The Patriots do it this waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay..." spiel?
;)


--->

patteeu
11-24-2004, 11:08 AM
By the rule, you ar not allowed to touch a reciever passed 5 yards. Now this happens every play and is done by everyone. All corners do it and LB's do it. They have cut down on the mauling but there is still contact. Did they tough and claw at Tony in the end zone? Yes they did plain as day. That is PI. Should have been 1st and goal from the one.

I agree with this. I think it was Phifer who was all over Gonzales as the pass was thrown. It might have been mere incidental contact (based on his superior position relative to the direction from which the ball was coming) if he had made an effort to look for the ball, but he didn't so it should have been PI.

Ari Chi3fs
11-24-2004, 11:31 AM
the Flying Elvii 9... was that a reference to FDE?

BIG_DADDY
11-24-2004, 11:35 AM
I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on that call. I will say this though NE gets by with more holding and contact beyond 5 yards than any other team in football by far.

Saulbadguy
11-24-2004, 11:36 AM
Yes.

Wouldn't have made a damned bit of difference if it was called though. We still would have lost.

Sure-Oz
11-24-2004, 11:42 AM
The guy that was covering him was doing it a bit, harrison didnt do anything well except pick it off, but green admitted he should've thrown a better ball.

Garcia Bronco
11-24-2004, 11:54 AM
It wasn't pass interference......I think people neewd to man-up and realize it was a bad throw into double coverage.

jspchief
11-24-2004, 12:09 PM
It wasn't pass interference......I think people neewd to man-up and realize it was a bad throw into double coverage.

I haven't seen a single post that said it wasn't a bad throw into double coverage. Everyone on this board has conceded that it was a bad throw. But bad throws don't offset penalties.

morphius
11-24-2004, 12:12 PM
It wasn't pass interference......I think people neewd to man-up and realize it was a bad throw into double coverage.
someone needs to man up and read the stupid thread...

philfree
11-24-2004, 12:14 PM
The throw don't matter. It should of been flagged even if Trent threw the ball to someone else or not at all. But alas it's only a penalty if the dumb asses call it. They didn't and it's time to move on.



PhilFree :arrow: