Defensive penalty resulting in a turnover

[Lprechaun]

The "because refs" explanation wont cut it so just dont
What is the actual rule explanation of there being ANY defensive penalty that still results in the turnover standing.
Holding or PI only decides where the ball is placed after the penalty.

[RINGLEADER]

If the illegal contact occurs before the ball is thrown it is defensive holding.

If the illegal contact occurs after the ball is thrown it is defensive pass interference.

EXCEPT...

The contact for defensive pass interference can only occur if the pass was targeting the player fouled.

The ref said that the reason the DPI didn't stand is because Kelce wasn't the target of the pass. The reason Kelce didn't get the DPI is because the ref said he was illegally contacted AFTER the ball was thrown.

I would need to see the play again to be able to tell if that was the case. I doubt it was the case given where the penalty happened and how long Mahomes held the ball that play, but would need to see it.

[Lprechaun]

Is not a play technically dead once a defensive penalty happens unless the result of the play benefits the offense?
The explanation of letting the int stand while basically saying the defensive penalty was a non issue.
Yet in probably every game and in this game later on there were plenty of downfield holding and pi penalties where the player was not the intended target.
It screams forward progress playoff game

[Rain Man]

The only thing I could theorize is that they were saying the initial call of pass interference was incorrect. This is true, because the officials were incompetent at best if they were legitimately trying to call a good game. So then they were saying it should've been defensive holding instead, but that once the ball is in the air they don't call that any more? That would be news to me, but that's the only explanation I could figure out that didn't involve money changing hands.

At a minimum it was defensive holding. They were literally tackling Kelce all the way downfield constantly and it wasn't being called. Yet we were getting called for defensive holding constantly. It doesn't give one confidence that the game is being called legitimately.

[DanT]

What RINGLEADER said is correct. Here's what Ed Hochuli said, "After discussion, the contact that was potentially a hold was
while the ball was in the air. It is not pass interference because it was not on the receiver that caught the ball.”

Here are the rules. https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules...ive-holding394

Also see Article 7, which explains that, in effect, if the QB has thrown the ball, the defender can make contact with a receiver that would have been defensive holding had the QB not thrown the ball.

In short, there was neither defensive pass interference nor defensive holding on that play, in the opinion of the refs.

[TimeForWasp]

Originally Posted by Lprechaun

Is not a play technically dead once a defensive penalty happens unless the result of the play benefits the offense?
The explanation of letting the int stand while basically saying the defensive penalty was a non issue.
Yet in probably every game and in this game later on there were plenty of downfield holding and pi penalties where the player was not the intended target.
It screams forward progress playoff game

If it's against Kelce , it does not count.

[TLO]

THIS IS TOO COMPLICATED FOR ME TO DISCUSS. FIRE BURT VEACH AND WALRUS REID!!!!!

[lcarus]

They said the defensive holding on Kelce didn't count because it happened while the ball was in the air to a different receiver downfield. Which is complete horse shit because it happened before Mahomes threw it. The refs are just morons and botched that shit up.