Quote:
Originally Posted by Bearcat
Oops... I'm getting old, there were so many horrible calls in a short period of time, I forgot they made that 3rd and 2 all by themselves.
I did watch it several times right after it happened, and a few times in slow-mo, because after the first couple of horrible calls on the previous drive, I was in straight up denial that such a thing was happening.... I understand there was contact, but 1) the ball was probably uncatchable since it was 7 yards beyond where he got tripped up, so there's no DPI, and 2) it was incidental contact from tangling up feet, so there's no DPI.
Evans' foot hit Breeland's as they were both running and then his foot got caught under Breeland a bit as he was already falling down. There's no pass interference on that.
And there was only 24 seconds at that point, and still needed a DPI call where the ball hit the ****ing back wall, which was far worse than the first one.
So, even with converting the 3rd down, I don't think it's a bad strategy by Reid.... it took two horrible non-existent calls, and even if the first one was somehow DPI, they still had a good chance at holding them to 3 if it weren't for the far worse 2nd DPI.
Reid was probably thinking they could possibly score 10 points between two possessions and make it 17-16, or at worse kick a FG to start the 2nd half and be within one possession... that was mostly the point.
|
So please bear in mind that I do not expect you to believe any of this. But I want to throw it out there for your consideration anyway.
1) Evans was tripped at the 23, the ball hit the dirt at the 19. Had he been standing, he's 6'5". His arms are 35" long and he has a 37" vertical. A ball can be up to 12' in the air and be catchable. Ignoring loss of momentum, the ball landed within 12' of him, so no. Were he not tripped, that ball is by no means uncatchable. It lands in frame on the slow mo. And when in doubt, the rule is not err on the side of probably uncatchable.
2) The tangling of the feet is indeed incidental contact, which is permissible when Either both players are playing the ball, or neither is playing the ball. So the tangling of the feet, totally fine. However, not all incidental contact is permissible. The rule is, "Incidental contact by an opponent’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball, or neither player is looking for the ball." Once the feet were tangled, the defender looked forward, and as he tripped dove out, slapped Mike Evan's ass and thigh, and tripped him up by doing so. As he did so, he was not playing the ball, while Mike Evans was still looking for the ball. As such,
it does not matter if that contact was incidental. It would still be impermissible contact and as such pass interference.
I can address the 2nd one as well if you like, but again I think there's little point. I don't even know if you have access to the video and can review my statements for accuracy. Would you agree that if the 1st ball was indeed well within Mike Evan's catch radius had he not been tripped, as I claim, and if the defender did indeed slap Mike Evan's ass and thigh as he was falling, while not playing the ball, while Mike Evans was still playing the ball, such incidental contact would be impermissible according to the rules?