Caveman_Nick Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 WEEI in Boston reported this hour that the NFL has acknowledged that the pass interference call on Ellis Hobbs in the endzone was a mistake. Apparently the report generated out of Jacksonville. No word on this has been released by the Patriots at this time. I am putting this out there in so that people who wish to try and find the link can do so. If this turns out to be true, and the Colts go on to win the SB, will it be viewed as tainted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk37 Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 well that crap is gonna happen take it from me man..dont take anything away from the colts the Patriots had their chances.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Ryan Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 are you kidding. If that is the case, 2 of the 3 Pats SBs were tainted. Tuck Rule, mugging Colts WRs in NE, those were as flukey and horrible called games, Ive ever seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 26, 2007 Author Share Posted January 26, 2007 (edited) well that crap is gonna happen take it from me man..dont take anything away from the colts the Patriots had their chances.. As I have acknowledged several times, the Patriots did have their chances. I recognize that. It's one thing to postulate on a website that the officials made a mistake. It's another when the NFL comes out and admits to one that would unequivocally have a game changing outcome. I am throwing this out there to see how this admission will alter people's views. The call doesn't equate a Patriots win. That would have me losing my mind. Leaving the rest of the game intact, it means overtime. No guarantee for any change in the who won. Playing overtime makes it a very different game, though. Edited January 26, 2007 by Caveman_Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 26, 2007 Author Share Posted January 26, 2007 are you kidding. If that is the case, 2 of the 3 Pats SBs were tainted. Tuck Rule, mugging Colts WRs in NE, those were as flukey and horrible called games, Ive ever seen. Could you point out to me where the league admitted mistakes in these cases? If you can, I will 100% agree with you. If you can't, then your point is....pointless in this discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 Does this mean the Bears win by default? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Next Generation Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 (edited) It's a good thing the commentator (forget who it was...Simms???) said, "Yep, that's face-guarding and an easy call." Edited January 26, 2007 by The Next Generation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 26, 2007 Author Share Posted January 26, 2007 It's a good thing the commentator (forget who it was...Simms???) said, "Yep, that's face-guarding and an easy call." That was supposedly mentioned in the article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdrudge Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 If this turns out to be true, and the Colts go on to win the SB, will it be viewed as tainted?No. Because the NFL routinely says that they either missed a call or made the incorrect call after the fact. They don't change the record books, the win still goes with the original winner. The Colts won. The Patriots lost. Give it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Next Generation Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 (edited) No. Because the NFL routinely says that they either missed a call or made the incorrect call after the fact. They don't change the record books, the win still goes with the original winner. The Colts won. The Patriots lost. Give it up. I agree...s h i t happens, deal. Edited January 26, 2007 by The Next Generation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 26, 2007 Author Share Posted January 26, 2007 No. Because the NFL routinely says that they either missed a call or made the incorrect call after the fact. They don't change the record books, the win still goes with the original winner. The Colts won. The Patriots lost. Give it up. When have I said anything else? To ignore this as insignificant, though, is irresponsible IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyr0802 Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 26, 2007 Author Share Posted January 26, 2007 so your answer to my original question would be 'no' then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 I think if we broaden the amount of things that can be challenged it would eliminate this type of error..They settled for 3 when they couldve had first and goal from the 1 in a dogfight..Thats a hugh blunder..I know purists arent crazy about instant replay but if we are going to have it it should cover a bigger range of things Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#40 Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 saw it reported on proffotballtalk.com today; they give you a link to Jax Jaguars.com where Vic Ketchman was answering questions. text to the specific question below... Jacob from Weymouth, MA: “He was face-guarding. You’re not permitted to do that. It’s been that way forever. You can’t shadow a receiver for the purpose of blocking his vision of the ball. That’s what Hobbs was doing. It was an easy call.” Vic, you should check your NFL rules book. Face-guarding was made legal in the NFL six or seven years ago. Learn the rules before you make blatantly wrong claims. Vic: I bow to your superior intellect. I checked out what you are saying and you are absolutely correct. Face-guarding was discontinued several years ago and I completely missed it. I talked to Dean Blandino in the league office and he confirmed what you’re saying. Blandino, by the way, was in the replay booth at the Patriots-Colts game. Ellis Hobbs should not have been flagged for pass-interference. He didn’t make contact with the receiver and in no way did Hobbs impede Reggie Wayne’s ability to catch the pass. Blandino confirmed that the incorrect call was made. It advanced the ball from the Patriots’ 19-yard line to the one-yard line and was the big play in a touchdown drive that led to a two-point conversion and a tie game at 21-21. Referee Bill Carollo made no reference to face-guarding in his explanation, but CBS analyst Phil Simms did. Apparently, he, too, doesn’t know the rule no longer exists. The next time you hear a TV analyst say, “he wasn’t playing the ball,” think of the Hobbs play, then turn down the sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 It's another when the NFL comes out and admits to one that would unequivocally have a game changing outcome. where the hell do you get this "unequivocally" crap? if they don't make that call, it's 3rd and 7 from just inside the pats' 20. how many 3rd downs did the colts fail to convert in the second half of that game? even if the call directly resulted in a change of possession, how the hell can you EVER say that a call in the middle of the third quarter "unequivocally" had a game changing outcome? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyr0802 Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 so your answer to my original question would be 'no' then? You would be correct sir. To offer some actual input though, if I am objective I could the potential for others to feel it's tainted. I know I feel like the Patriiots getting into the SB on the tuck rule was tainted, but that call had no impact on them in the Superbowl. Them winning the Superbowl has nothing to do with it, so the Superbowl win isn't tainted IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msaint Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 There are bad calls every game, sometimes you make out, sometimes you get hosed. They got it in our favor when Wayne tripped over his own feet (no PI), and they might have botched a couple other calls (e.g. Hobbs PI, Banta-Cain "roughing", no PI vs. Caldwell late in end zone). And I'm sure if the Pats had won, Colts fans would have been debating the Gaffney TD, which looked like he stayed in bounds on his toes, but was certainly close enough for debate, could have gone either way depending on the replay booth. To me, however, the single worst call was the Troy Brown "offensive PI" penalty. Borrowing from a friend of mine who emailed, that had a huuuuge effect on the outcome because... "Game was basically over if they didn’t call that penalty. Would have been 28-3 at halftime (24-3 at minimum). Manning wouldn’t have gotten the ball back in the first half and he would have headed into the locker room with the memory of a pick-returned-for-TD followed by a 3 play drive when he was sacked twice and took a delay-of-game penalty." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 I think if we broaden the amount of things that can be challenged it would eliminate this type of error..They settled for 3 when they couldve had first and goal from the 1 in a dogfight..Thats a hugh blunder..I know purists arent crazy about instant replay but if we are going to have it it should cover a bigger range of things i agree with this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrunt Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 No. Because the NFL routinely says that they either missed a call or made the incorrect call after the fact. They don't change the record books, the win still goes with the original winner. The Colts won. The Patriots lost. Give it up. +1 Mistakes happen all the time in the NFL in regards to penalties. Sometimes they can cause a possible change in the dynamics of a game, and sometimes they don't seem to change much at all. But the fact is the winner of the game is just that -- the winner. If the Colts win the Super Bowl, then their SB victory is not tainted. I'm pretty sure we can go back and review the last 20 years of playoff runs and Super Bowl victories and be able to point out 'game changing' bad calls in over half of the last 20 years. At least we can be glad that any 'arguable call' during the Colts/Patriots playoff matchup didn't make the game boring. Last years Super Bowl was a bore-fest because of one arguable call after another, and I am praying to the football gods that they don't let the refs interfere with this years Super Bowl. Just remember, bad calls happen on occasion, but if they are not repeatedly dictating the "momentum" a team has throughout the game then we shouldn't really be considering a win as "tainted." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 26, 2007 Author Share Posted January 26, 2007 where the hell do you get this "unequivocally" crap? if they don't make that call, it's 3rd and 7 from just inside the pats' 20. how many 3rd downs did the colts fail to convert in the second half of that game? even if the call directly resulted in a change of possession, how the hell can you EVER say that a call in the middle of the third quarter "unequivocally" had a game changing outcome? 3rd and 7 from the 20 isn't unequivocally different from first and 10 on the 1? I'd love to see that happen to the Broncos and hear your tune then. It's an irrefutable fact that, whatever the final score might have been, the route to get to that final score would be changed tremendously by that difference. And I am not complaining. I am asking a simple question. We have all talked about that being a very bad call that could have had impact on the outcome of the game. Does the league admitting that they botched it change the way people feel about it? Simple question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 26, 2007 Author Share Posted January 26, 2007 I think if we broaden the amount of things that can be challenged it would eliminate this type of error..They settled for 3 when they couldve had first and goal from the 1 in a dogfight..Thats a hugh blunder..I know purists arent crazy about instant replay but if we are going to have it it should cover a bigger range of things JMO, but the one call officials make on a regular basis that carrys enormous swings of momentum is pass interference. I would like to see some level of replay attached to this call, particularly because it is so subjective. And not because of this play, but because of all of the 50 yard downfield passes that get thrown in a season, any one of which could result in a 50 yard penalty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 If this turns out to be true, and the Colts go on to win the SB, will it be viewed as tainted? If so, the 03 Pats team's championship would be viewed as completely tarnished. Wasn't last Sunday's game the first time in three playoff games against the Colts that a Pats DB was actually called for pass interference? Are we supposed to believe that it really WAS the first time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 26, 2007 Author Share Posted January 26, 2007 If so, the 03 Pats team's championship would be viewed as completely tarnished. Wasn't last Sunday's game the first time in three playoff games against the Colts that a Pats DB was actually called for pass interference? Are we supposed to believe that it really WAS the first time? I am asking you the same question that I asked Sarge here. Can you show me where the league admitted making a mistake in this game? Because if you can't then it's irrelevant to this discussion. Specifically what I asked is, does the league admitting that they botched a call that led to a Colts TD and changed the outcome of the game change the way people feel about the victory. And, truth be told, I am not really asking Colts or Pats homers. I think how each side feels in that discussion would be pretty well divided along party lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 By the time Sunday 4th Feb rolls around, I will have convinced myself that the Colts are in the SB because they are a stinking bunch of cheats and, therefore, whatever the result, the Chicago Bears are the true champions. Thanks, Nick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.