January 22, 2019 02:48AM
After loading the video onto my computer, I went through the play frame by frame. I used two camera angles and found that there was no contact until 1/6 of a second before the ball arrived. At the end of the play, an official was standing beside the receiver, who went right back to the huddle without the slightest protest (not a word and no body language). It was a bang-bang play in which there was contact a split second before the ball arrived. I could produce many examples of non-calls in that situation. I have seen similar plays discussed during replays in which the announcers said that the officials allow defenders to make contact a split second before the ball arrives. That's not how I would prefer such calls to be made, but they need to be made consistently. The call on that play is consistent with how such plays are typically called. The NFL always has knee jerk reactions, as they have had regarding what constitutes a catch. I wouldn't be surprised if they change the rules next year so that defenders aren't given any margin.
SubjectAuthorViewsPosted

  the 'pass interference' play viewed from the side

L.A.Rams1162January 21, 2019 02:37AM

  Re: the 'pass interference' play viewed from the side

ramjam79383January 21, 2019 02:58AM

  The controversy is BS even with it being PI......

roman18330January 21, 2019 03:09AM

  Yup, this is true

EternalHorns450January 21, 2019 03:12AM

  I brought this exact thing up...

GlacieRam309January 21, 2019 03:36AM

  Re: I brought this exact thing up...

sfbayram323January 21, 2019 04:12PM

  Re: YEP!! You've nailed it!!

THE FANATIC369January 21, 2019 05:56AM

  Agree 1000%...

jemach281January 21, 2019 06:00AM

  Are there clips of the different angles ?

dodgerram202January 21, 2019 06:10AM

  There is...but no one is showing it because..

jemach270January 21, 2019 06:12AM

  yes

L.A.Rams194January 21, 2019 06:17AM

  Could you provide a link to those clips ?nm

dodgerram169January 21, 2019 06:19AM

  Here it is...

L.A.Rams230January 21, 2019 01:29PM

  Re: Here it is...

WhiteHorns204January 21, 2019 01:58PM

  Re: Here it is...

L.A.Rams518January 21, 2019 02:39PM

  Re: Agree 1000%...

Classicalwit182January 21, 2019 06:21AM

  Common guys

waterfield316January 21, 2019 06:14AM

  Re: Common guys

L.A.Rams243January 21, 2019 06:18AM

  We'll drop it when they do.

Saguaro340January 21, 2019 06:21AM

  Re: We'll drop it when they do.

waterfield247January 21, 2019 06:30AM

  Oh, no doubt I'd be upset, waterfield.

Saguaro257January 21, 2019 06:36AM

  Re: We'll drop it when they do.

Classicalwit276January 21, 2019 06:58AM

  Re: We'll drop it when they do.

bigjimram21163January 21, 2019 03:22PM

  Re: I agree mostly

Speed_Kills282January 21, 2019 06:21AM

  Re: I agree mostly

waterfield224January 21, 2019 06:37AM

  Re: well sure they are talking about it because the media keeps running it

Speed_Kills276January 21, 2019 01:31PM

  Agreed. The REAL villains of the piece?

RFL268January 21, 2019 06:28AM

  Tom Mack

waterfield285January 21, 2019 06:49AM

  Re: Common guys

Classicalwit224January 21, 2019 06:39AM

  Re: Common guys

bigjimram21153January 21, 2019 03:16PM

  Re: Common guys

moklerman156January 21, 2019 03:26PM

  it doesn't really matter anymore...cuz it's over & done with...

SunTzu_vs_Camus196January 21, 2019 06:41AM

  Re: it doesn't really matter anymore...cuz it's over & done with...

waterfield219January 21, 2019 06:58AM

  Agreed...the non facemask call on Goff...

ramsfanatic269January 21, 2019 01:44PM

  As mentioned...

JamesJM205January 21, 2019 01:47PM

  Re: Agreed...the non facemask call on Goff...

moklerman277January 21, 2019 03:30PM

  frame by frame: 1/6 of a second

L.A.Rams254January 22, 2019 02:48AM

  Re: frame by frame: 1/6 of a second

dodgerram322January 22, 2019 03:18AM

  Permanent Stockholm Syndrome

EternalHorns229January 22, 2019 03:31AM