Two questions about the Pats game

[formerharvardquarterback]

Long-time lurker, first-time poster.

 

Two questions about the Pats game, which I was lucky enough to be at.

 

1) Was the pass interference penalty Nelson drew in the end zone legit, questionable, or a bad call? It was at my end, but the ball was so far away from him that I barely even looked at him as the ball was in the air.

 

2) Did Fitzpatrick actually fumble during the kneel-down sequence at the end, or were the Pats just being idiots when they started motioning like it was their ball?

 

Thanks for your help!

[TheMadCap]

Long-time lurker, first-time poster.

 

Two questions about the Pats game, which I was lucky enough to be at.

 

1) Was the pass interference penalty Nelson drew in the end zone legit, questionable, or a bad call? It was at my end, but the ball was so far away from him that I barely even looked at him as the ball was in the air.

 

2) Did Fitzpatrick actually fumble during the kneel-down sequence at the end, or were the Pats just being idiots when they started motioning like it was their ball?

 

Thanks for your help!

 

 

1. Yes, Nelson was very clearly grabbed when the ball was in the air. Fitz got really lucky, and gannon correctly blasted him for it.

 

2. Looked to me like Fitz was actually trying to score there, so it was legit for the Pats to try and stop him. I could not really see what happened after the play, but the Pats were getting frustrated and took shots after the whistle on that play (resulting in penalty) and the took another cheapie the next play (not flagged). ..

[CodeMonkey]

1) To me it was marginal at best. One of those where he could have thrown the flag or just as easily kept it in his pocket. In any event Fitz was lucky as hell as whatever interference there was, was not the cause of the INT. It was one of his classic WTF throws. Like I have said in other threads, the football Gods were smiling on the Bills Sunday

[bills44]

1. Yes, it was a legit PI call. The defender made no attempt to play the ball, and prevented Nelson from going after the pass.

 

2. No, didn't look like it to me. The buffoons on the Pats* D were all signaling that they had recovered the "fumble", but Fitzmagic got up from the pile with the ball.

[PromoTheRobot]

Fitz had already knelt down when he got popped and lost the ball. Play was over. No fumble. The PI was as blatant as it gets, but no call is ever a sure thing with the refs.

 

PTR

[Kelly the Dog]

1. Yes, Nelson was very clearly grabbed when the ball was in the air. Fitz got really lucky, and gannon correctly blasted him for it.

 

2. Looked to me like Fitz was actually trying to score there, so it was legit for the Pats to try and stop him. I could not really see what happened after the play, but the Pats were getting frustrated and took shots after the whistle on that play (resulting in penalty) and the took another cheapie the next play (not flagged). ..

1] I thought it was a decent call and probably interference but was not a no brainer. I think Bills fans would have protested loudly if it happened to one of our DBs. Ultimately, however, it was probably interefence. The DB did grab him, and before he looked for the ball, and impeded his movement back for the pass. DNelson probably doesn't get enough credit for drawing the penalty, but it was at the very least, technically by the rules, a penalty.

 

2] Fitz definitely downed the ball first on the alleged fumble. The play was over as soon as his knee hit and the whistle should have blown earlier (or the Pats getting a penalty for late hit). There was no fumble because it was well after the play was over.

 

On the first down, the Pats actually tried to let Fitz score. The DL kind of backed off and opened up a hole for him. Fitz, smartly, didn't take the bait and just put his knee down at the half yard line. It was a heady play.

[Maddog69]

1) To me it was marginal at best. One of those where he could have thrown the flag or just as easily kept it in his pocket. In any event Fitz was lucky as hell as whatever interference there was, was not the cause of the INT. It was one of his classic WTF throws. Like I have said in other threads, the football Gods were smiling on the Bills Sunday

 

I diagree. Our receiver was blocked from being able to get over to where he was trying to go. Had he not been interfered with, he could have made the catch or atleast knocked it down so it was not intercepted.

[bladiebla]

1) Legit, no question about it. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebUidLNoR-E#t=03m36 for a good angle on it. Direct link that starts at PI: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebUidLNoR-E#t=03m36

 

2) Fitz allready had his knee down so play over, then fumbled and recovered. So was it a fumble; no. Replay showed that one very clearly too.

Edited September 27, 2011 by bladiebla

[Albany,n.y.]

I diagree. Our receiver was blocked from being able to get over to where he was trying to go. Had he not been interfered with, he could have made the catch or atleast knocked it down so it was not intercepted.

That's how I saw it, but I wasn't sure whether they were going to call pass interference & put the ball at the 1 or were just going to give the Patriots a 5 yard illegal contact penalty. Fortunately, they gave us the big one. The DB clearly got in front of Nelson & blocked his forward movement.

Any way they ruled it, there was no way the interception was going to stand up.