10-22-2023, 05:56 PM
(10-22-2023, 05:44 PM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: Gene didn't say that, he said there was merit for them to review it. Feel like you're making up shit now lol. The DPI occurred after the ball was thrown, it didn't affect the QBs throw. If there was DPI before the throw maybe uncatchable doesn't apply.
If the QB throws the ball 100 yards in the stands and you commit DPI after the throw, is it DPI?
The official NFL rule book contains only one reference to the term “uncatchable.” Rule 8, Section 5, Article 3© identifies as a permissible act "[c]ontact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the pass is clearly uncatchable by the involved players.”
I have it Tivo'd. Want me to put it up? First one he said it was illegal contact. End.
Second play. He said "the tug happens early there. I think there is material effect. The catchability aspect, I don't disagree that they should have had a further conversation on whether it is catchable or not. Usually uncatchable balls, the ball ends up in the stands or it is really an exaggerated throwaway."
"I do support the contact as it relates to pass interference because the tug happens early when the ball is in the air."
What is made up?
Like a teenage girl driving a Ferrari.
