Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

The Holding Calls. The right calls or a conspiracy?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 156
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

They were right by the law but my problem is the Packers were doing the same thing and the flags weren’t coming.  I mean they tackled a guy about to sack Rodgers on the last drive.  

The refs definitely tried to give the Packers a way to stay in the game - pathetic 

Lets put it this way...how often does a potentially game sealing drive end w 6 offensive holds in the final 2 minutes?

Just now, csmopar said:

Dude, I literally chunked the remote across the room and I rarely ever get mad.

Haha....man! I know. Me too, I rarely get mad, BUT, I had never seen anything like that before. Even the broadcasters couldn’t believe what they were seeing.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, poaponies said:

this almost feels like the no pass interference on the hail marry. In some ways  

Its what should happen. You could call hold or pass interference, or defensive holding on the vast majority of plays,  but its never called that way. So when it actually is called that way, there's an appearanxe of unfairness, or impropriety... disproportionately at the very least.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to hijack your thread Statesman, but another call I wondered about was the kick off that landed on the goal line. Yeah it hit the goal line but he picked it up out of the end zone and tried to advance it. How was that ruled a touchback? Seems it would be the same thing as returning a kick that you caught in the end zone?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Archangel said:

The sad thing now that the Refs did the holding calls. they will be watching the colts extremely close the next few games.

I hope it means the league will be watching this reffing crew extremely close the next few games.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dunk said:

Not to hijack your thread Statesman, but another call I wondered about was the kick off that landed on the goal line. Yeah it hit the goal line but he picked it up out of the end zone and tried to advance it. How was that ruled a touchback? Seems it would be the same thing as returning a kick that you caught in the end zone?

That’s the kind of thing reich should be yelling to the refs.  It’s my only complaint about him.  I haven’t seen him plea for calls.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d hate for the NFL to turn into the NBA when it comes to penalties.  In that league, it depends on the time of the game and the player involved if the ref will call the foul.  The NBA is unwatchable for me because of that.  
 

Those were good calls, but like everyone has said, they can call holding (and pass interference) on just about every play if they wanted.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dunk said:

Not to hijack your thread Statesman, but another call I wondered about was the kick off that landed on the goal line. Yeah it hit the goal line but he picked it up out of the end zone and tried to advance it. How was that ruled a touchback? Seems it would be the same thing as returning a kick that you caught in the end zone?

Once he gave himself up/called for a fair catch in the endzone, and it hit in the endzone?

 

The ball is dead.  Doesn't matter what happens after.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive never seen that many calls made in a clutch point in the game. They definitely didnt call the whole game like that, nor did they call the Packers the same way.

 

On that deep shot to MVS the next drive there was the same type hold in the endzone that got called 3 times against us...it seems like they tried to hand it to the Packers.

 

Whatever we won , i question the integrity of the NFL sometimes though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, StatesmanN said:

Once he gave himself up/called for a fair catch in the endzone, and it hit in the endzone?

 

The ball is dead.  Doesn't matter what happens after.

I would have to see the play again. I don't think he called for a fair catch, he didn't think the ball entered the end zone, picked it up and tried to advance it. No one else questioned the overturn, so I'm probably wrong, but thought I'd ask.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StatesmanN said:

Even Tony Dungy just said that the Reich were terrible with the passing calls under 2 minutes that went incomplete.

 

 

 

Yeah, but Tony always played it conservative, personally I've really liked how Frank calls plays aggressive. Any other coach would of punted it on 4th and 4 and Rodgers would of probably scored having the extra time. So you gotta take the good with the bad

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought most were legit.  The one on Pascal I would have let go because it appeared *to me* that the defender actually ran Pascal over and he was just trying to keep from falling down and both were literally out of the play at that point.  The rest I don't have a problem with.  Pittman looked like he was trying to makeout with the guy.  The ones on the OL were legit to me.  Just a bad bad bad drive there.

 

What I have most problem with are several I saw the Packers committing that weren't called.  At least make it equal there.  But not much of a problem with the Colts penalties.  And no, while I'm sure the league and the general NFL fan would like to see the Packers do well, I don't think there is any agenda there.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, superrep1967 said:

Yeah, we need a new o-line coach. 

I have been of that opinion for a while now.  I think Nelson may still be hampered from the back issues he was having before the start of the season, but that asside, the O line is shell of what they were last year. 

Im opinion they have been on a steady decline sence they changed coaches.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

2017 rule: The ball is dead if it is downed in the end zone by the receiving team.
New rule: The ball is dead for a touchback if it touches the ground in the end zone, even if hasn't been touched by the receiving team. The returner doesn't have to down the ball in the end zone to get the touchback. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Dunk said:

I would have to see the play again. I don't think he called for a fair catch, he didn't think the ball entered the end zone, picked it up and tried to advance it. No one else questioned the overturn, so I'm probably wrong, but thought I'd ask.

This. I think the refs went with “what the player meant” to do. But he still advanced it. So even if he did intimate a fair catch, he ran out with it. Which in the even of a fair catch, it’s a flag for unsportsmanlike conduct. 
 

Edit: see above. Apparently it’s a new rule.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What confounded me was the lack of calls on GB and the suddenness of all the calls.

 

Ive watched enough games to know that these holds happen on almost every play. The fact that the refs could see all of these on the colts side leads me to believe they are pretty keen observers so they willfully did not call any on the pack.

 

Additionally another item has to be brought up, did the colts o line play this way all game and the flags weren’t thrown any other time (that many flags) or did the o line suddenly regress for just one series?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PeterBowman said:

Not so much the holding being called, it was blatant lack of consistency and the timing.

The timing is true.  They didn’t call the holding that way anywhere else in the game.  Yes they made some other holding calls but they weren’t that tight the rest of the day.  That’s unacceptable.  You can’t call the game one way one drive and another way the rest or the day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone that thinks the refs were pulling for the Pack is full of playdough. Get over yourselves. Pathetic number of holding violations that Reich should fine his players for. But to the real issue is the Colts appear to be playing better every week. There was a time when they failed to comeback to win games. Every player is getting the job done and as pointed out in the game there re no weak spots.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, King Colt said:

Anyone that thinks the refs were pulling for the Pack is full of playdough. Get over yourselves. Pathetic number of holding violations that Reich should fine his players for. But to the real issue is the Colts appear to be playing better every week. There was a time when they failed to comeback to win games. Every player is getting the job done and as pointed out in the game there re no weak spots.

I don’t think the refs were pulling for the Packers.  I do think they called the game differently on that drive than they did the rest of the day.  Yes they were holds but other than one or two of them they were holds you could call on any play but officials don’t because the league doesn’t want it called like that.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

They had to do something they were getting flagged anytime they tried to run.  The passing was working and they were a first down away from either being in field goal range or running out the clock.  

 

Right, it was 1st and 20, and the refs were throwing a flag every run play, literally. Throwing was reasonable. 

 

Also, I don't care about Dungy's opinion when it comes to play calling and game management. He's incredible conservative and risk averse, and I don't think he would be able to handle the recent data trends regarding pass/run, 4th downs or two point attempts. So offering Dungy as an authority here doesn't work for me. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Plus the playmaking defense.    For Stafford id think its between us a SF. But this is up to the lions FO. 
    • I mean... everybody says that and right now maybe we are the best option for him, but would that be the same in 2 years time? Who knows...    About the pick compensation - yes, I would really hope Ballard doesn't go into a bidding war with other teams. Have a firm price set and don't go over it. 1st and 3d is about the max I would be willing to give for 33 year old Stafford. 
    • Stafford has been very public about his number one goal:   Winning.   (His words, not mine).   He’s not going to want to leave because we want to pay him $25m instead of $30+ million.   The Colts give Stafford the best chance of winning.   Period.  Leaving the Colts for a money grab would be the worst look possible for him.  I don’t see that as a worry.  Honestly.    My bigger concern is the cost in draft picks to acquire him.  There may be a bidding war, which could prove very expensive.   At some point, I could see Ballard dropping out.   We will likely know in the next 6 weeks. 
    • He is 33 and has 2 years left on reasonable contract. After that you will have to give him a contract in the realm of what other top QBs are getting now and he will be getting older... So you will either have to pay big or lose him and this is while all our young pieces are moving out of their rookie contracts... So we will start losing some of them. So IMO IF we get Stafford this will be the golden window to try to go all in...  Use Stafford's best remaining years at the best contract you will have him at, to try to surround him with best talent we can get while our young player are still cheap. Later he will be older/worse on worse contract and our young studs we either be paid much more (less money to get reinforcement elsewhere) or will be gone.    So... Go all in NOW. This doesn't mean you concede the later years, but IMO the best chance we have are the next 2 years if we get Stafford. This is legitimate Superbowl contender if we can get one of the top receivers, a very good pass-rusher and some solid CBs. 
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...