Why the Pass to Crabtree was a No-Call

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Why the Pass to Crabtree was a No-Call

    For starters Mike Pereira agreed with the call. However, Cris Carter, Mark Schlereth, & Tim Hasselbeck explained it the best on Mike & Mike Monday. They claimed it was postioning; Crabtree ran a poor fade route, which allowed the defender to get inside leverage on him via his hips; a knot he couldn't extricate himself from. Carter said an official would usually NOT call interference when a receiver gets outmaneuvered like that (especially since they were consistently leaning towards not calling it in the game anyway, which these experts approved of generally speaking), and the officials would feel it was Crabtree's mistake. Hasselbeck did allow that it could have been called defensive holding, but didn't feel that was likely to be called either.

     

    Regarding playcalling. Hasselbeck also claimed a brilliant defensive maneuver (known as Casino blitz) by Baltimore forced the 49ers hand into calling this poorly executed fade. Hasselbeck pointed out that Ravens Defensive coordinator Dean Pees also called this play late in SB42 when he was on the Pats; but that time, it didn't work, 'cause Burress didn't fall for getting tangled up by the PATS DB like Crabtree did with the Raven's guy (similar defensive formation), leading to the final score in that game.

    Here's the link:

    http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=8913719

     

     

     

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Why the Pass to Crabtree was a No-Call

    Had he run a better route it could have been touchdown city!


    But Crabtree ran right into the defender and both guys had their hands on each other.  You don't throw a flag to make up for a bad play like that.  Good no call, imo.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Why the Pass to Crabtree was a No-Call

    It was holding. In a Superbowl it has to be really clear to be called if it is a critical play like this one. Problem is it was clear. His hands were outside the body and holding.

    Here is the balance in call or no call: you dont want a cheap penalty to influence the outcome BUT both the O player and D player have to be allowed to make a play. In this case the O player was not allowed to participate in the play. There was a penalty on the other side of the field too but I have not looked as closely at it. In any case, as unfortunate as it would have been, this penalty really should have been called.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Why the Pass to Crabtree was a No-Call

    They should of ran the ball 4 times.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Why the Pass to Crabtree was a No-Call

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    It was holding. In a Superbowl it has to be really clear to be called if it is a critical play like this one. Problem is it was clear. His hands were outside the body and holding.

    Here is the balance in call or no call: you dont want a cheap penalty to influence the outcome BUT both the O player and D player have to be allowed to make a play. In this case the O player was not allowed to participate in the play. There was a penalty on the other side of the field too but I have not looked as closely at it. In any case, as unfortunate as it would have been, this penalty really should have been called.

     



    Absolutely the DB had a hand full of Crabtree's jersey. Which made it impossible for Crabtree to make a move.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share