Ravens intentional holding on punt

[CS85]

I'm going to pretty much agree with Cujo (while simultaneously arguing against him in another thread, crazy, I know) on this, but only to an extent (our progress has been dashed).

Let's say the safety play was called as holding (as it admittedly should've been), it wouldn't have stopped the clock. If time had expired they likely would've simply awarded SF the 2 points and given them an empty clock for the kick return.

Also you've got to acknowledge the ill-thought out return of Ted Ginn to even consider lateraling the football.. He threw himself headfirst into the fray trying to be a hero without giving his return men an opportunity to make something happen.

...so I don't really know exactly what's being argued here. This isn't even microscopically comparable to a truly arguable robbery, ala the Packers/Seahawks MNF game earlier this year.

[Still MIGHTY]

Again this is all totally trite. The 49ers got stonewalled on two separate goal line stands, both times in which they had all the momentum and still couldn't punch it in.

Well to be fair, on one of those goal line stands...

This should have been a catch and fumble in my opinion (no one ever knows what the exact definition of a "football move" at any given time, but I think this is one. Catch, two steps while dragging a defender, a turn up field.) so the ball would have been on the four-ish instead of what the 10 or so? AND as I believe the gif shows, helmet to helmet as well. So if they called that, then you'd have a first down at the 2-ish with 30 seconds remaining. I have a feeling the outcome would be quite different.

---

But yes, as for this topic, like CS85 eloquently put it earlier, holding in the endzone would be a safety anyway... so... good move Baltimore.

[CS85]

Again this is all totally trite. The 49ers got stonewalled on two separate goal line stands, both times in which they had all the momentum and still couldn't punch it in.

Well to be fair, on one of those goal line stands...

This should have been a catch and fumble in my opinion (no one ever knows what the exact definition of a "football move" at any given time, but I think this is one. Catch, two steps while dragging a defender, a turn up field.) so the ball would have been on the four-ish instead of what the 10 or so? AND as I believe the gif shows, helmet to helmet as well. So if they called that, then you'd have a first down at the 2-ish with 30 seconds remaining. I have a feeling the outcome would be quite different.

Hypotheticals weren't listed in the official rule book for this already dumb argument. If we're going to go down that road I'll take it a step further:

Let's say hypothetically...

• ...that the 49ers weren't offsides on the opening Ravens drive and forced a field goal attempt.
  
• ...that Crabtree catches the touchdown pass that hit his hands in the 1st quarter.
  
• ...that James doesn't fumble just outside the Ravens red zone
  
• ...that Whitner didn't subsequently facemask the hell out of Dixon to give Ravens a comfy seat at the 49er 4YL.
  
• ...that Kaepernick didn't overthrow Randy Moss (who's plenty familiar with half-assing in big games) and it wasn't picked.
  
• ...that Justin Tucker's fake field goal wasn't foiled by a great play from Patrick Willis.
  
• ...that Cary Williams breaks on the pass a little sooner and converts an easy pick-six.
  
• ...that Chris Culliver tackled Jacoby Jones instead of standing there watching him score.
  
• ...that the Ravens weren't called for "running into the kicker" and Akers missed FG stood.
  
• ...that Sapoaga was called for an obvious late hit on Flacco as they were making an end zone push.
  
• ...that the 49ers didn't have to waste a timeout to avoid a delay of game penalty in the final drive.
  

[BBTV]

Whoever said that Baltimore would've won on a 10 second run off - I think that only applies when the trailing team commits a foul that would stop the clock when they don't have time outs. IIRC if you have time outs, you can "trade" one to avoid the run off. I don't think it would have applied to Baltimore.

[ESTONES6]

I think I counted 4 holds, including one where the Ravens player looked like he was trying to belly to back suplex him. In other words, the 49er was running in one direction and the Raven was literally pulling him backwards in the other direction.

Isn't there a rule where if the Offense commits a penalty inside 2 minutes, there is a 10 second run off on the clock?

[marble21]

Isn't there a rule where if the Offense commits a penalty inside 2 minutes, there is a 10 second run off on the clock?

Yes, if the penalty causes the clock to stop basically.

[BBTV]

Isn't there a rule where if the Offense commits a penalty inside 2 minutes, there is a 10 second run off on the clock?

Yes, if the penalty causes the clock to stop basically.

Well as I just posted, that only applies if the team is trailing and has no time outs. If a losing team commits an offensive penalty and has a TO, they get charged that TO. If not, it's a 10 second run off. Just to prevent intentional fouls that would trade 5yds for a timeout. It did not apply at all in this situation, and the only way in which those penalties would have mattered is if for some reason the punter did something silly like actually punted the ball.

[njmeadowlanders]

Correct. There would not have been a run off.

Even if there WERE a run off, the Niners could've declined the penalty (and thus the run off) and still had the safety.

That's that.

[rams80]

Will the NFL even bother to sweep under the carpet, their intentional non call of the intentional holding on the intentional safety? Or will they just ignore the whole thing?

And I don't get underlining either!

Let's see, just joined today? Oh you've earned this one...

[Still MIGHTY]

Again this is all totally trite. The 49ers got stonewalled on two separate goal line stands, both times in which they had all the momentum and still couldn't punch it in.

Well to be fair, on one of those goal line stands...

This should have been a catch and fumble in my opinion (no one ever knows what the exact definition of a "football move" at any given time, but I think this is one. Catch, two steps while dragging a defender, a turn up field.) so the ball would have been on the four-ish instead of what the 10 or so? AND as I believe the gif shows, helmet to helmet as well. So if they called that, then you'd have a first down at the 2-ish with 30 seconds remaining. I have a feeling the outcome would be quite different.

Hypotheticals weren't listed in the official rule book for this already dumb argument. If we're going to go down that road I'll take it a step further:

Let's say hypothetically...

Well yeah. Of course we can go through any game and change the outcome of numerous things to sway it one way or the other.

What if the 49ers won the coin toss? What if the 49ers drank blue Gatorade? What if Ray Lewis killed two guys?

I was just referring to one play on the crucial goal line stands you mention that I think was called incorrectly on two things.

Basically, the refs let them play in this one, the 49ers were down 22 points, and didn't make enough plays to win.

[Lights Out]

Will the NFL even bother to sweep under the carpet, their intentional non call of the intentional holding on the intentional safety? Or will they just ignore the whole thing?

And I don't get underlining either!

If you're waiting on any pro sports league to hold bad refs accountable, don't hold your breath. No matter how bad they are, they'll always be doubly protected by the league and by sports fans' general attitude that calling out poor officiating is "whining" and a "loser mindset."

That being said, the refs were pretty bad on both sides. I can't really complain that much because I'd rather the refs generally let the players play (which they did), but I can understand the frustration because there were obvious calls missed against both teams.

Here's an idea for Goodell: instead of changing poor refs' ratings to allow them to do the Super Bowl, why not select your highest-ranked refs to officiate the most important game of your sport? Novel idea, I know, but it's worth a try.

[rams80]

Also you've got to acknowledge the ill-thought out return of Ted Ginn to even consider lateraling the football.. He threw himself headfirst into the fray trying to be a hero without giving his return men an opportunity to make something happen.

Yeah, what the crap was up with that? I kept waiting for a hook-and-lateral that never materialized.

[BlueSky]

Either I'm misunderstanding the OP's point or this thread ended up in Knee-Jerk City in record time. I thought Brave-Bird was simply highlighting the unusual fact that in the SB we had a scenario where a team benefited by intentionally breaking the rules. As many have pointed out, had the flag been thrown, 1) the play would have continued, 2) the safety would have occurred, and 3) there would have been no effect on the clock.

With that said, I think the refs have to call it regardless of what the outcome may or may not be. There's a difference between "letting them play" and "get us some guide dogs down here to lead the refs off the field" which is the thought I was left with when they didn't call holding. I wonder whether they let things be because to call the penalty with absolutely no effect on the play's outcome would've just shined a spotlight on the fact that the rules allowed for such a bizarre scenario to begin with.

On the officiating in general, it was awful, but it was evenly awful. Yeah, there was a lot of contact on the 4th down play but SF got away with several obvious PIs themselves. I thought one major failure was several players who threw punches and one who shoved an official but weren't ejected. The zebras almost lost control of that game.

And @rams80, I know what you meant about the "hook and lateral" but a player can only accomplish the "hook" part by running a pass pattern, not on a kick return.

[GFB]

Again this is all totally trite. The 49ers got stonewalled on two separate goal line stands, both times in which they had all the momentum and still couldn't punch it in.

Well to be fair, on one of those goal line stands...

This should have been a catch and fumble in my opinion (no one ever knows what the exact definition of a "football move" at any given time, but I think this is one. Catch, two steps while dragging a defender, a turn up field.) so the ball would have been on the four-ish instead of what the 10 or so? AND as I believe the gif shows, helmet to helmet as well. So if they called that, then you'd have a first down at the 2-ish with 30 seconds remaining. I have a feeling the outcome would be quite different.

---

But yes, as for this topic, like CS85 eloquently put it earlier, holding in the endzone would be a safety anyway... so... good move Baltimore.

That was what I thought.

I also believe if Crabtree had given up on the 4th down lob after he was grabbed and done one of those "two arms in the air, where's my call?" maneuvers, he would have gotten the flag. Instead, he tried pushing back off and it looked like they were equally fighting for the ball to the naked eye.

Plus, I loved that the game ended on a boneheaded play by a former Buckeye.

[NJTank]

It is just a resentence so nothing has to be changed until the sentence

[cameroncrazie07]

I said the same thing that the OP said when that play initially occurred also. Those of you who were all saying that it would've been 2 points anyways and the score wouldn't have changed, we all know that. I think that if you look, the first holding that I see on that play occurred with 10 seconds to go. Now it's all a mute point though after thinking about the actual rules, because a play isn't blown dead after a hold, so the time would've ran off anyways. Overall just a really smart play on the Ravens part.

[DaytonBlue]

What if Beyonce doesn't break the Superdome? (or whatever caused the power outage)

I have never agreed with the idea of "letting them play" just because it's the end of the game, but they let them play all night. It's like in baseball when an umpire has an odd strikezone but is at least consistent.

BTW, that take a safety reminded me of watching the Grey Cup this year. I'm glad CFL is going to be on NBCSN going forward. If they hadn't already tried this unsuccessfully, I'd say they should expand the CFL to the U.S.

[crashcarson15]

Well yeah. Of course we can go through any game and change the outcome of numerous things to sway it one way or the other.

What if the 49ers won the coin toss? What if the 49ers drank blue Gatorade? What if Ray Lewis killed two guys?

Did this go unnoticed or...?

[Kramerica Industries]

I think he said that very much on purpose.

[BlueSky]

One last thing about this play...seems the NFL should consider the opposite of the 10-second runoff for such a situation, i.e. if a team commits a foul with the intent of running off time, 10 seconds (or whatever) amount of time should be added back to the clock.

There's another interesting question buried in that play. Suppose the punter had dropped the snap and the Niners trying to recover it were held in the manner they were. Could it develop in such a way that the referee could invoke the "unfair act" part of the rules that covers stuff like guys making tackles from the sidelines? If so, in the Super Bowl situation SF would have been awarded a touchdown - and the Lombardi. Pretty intriguing possibility.