It doesn't mean GB wouldn't have scored anyway. After all they scored on every drive in the first half until the final 2 plays to run the clock out. They didn't go into their try not to lose mode until the 2nd half.

Can you imagine how drug out the game could get if they reviewed every PI play?

---

I'm confused. He literally held down the receiver's arm. To me, that's textbook pass interference. Or was it holding? Or am I just so confused by what the rules even are anymore?

---

Define "catch". PI must be just as confusing for officials. I see it all the time and not get the call. WRS are always screaming for it but them they are just babies. 🤣

---

I actually get what I catch is. It's a little confusing but I get it. But literally pass interference has such a high price for something that is so undefinable.

---

Yep, almost every contested pass follows with a receiver with his arms up in the air crying for a flag if he doesn't catch it. The play mentioned above sure looked like PI to me though...

It looked to me that their legs tangled and that's what sent Davis to the ground, which wouldn't constitute pass interference. The grab itself did next to nothing but with it happening the same time as their legs tangling I see why it would likely get called in real time. The bottom line is that Lawson didn't need to reach out and grab him.

He also didn't need to leak this to the media either but that's what I expect from the Lions. Small time clubs breed small time players. When you haven't been relevant in half a century you look for moral victories.

---

But yet he still grabbed the guy's arm with the leg tangling happening at the same time. I mean.. isn't the PURPOSE of pass interference to stop players from just grabbing the opposing team's body from physically being able to move themselves to attempt to catch the damn ball?

---

I agree 10,000% w/ Ninja. There is NO WAY the NFL said it was not PI, the only way they could is if they asked Davis if the contact affected his ability to get to the ball. The letter probably contained an "if" and Lawson is adding what he says occurred to the "if" to draw his conclusion. I dont think teams are allowed to publish these letters, so let's add a 10K fine to the longest PI in history for this dope.

At the 15 yard line the CB's right hand is put on Davis' right arm at lower bicep. At the 8/9 yard line Davis' body begins to twist clockwise. Davis' left hand is getting ready to catch ball and Davis right arm is "inexplicably" looking like it is being pulled back toward Rodgers and Davis is moving it up and down like hes trying to free it. As Davis turned clockwise his left foot glanced against the CB's right thigh causing Davis to stumble. And as Davis fell CB no longer had hand on Davis' arm.

If Davis is moving his right arm up and down because he caught a glimpse of his mom in the front row and his turning to get ball had nothing to do with CB having a grasp on Davis' arm, then it is not PI. If the CB turned Davis, even a 1/4", it is unequivocally PI. There is no way a dork in an office looking at a video can determine the amount of force the CB exerted on Davis arm to turn, or not to turn him.

The NFL letter probably quotes this from The Rule Digest :

"Actions that do not constitute pass interference include but are not limited to:
(a) Incidental contact by a defender’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball, or neither player is looking for the ball. If there is any question whether contact is incidental, the ruling shall be no interference. [Emphasis added]
(b) Inadvertent tangling of feet when both players are playing the ball or neither player is playing the ball."

And then CB is saying there is a question as to whether the contact is incidental; therefore it is not PI.

But there is also this:
"Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: ...
(f) Hooking a receiver in an attempt to get to the ball in such a manner that it causes the receiver’s body to turn prior to the ball arriving."

No one can ever tell watching a video whether CB/WR contact is incidental, it is pure judgment. If CB puts hands on WR's back and just as this happens the WR flops laying out, his arms out-stretched like Superman jumping off a building; how can anyone just watching video know if there was a real push or the WR did an academy award winning flop? ON the 2nd Jordy TD, which is exactly like the TD Rollins gave up in week one to TE Thomas, Nelson and Thomas pushed off just b4 ball arrived, this is OPI, but the push-offs were so subtle, they were not, and really could not be, called.

To be an NFL player you need to use your hands in illegal, but subtle ways. The good position coaches teach and preach these subtleties. Much of developing strength in rookies is not about benches; but building strength in fingers, wrist and forearms so that great force can be exerted on your adversary's body with hand movements that look totally benign. If Richard Sherman was walking down a crowded street he could spin the average pedestrian around like a top with what looked like an affectionate touch of his hand on video.

You're right, that is the purpose. But as I said, I don't think the grab itself did that. I don't think the grab had the slightest effect on Davis. And if Davis is actually slowed or impeded by such an inconsequential grab, then he needs to hit the weight room even more than his scouting reports suggested.

Per the NFL rules digest:


What impeded Davis' attempt to make a play on the ball was their legs entangling, which is almost always, if not always, ruled incidental contact.

---

Even if their feet never got tangled Trevor wouldn't have been able to get both of his hands up because the dude was holding his arm down. He started holding his arm down a couple yards before the end zone and only let go once he fell. If that's incidental then so was the slight grab Randall got called for on that last conversion Minnesota had that he got called for. Also Trevor needed to run at full speed to reach that ball, do you think you can run at full speed with someone holding onto your bicep? If he had a hand on top of a shoulderpad or touching his back or something that's one thing but he had a hand wrapped around the receivers arm, there is no reason to do that but to interfere with his ability to catch the ball.