I think that basically had to be the reasoning. Though I can't say I completely understand or agree with it unless there's some super-specific rules regarding these types of situations. It was uncatchable, but it was uncatchable because gronk was held. There were a few good angles which showed gronk pivoting and leaning forward right as the ball is entering the interceptor's chest.

though one thing I did miss: how much time was left on the clock when the ball was intercepted? If there was enough time, then it's definitely a shit call considering all gronk would have had to do it tip it/prevent the interception and then it's still 3rd or 4th down (can't remember which). If that was a last second play, then the ruling is a little more subjective. But I think "very hard catch" still == "catchable".

There was :03 left when the play started so it was the last play. Refs are usually hesitant to interfere on last second plays, they didn't want to call a shadow penalty that gave the Pats an extra play. If you're 50/50 it's safer to just let what the players did decide it. I think if the flag was thrown they should have called it though (unless I'm missing something).

Edit: Maybe it was uncatchable because the Panthers player would have been in front of it anyway?

I think if Gronk had made any effort whatsoever to get back to the ball, it would have been pass interference. I'm not technically sure the defender was "restricting the receiver's opportunity to catch the ball" since he wasn't even making a move for the ball. It would probably be a penalty for the first 59 minutes and I'm a big believer in consistency, but the combination of an underthrown ball and Gronk just moving himself farther away instead of coming back makes it a borderline call. I'm not sure what I think of the ref picking up the flag, though.

I'm not sure if Gronk didn't make an effort to get back to the ball because he was tired or because he assumed he'd get the PI call. But I think it would have been picked off without the hold. However, I'm betting Brady through that ball because he expected to get the flag.

all valid points. seems like from the clip Gronk is turned when he sees that the ball is clearly heading short, but does not make a big effort to come back up.

He was moving the other direction when the ball was thrown. It's definitely uncatchable as in no universe would he be able to get that ball. He doesn't even start moving in the direction of the ball until its almost in the defenders chest. Need I also remind everyone that if it's tipped in front of him (or touched at all) it's not PI. You could argue for 5 yard holding which would give you one untimed down from the 13.

Matt MgGloin was about replacement level in that game. Good TD drives lousy ever other drive. And no one had tape on him.

mostly fair points. But I don't see how grind moving away from the ball when it was thrown should weigh on anything. The point would be he was moving away as it came into the receivers chest. But you could also argue that he was doing so because he gave up on the play precisely because he held. Again, I think the call was fair. Really, Brady had his chance to make a better throw.

Him moving away from the ball matters, because when the ball is knocked down or intercepted before it reaches the receiver, it's not pass interference. I think they should have called the holding and given them another chance at the 13. If he moved towards the ball you could say the guy interfered with his ability to fight for the catch. As it stands it just looks under thrown.

Aren't all footballs on curl routes thrown with receivers back to the ball? I'm not saying him moving away didn't matter at all. I think I might just be nitpicking language.

i think there should have been at least a holding call. you could make an argument that the ball was uncatchable but you can't make the argument that he wasnt being held.

Other than the fact on last plays of the game like that its almost never called. But yeah he was being held. Brady really deserves the blaim because I think he was trying to deliberately draw pass interference by underthrowing

I don't think it was curl I think it was a post. After the game Brady said he was worried about it going out of the back of the endzone so he held back, he just held back too much. Gronk's second move was towards the back of the endzone, and you're generally not gonna make a guy do 3 moves (coming back to the middle) when the Panthers were getting that kind of pressure on Brady. I think part of the reason Gronk held up was because as he turned he was expecting a jump-ball. (I haven't seen the play since the highlights yesterday so maybe I'm off, but I'm pretty sure that's what was going on).

hah, yeah, i think you're right. I was saying crxions sentence "He was moving the other direction when the ball was thrown" does not imply anything about whether a call should made one way or another. which i still think is true as far as I can tell. so, mostly I was just being an ass.

Saying stuff like this is mind-boggling to me. Your team has never benefited from a bad call?

Most hilariously disappointing season: Texans or Falcons?

This week it was Schaub replacing Keenum to give the offense a "spark", I guess? Then he does what he always does and throws to a triple-covered Andre Johnson on 4th down because he rarely ever looks for another receiver. AND Schaub has gifted us with the sideline incident with Andre. He's done in this city, man. Maybe if Schaub had won us this game and we had an outside (extremely outside) shot at 9-7 and the playoffs then I could see playing him again, but short of injury it needs to be Keenum the rest of the way. If Kubiak starts Schaub against the Jags then I don't even know what the fuck. I mean, I still like Schaub but I'm like 90% convinced at this point that it's in the team's best interest to move on. The last couple of years were fun, but this season just makes it sting more in a way and people are either wistful about what could have been (and mad), or disappointed (and mad), or just mad. Plus "best QB you ever had" means he's better than David Carr. This team is going to have some tough decisions. Bring Antonio Smith back? Probably not for more than a couple million a year, and he's going to be coming off a $9m year so he might test free agent waters. Keep Owen Daniels? Keep Danieal Manning? Keep a clearly declining Johnathan Joseph? Keenum has done a solid job of not turning the ball over but I would take a QB in the second round at the latest in the draft.

It does imply if he doesn't change direction until the ball is almost on top of a guy 5 yards in front of him and low that the ball is uncatchable.