The hold on JJ's Kickoff return was legal? MMQB

**cbaywolf** · 02-11-2013, 01:53 PM

I just thought it was a missed call (which frankly happens all the time)- but Peter King said that it's legal that Ayanbedejo held the 49 special teamer since he didn't fall to the ground. I have never heard this before- Is it, in fact, legal to hole as much as you want on a kickoff as long as the defender doesn't go to the ground? Why would exception be allowed? This seems bizarre, and counter intuitive.

**JAB1985** · 02-11-2013, 01:54 PM

Originally Posted by cbaywolf

I just thought it was a missed call (which frankly happens all the time)- but Peter King said that it's legal that Ayanbedejo held the 49 special teamer since he didn't fall to the ground. I have never heard this before- Is it, in fact, legal to hole as much as you want on a kickoff as long as the defender doesn't go to the ground? Why would exception be allowed? This seems bizarre, and counter intuitive.

I saw that in one of the replays and wasnt sure why it was missed or not talked about. The 49ers, including 49, didnt seem to take issue with it, so it must be at least somewhat common, but looked pretty blatant to me as one of the only guys that could have made the play. If thats the rule its certainly news to me.

**RavenScallywag** · 02-11-2013, 01:56 PM

Someone mentioned the "defenders blocking perpendicularly" being legal. So I'm not sure if that part of it made it legal, because neither one was truly holding, but they "combined" for it?

**JAB1985** · 02-11-2013, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by RavenScallywag

Someone mentioned the "defenders blocking perpendicularly" being legal. So I'm not sure if that part of it made it legal, because neither one was truly holding, but they "combined" for it?

to me it seemed the defender tried to roll off ayabadejo and the other Raven didnt allow him to. To me thats a hold but im not sure about this "perpendicular blocking" allows them to sandwich said player without penalty, basically neutralizing a player.

good view around the 1 minute mark.
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-cant-m...kickoff-return

**Hammerhead** · 02-11-2013, 02:22 PM

Mike Pereira explained it as it happened. Two blockers blocking one guy on a kickoff are not flagged for holding unless they bring the guy to the ground. They did not. In fact, if you look at Ayanbadejo and the other Raven (Allen?), they took pains to make sure that Miller stayed up. Miller never complained after the play either.

King learned about the rule between this week and last week.

If you think about it, it makes sense. Two blockers at an angle will almost always envelop one blocker around the body (at least a little bit). If that were holding, you could never have two guys block one guy unless it was right in front of his face.

Unbeknownst to most, that was actually a good no call. The one on Jimmy Smith was also a good no call. And I can even live with the no call on the Torrey Smith would be touchdown at the end of the first quarter. This, in my opinion, is how NFL games should be reffed -- minimal calls and the players settling it mostly.

**Ravenswintitle** · 02-11-2013, 02:44 PM

Special Teams Yo again!

**RavenScallywag** · 02-11-2013, 02:48 PM

The only one I'd be willing to concede was missed was Ed Dickson holding on the intentional safety. Result of the play is still a safety, but would that add time seeing as he held before Koch went out of bounds?

**LukeDaniel** · 02-11-2013, 02:49 PM

Solomon Wilcotts yesterday on NFL radio on Sirius said that holding should be called on the Smith/Crabtree play 0% of the time and that essentially Jimmy had the right to the space and the right to handfight back with Crabtree. The host of the show (didn't catch who it was) said that he agreed a "zillion" times over.

**Matchstick** · 02-11-2013, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by Hammerhead

And I can even live with the no call on the Torrey Smith would be touchdown at the end of the first quarter. This, in my opinion, is how NFL games should be reffed -- minimal calls and the players settling it mostly.

Yeah. Looking at that closely, I don't think the defender really grabs Torrey, just puts his hand on him.

However, earlier in the play, he does jam and redirect him pretty forcefully 9 yards downfield, which I believe would constitute illegal contact and a first down.

**JAB1985** · 02-11-2013, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by RavenScallywag

The only one I'd be willing to concede was missed was Ed Dickson holding on the intentional safety. Result of the play is still a safety, but would that add time seeing as he held before Koch went out of bounds?

There was about 5 holds on that play (dicksons was probably the least aggressive actually, some guys tackled their man) and i think it was discussed that no time could be added on to the clock regardless. it should have been called and explained but the result was the same regardless.

**Hammerhead** · 02-11-2013, 02:58 PM

Originally Posted by Matchstick

Yeah. Looking at that closely, I don't think the defender really grabs Torrey, just puts his hand on him.

However, earlier in the play, he does jam and redirect him pretty forcefully 9 yards downfield, which I believe would constitute illegal contact and a first down.

Agreed -- it looks more like illegal contact 10-12 yards past the line of scrimmage. But I am OK with them letting them play consistently like that.

**RavenScallywag** · 02-11-2013, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by JAB1985

There was about 5 holds on that play (dicksons was probably the least aggressive actually, some guys tackled their man) and i think it was discussed that no time could be added on to the clock regardless. it should have been called and explained but the result was the same regardless.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...hole-in-rules/

I do now remember reading that now.