Wilfork admits Boothe didn't hold

[St Marys]

A big part in that call was the way in which Wilfork twisted when he fell which sold it to the official.

Definitely a veteran move.  But the supposed best officials for the season should not be fooled by that.  And the guy who called it (the umpire?) as much as admitted he didn't see the hold but based his call on secondary observation of the play.  The ref suspected the truth but the umpire maintained his take and so the penalty was called.

Funny how all the talking heads put it all on Walker for his drop, but there was this bogus hold and a drop of a similar tough catch by Mario, on that drive, which could have given the Giants a 16-3 lead and completely demoralized the Patriots and led to a blow-out.  But the Giants were just lucky because Welker dropped that pass.  Which, BTW, wasn't thrown nearly as perfectly as Manning's pass to Manningham.

I find it amazing that an official should allow himself to be influenced unduly by a player, a feeling only bettered by the over the top reaction to Welker's drop which, having seen it again, Brady put in there perfectly but which I thought he jumped too early for.   Nowhere was it as precise as the Manning-Manningham play.   I liked Collingsworth's comments, that people will be talking about that play for the next 50 years.

[Rambo89]

I was impressed very much with that play by Boothe. Thought right off, the holding call was baloney. I thought it was a helluva block Mano a Mano with one of the elite interior DL in the NFL. Boothe showed plenty on that play.

As the Aussie's say "Good on Wilfork".

Boothe because of the way he played it left himself vulnerable for that to be called.  I put the blame on him that the Giants didn't blow that game open in the first half.  But at the end of the day the Giants won so it didn't matter.

[bamagiantfan]

Nice to know we are consistent and can complain about the Refs, win or lose. 

[Gmo11]

Well the refs were blowing numerous calls against our beloved Giants at an alarming rate throughout the playoffs.  I don't think we can blame some people for being a little quick on the trigger when it comes to the zebras.  That Booth call was bad, but understandable to see what the ref thought he saw on that play.  The pass interference that wasn't called on a play to Manningham was another missed call.  Overall though, they did a pretty good job.  It was hands down the best officiated playoff game involving the Giants this season.  Frankly, by a wide margin.

[CAGiantFan]

A big part in that call was the way in which Wilfork twisted when he fell which sold it to the official.

Definitely a veteran move.  But the supposed best officials for the season should not be fooled by that.  And the guy who called it (the umpire?) as much as admitted he didn't see the hold but based his call on secondary observation of the play.  The ref suspected the truth but the umpire maintained his take and so the penalty was called.

Funny how all the talking heads put it all on Walker for his drop, but there was this bogus hold and a drop of a similar tough catch by Mario, on that drive, which could have given the Giants a 16-3 lead and completely demoralized the Patriots and led to a blow-out.  But the Giants were just lucky because Welker dropped that pass.  Which, BTW, wasn't thrown nearly as perfectly as Manning's pass to Manningham.

I find it amazing that an official should allow himself to be influenced unduly by a player, a feeling only bettered by the over the top reaction to Welker's drop which, having seen iit again, Brady put in there perfectly but which I thought he jumped too early for.   Nowhere was it as precise as the Manning-Manningham play.   I liked Collingsworth's comments, that people will be talking about that play for the next 50 years.

I don't think Brady put it in the perfect spot.  Certainly he had to put it outside but he could have done that and still made it a lot more catchable.  There was no need for it to be so high and so far away from his body.  Eli made a similar throw in the SF playoff game - the one that Dilfer raved about how Eli threw Cruz open.  It was the same type of throw, except Eli was far more precise with his throw and gave Cruz a much more catchable ball than Brady gave Welker.  Welker could have caught it, but I thought it would have taken a great catch.  All of that "he catches that ball 100 out of 100 times" stuff was pure BS, IMO.  When the chips were down Eli made a perfect throw and Brady didn't.

[Rambo89]

Brady holds just as much responsibility on that play as Welker does.  Brady throws that ball well and Welker might have gone in for 6.

[CAGiantFan]

"The Ref" buries himself deeper:

http://insidefootball.com/blog/archives/3931

"Obviously, you are entitled to your opinion but I disagree. I felt that Boothe pulled the Patriots defensive lineman to the ground when he grabbed the back of his shirt after holding him while the play was underway.

As the hold, was at the point of attack as the runner went past and the Patriots DL ended up on the ground, I felt it was an easy call."

"As for the “wink,” I think you are seeing things. The league office had absolutely no problem with any of the calls (and non-calls) in the game. You appear to spend much of your time trying to find situations where the officials “missed” the call. Your opinion is not shared by those who were responsible for assessing the performance of the officials in this game."

Upon further review...

And then even deeper:

First, to clarify, the call was made by the Umpire Carl Paginelli, not the Line Judge or the Back Judge as has been mentioned by some. Secondly, I stand by my opinion that given the position of the Umpire in the offensive backfield, the location where the action occurred in relation to the Jacobs run, when it occurred and the results of the action (i.e., Wilfolk going to the ground),  I believe if the same action were to occur 10 times, in real time it would probably be called “holding” at least 8 and perhaps more.

The interplay between Referee John Parry and Paginelli was totally normal as the Referee will often ask the calling official whether he saw the whole play and how certain he is of the call. In this case, Parry, who had a different angle on the play, offered his opinion and Paginelli stood by his call and that was it. (I would point out that Parry could not “overrule” Paginelli on such a call.)

As for the questioning of Wilfolk and the interplay between the officials and the players (as well as the coaches), that is typically dependent upon the individual official, his relationship with the player (i.e., is it someone who has been in the league for a while or an unknown rookie) and the situation in the game (i.e., is there a time out or other opportunity for a conversation). I would also caution that I have learned to take the opinion of the player(s) with a grain of salt regarding whether it was a foul or not.

Oh good, in his opinion they would have got this wrong 8 out of 10 times and that makes it OK.  NFL officiating is great but it is OK to get a critical call in the biggest game of the year wrong 8 out of ten times because of "the position of the Umpire in the offensive backfield, the location where the action occurred in relation to the Jacobs run, when it occurred and the results of the action".  Even though the official didn't SEE the actual hold - because it never occurred.

And a veteran like Vince Wilfork doesn't know if he was held or not. 

Uh huh. 

It would also be nice if he got the guy's name right. 

http://insidefootball.com/blog/archives/3945

[MightyGiants]

"The Ref" buries himself deeper:

http://insidefootball.com/blog/archives/3931

"Obviously, you are entitled to your opinion but I disagree. I felt that Boothe pulled the Patriots defensive lineman to the ground when he grabbed the back of his shirt after holding him while the play was underway.

As the hold, was at the point of attack as the runner went past and the Patriots DL ended up on the ground, I felt it was an easy call."

"As for the “wink,” I think you are seeing things. The league office had absolutely no problem with any of the calls (and non-calls) in the game. You appear to spend much of your time trying to find situations where the officials “missed” the call. Your opinion is not shared by those who were responsible for assessing the performance of the officials in this game."

Upon further review...

And then even deeper:

First, to clarify, the call was made by the Umpire Carl Paginelli, not the Line Judge or the Back Judge as has been mentioned by some. Secondly, I stand by my opinion that given the position of the Umpire in the offensive backfield, the location where the action occurred in relation to the Jacobs run, when it occurred and the results of the action (i.e., Wilfolk going to the ground),  I believe if the same action were to occur 10 times, in real time it would probably be called “holding” at least 8 and perhaps more.

The interplay between Referee John Parry and Paginelli was totally normal as the Referee will often ask the calling official whether he saw the whole play and how certain he is of the call. In this case, Parry, who had a different angle on the play, offered his opinion and Paginelli stood by his call and that was it. (I would point out that Parry could not “overrule” Paginelli on such a call.)

As for the questioning of Wilfolk and the interplay between the officials and the players (as well as the coaches), that is typically dependent upon the individual official, his relationship with the player (i.e., is it someone who has been in the league for a while or an unknown rookie) and the situation in the game (i.e., is there a time out or other opportunity for a conversation). I would also caution that I have learned to take the opinion of the player(s) with a grain of salt regarding whether it was a foul or not.

Oh good, in his opinion they would have got this wrong 8 out of 10 times and that makes it OK.  NFL officiating is great but it is OK to get a critical call in the biggest game of the year wrong 8 out of ten times because of "the position of the Umpire in the offensive backfield, the location where the action occurred in relation to the Jacobs run, when it occurred and the results of the action".  Even though the official didn't SEE the actual hold - because it never occurred.

And a veteran like Vince Wilfork doesn't know if he was held or not. 

Uh huh. 

It would also be nice if he got the guy's name right. 

http://insidefootball.com/blog/archives/3945

Maybe it's just me, but I would think the mark of a good Ref would be their willingness to admit their mistakes and learn from them.  I would have to think it's counterproductive to deny or in this case double down on their error.

[JimboWHO]

Right Ref - take Wilfolk's comment about it being a bad call with a grain of salt.  Moron doesn't see how Wilfolk has every incentive NOT to put doubt in the official's minds about calling holding.  Wilfolk's admission that it was a bad call can be considered all the more accurate when one sees that DL-men would ordinarily be in the habit of 'working the ref's.'   If anything, Wilfolk would be complaining about holding if it was really taking place.

Paginelli and 'The Ref'.   Dumb & Dumber


JJM