I keep hearing over and over that Ginn was "interfered with" on this last play but I just don't see it. I've been watching the video over and over and while the defender is close, the only place he really makes contact with is Ted Ginn's shoulder pad (while going for the ball) and his contact there does nothing to alter Ginn's jump nor impede his ability to get to the ball in any way. The so-called "contact" made with the hip occured after the ball had already bounced off Ginn's fingertips- great timing actually although it didn't matter to the incompletion really.
To get a pass interference penalty (not just "illegal contact" which occurs in open space and is unrelated to the ball) the defending player really has to do something that actively impedes the receivers ability to get the ball, or has to actually make physical contact that has a visible physical effect on the offensive player's movement. The very negligible contact that occured on this play in no way fits either or those categories, as everytime small amounts of contact by the coverage occured it had no physical force behind it and was not sufficient to even squash a mosquite on Ginn's skin. I can't help but think of all the people on this who claim that Manning and Brady's TD records (over Dan) are tainted because of the NFL's re-emphasis of contact rules, taking away a CB's ability to play physical, yet some are calling for a penalty on a play where the defender made absolutely no contact of consequence with Ginn. Seems like a double standard. If such a penalty were called in prime time TV, it would have been such a huge joke that the shows would all be talking about it for the next week. And it's very noteworthy that Ginn never once glanced at an official to check for a PI, much less lobby for one. Obviously he didn't think that had anything to do with him not bringing it in.
The DB's physical presence may have influenced Ginn, but mentally and not physically. That he did so without making any real contact with Ginn makes it a pretty solid play by the CB and there's nothing penalty-worthy about it.
I hopes its OK to link to the video of the play, check it out on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zhf0Y0_eWBo
I just don't see how anyone could watch this replay and not see that, while not 100 percent a gimme, Ginn's failure to bring in this catch had absolutely nothing to do with interference. And I also can't see how you can watch this video and tell me that he didn't "make a play" needed to win the game. On every great throw and catch, there is a guy who brings down the catch as well. I told someone earlier this year that no matter if Chad could/couldn't have thrown the ball that Santonio Holmes caught to win the SB, I didn't think we had a WR who could bring that one down either. There may be another chance for Ginn, but he certainly didn't make the prime time play tonight.
To get a pass interference penalty (not just "illegal contact" which occurs in open space and is unrelated to the ball) the defending player really has to do something that actively impedes the receivers ability to get the ball, or has to actually make physical contact that has a visible physical effect on the offensive player's movement. The very negligible contact that occured on this play in no way fits either or those categories, as everytime small amounts of contact by the coverage occured it had no physical force behind it and was not sufficient to even squash a mosquite on Ginn's skin. I can't help but think of all the people on this who claim that Manning and Brady's TD records (over Dan) are tainted because of the NFL's re-emphasis of contact rules, taking away a CB's ability to play physical, yet some are calling for a penalty on a play where the defender made absolutely no contact of consequence with Ginn. Seems like a double standard. If such a penalty were called in prime time TV, it would have been such a huge joke that the shows would all be talking about it for the next week. And it's very noteworthy that Ginn never once glanced at an official to check for a PI, much less lobby for one. Obviously he didn't think that had anything to do with him not bringing it in.
The DB's physical presence may have influenced Ginn, but mentally and not physically. That he did so without making any real contact with Ginn makes it a pretty solid play by the CB and there's nothing penalty-worthy about it.
I hopes its OK to link to the video of the play, check it out on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zhf0Y0_eWBo
I just don't see how anyone could watch this replay and not see that, while not 100 percent a gimme, Ginn's failure to bring in this catch had absolutely nothing to do with interference. And I also can't see how you can watch this video and tell me that he didn't "make a play" needed to win the game. On every great throw and catch, there is a guy who brings down the catch as well. I told someone earlier this year that no matter if Chad could/couldn't have thrown the ball that Santonio Holmes caught to win the SB, I didn't think we had a WR who could bring that one down either. There may be another chance for Ginn, but he certainly didn't make the prime time play tonight.
