The ball landed well out of bounds.

What were your thoughts on the Akers flop?

---------------------------------------------
--- OregonDucks wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- Mosster47 wrote:

I thought a no-call was the right move. In the normal development of a route with a set throw it's a lot easier to call interference.

On that play Kap made a desperate throw on 4th down while both the wide out and corner were battling for position. When Crabtree created separation the ball was already out of his reach. It would have been an injustice to throw a flag there and let the Super Bowl be decided by a call instead of good football.

Now if Kap would have been able to set and throw and the corner came and made contact after initial separation then there would have been a flag.

---------------------------------------------

Um. The ball was out of reach because the receiver was being mugged.

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------
--- Ducksatbat wrote:



actually it was out of reach because it was out of bounds. No way he could have caught that and got 2 feet in bounds anyway

---------------------------------------------

You've never seen a wide receiver stretch out for a pass along the sidelines/endzone? (www.youtube.com/watch?v=24k3PCL4prU)

Unfortunately, we'll never know whether he could have caught it. The defensive back made sure of that!

cmsimg.news-leader.com/apps/pb...0&Ray-light

So, if what some of you are saying is reasonmable why doesn't the NFL just declare that there are no rules inside of 2 min to go? With no interference SF wins.

That's why holding would have been the right call and not P.I. Catchable isnt a factor in holding.

There was a PI call on SF during the Raven's last scoring drive on third down I believe, and to me there was little or no difference with the no-call on Crabtree. The holding is pretty blatant and desperate, and I think you have to make that call.

---------------------------------------------
--- Gaiser wrote:

If it was a bad call than they were making "bad" calls the entire night on both teams. 

For better or worst the refs let them play a very physical football team.  I thought the non call was consistent and that is ultimately what matters most.   I guess I missed it but somebody was telling me about one of the players shoving the refs.  It would normally have been an automatic ejection but no call was made.   When refs aren't even calling penalties on players attacking them, why should you expect a flag on that 4th down?

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------
--- Ducksatbat wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- OregonDucks wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- Mosster47 wrote:

I thought a no-call was the right move. In the normal development of a route with a set throw it's a lot easier to call interference.

On that play Kap made a desperate throw on 4th down while both the wide out and corner were battling for position. When Crabtree created separation the ball was already out of his reach. It would have been an injustice to throw a flag there and let the Super Bowl be decided by a call instead of good football.

Now if Kap would have been able to set and throw and the corner came and made contact after initial separation then there would have been a flag.

---------------------------------------------

Um. The ball was out of reach because the receiver was being mugged.

---------------------------------------------

actually it was out of reach because it was out of bounds. No way he could have caught that and got 2 feet in bounds anyway

---------------------------------------------

The fact was there was holding on the play. The question is could he have caught the ball. Too bad we will never know but thanks for sharing your opinion. One thing is for certain, it would of been a lot more exciting to watch the Ravens try and come back with time running out rather than the Ravens running a giveaway safety play at the end of the game.

How on earth can people say that ball wasn't catchable? Watch the replay. Assuming Crabtree is able to get there, that is a routine catch.

It was definitely PI or holding. No doubt about it. Whether you want to argue if it should have been called or not in this situation is a matter of opinion. I personally think it should have been called.

That said, I hate the play call more than the no call. If I'm Harbaugh, I run the pistol read option at least twice and let Kaep or Gore win the game with their legs.


---------------------------------------------
--- OregonDucks wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- Ducksatbat wrote:



actually it was out of reach because it was out of bounds. No way he could have caught that and got 2 feet in bounds anyway

---------------------------------------------

You've never seen a wide receiver stretch out for a pass along the sidelines/endzone? (www.youtube.com/watch?v=24k3PCL4prU)

Unfortunately, we'll never know whether he could have caught it. The defensive back made sure of that!

cmsimg.news-leader.com/apps/pb...0&Ray-light

---------------------------------------------

millcreekcoug wrote: The ball landed well out of bounds.

What were your thoughts on the Akers flop?

---------------------------------------------
--- OregonDucks wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- Mosster47 wrote:

I thought a no-call was the right move. In the normal development of a route with a set throw it's a lot easier to call interference.

On that play Kap made a desperate throw on 4th down while both the wide out and corner were battling for position. When Crabtree created separation the ball was already out of his reach. It would have been an injustice to throw a flag there and let the Super Bowl be decided by a call instead of good football.

Now if Kap would have been able to set and throw and the corner came and made contact after initial separation then there would have been a flag.

---------------------------------------------

Um. The ball was out of reach because the receiver was being mugged.

---------------------------------------------

LOVED the Akers flop because I had Ravens  8 Niners 3 on the board.    Rekick gave me $100!!!!      Bottom line is if they had called that PI it would have been a bailout call as Moss correctly noted that the throw was a total "I gotta get rid of this thing" throw.     Plus, as an all-star defensive back at the intramural level in college I think calls should always favor the defense.    lol

I have no dog in this hunt but I thought it was a good no call. The WR ran into the DB and there was some pushing/hand fighting by both parties. The WR still had a chance to make the catch had the pass been thrown better. He over threw the pattern. A higher softer throw could have resulted in a TD. Besides, SF had 4 chances from inside the 10 yard line. No crying in football.

It was a good no call, mostly because the refs had been swallowing their whistles all day. You can't 'let em play' and then make a marginal call on a game deciding play.

Outside of that, Crabtree initiated the contact and tried to push off and got held, and its really doubtful that ball was catchable anyhow. I would have hated to see them call it and basically give the 49ers the game. They had 4 shots and fell short.

All the slow mo replays give us great hindsight. Watch it in full speed and its a good no call.

because the penalty for holding in the EZ is...... wait for it.... A SAFETY!! John told them all to hold, it was great coaching

CODuckfan wrote: It was pretty obvious the refs weren't going to throw the flag on Baltimore all night. Watch the safety in the end zone, you will see Dickson bear hug a defender with the ref staring right at him and doesn't throw the flag. I realize it wouldn't change the outcome of the game, but it shows the refs had made a conscious decision they weren't going to throw a flag on Baltimore no matter how blatant the foul was.

For Baltimore to only have 1 flag the whole game is pretty silly. Sorry, no team plays football that clean. The box score shows 2 flags, but one doesn't really count because it was offsetting with San Fran from the little mele they had going. The other flag, the commentators thought it shouldn't have been a flag (running into the kicker).

This reminds me of the Bettis super bowl against Seattle...for whatever reason the NFL seemed to want Ray Lewis to win another Superbowl and helped that outcomes along where possible.

---------------------------------------------
--- phlduck wrote:

because the penalty for holding in the EZ is...... wait for it.... A SAFETY!! John told them all to hold, it was great coaching

---------------------------------------------

Shouldn't the officials have called the penalty, blown the whistle and preserved more time on the clock? Not that it would have mattered, but they did not call a penalty on the play.

Perhaps the officials wanted to get out of there before the lights went off again...

The refs are going to Disneyland!!

Yes the Niners should've had better play calling when they had a 1st and goal and couldn't punch it in, but that doesn't excuse the refs from such a terrible non-call. The Niners should've been able to score before it even got to that point, but if there's a hold that blatant (the defender had a complete handful of Crabtree's jersey) you can't ignore it no matter what point you're at in the game. I can't remember if a holding call like that would be an automatic 1st down, but the Niners should have gotten at least one more chance since they clearly didn't get all four of the chances you would think they would've gotten from a 1st and goal. Just because you think they should've been able to score before 4th down doesn't mean it's okay to take that down away from them by not calling such an obvious penalty.