Even IF the 49ers Get The Holding Call, They STILL LOSE

[Fang]

I cannot understand why 49ers fans and Raven haters are saying the non-call should have gone their way and the 49ers should have won. Even IF the 49ers get the call, they still have to score a touchdown on the #1 redzone defense in the league. That's no easy task.

So let's say they do score, there was 1:46 left and the Ravens had all 3 timeouts. Assuming the Ravens use some timeouts, they get the ball back with about 50 seconds to a minute remaining with a timeout or two. They have the hottest QB in the playoffs and a kicker who was making 60 yarders in warm ups. Best case scenerio Flacco drives for a game winning TD or FG (assuming the 49ers don't convert the 2 point conversion again). Or Flacco drives for a game tying FG and forces overtime.

I'll take the Ravens with Flacco in overtime, or a game winning FG by Tucker at the end of regulation.

But the correct call was a non-call and the Ravens are WORLD CHAMPIONS!!!

[JOHNBOY152]

Some comments from a 49er:
http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/2013/...just-panicked/

I looked at the last pass from two angles...appeared to be uncatchable...should have been offsetting penalties holding/pushing off...that way Boger would have come out squeaky clean...

[Ravens2006]

Crabtree basically admitted and was quoted implying that the pass probably wasn't catchable. I don't know if it "wasn't catchable" in general, but I don't think he could have caught it with both feet in bounds. Either way, there was obvious and undeniable illegal contact both ways beyond 5 yards. The free blitzer made Kap rush the throw. It was a good no-call both ways, and consistent with how Bogar's crew treated the whole game.

As has been pointed out, Torrey Smith catches a long TD earlier in the game if he's not held WAY down field. The only reason they called the one against Culliver was that he had Smith at a complete stand-still. Moving contact was fair game all day long. It was similar to the way the Pats played the Colts in the earlier 00s, jamming and beating on their receivers all day long in the playoffs. If they call the blatant out-of-bounds hit on Flacco (one that Sanders jokingly said in post-game review would have resulted in ejection had Brady or Manning been on the receiving end) the Ravens get a fresh set of downs on the goal line earlier in the game, likely extending the lead further. There was another play where Rice was stopped on a rush between the tackles, and well after the whistle a 49er defender came in with a blatant late hit, helmet to helmet. Could have been justifiably called, even though he wasn't a receiver.

In all honesty, one way I think the league can indirectly reduce these big dangerous hits on "defenseless receivers" downfield is to tweak the rules the other way for once... and allow more contact. Slow these guys down and stop them from running with reckless abandon, and they won't get hit as hard.

[Cameron]

Crabtree didn't whine about the call.

Case closed.

[kronusthebonus]

Man, I wish that damn blackout never happened. It would have been awesome to win in a blowout fashion, shutting up all the haters.

[LarryN]

Crabtree basically admitted and was quoted implying that the pass probably wasn't catchable. I don't know if it "wasn't catchable" in general, but I don't think he could have caught it with both feet in bounds. Either way, there was obvious and undeniable illegal contact both ways beyond 5 yards. The free blitzer made Kap rush the throw. It was a good no-call both ways, and consistent with how Bogar's crew treated the whole game.

As has been pointed out, Torrey Smith catches a long TD earlier in the game if he's not held WAY down field. The only reason they called the one against Culliver was that he had Smith at a complete stand-still. Moving contact was fair game all day long. It was similar to the way the Pats played the Colts in the earlier 00s, jamming and beating on their receivers all day long in the playoffs. If they call the blatant out-of-bounds hit on Flacco (one that Sanders jokingly said in post-game review would have resulted in ejection had Brady or Manning been on the receiving end) the Ravens get a fresh set of downs on the goal line earlier in the game, likely extending the lead further.

In all honesty, one way I think the league can indirectly reduce these big dangerous hits on "defenseless receivers" downfield is to tweak the rules the other way for once... and allow more contact. Slow these guys down and stop them from running with reckless abandon, and they won't get hit as hard.

Not to mention that the Niners got 3 free points on the (F)Akers flop.

[bawlmer_fan]

Reed was there to knock him out of bounds had he caught the ball. No way Crabtree would have kept two feet in.

[baltimoreron]

The call was not made. The refs let them play football. We have the Lombardi. Who cares?

[Saticon3]

Well, it's a "what-if" scenario which can go many ways-- I agree the Ravens would have won either way, but "if" the 49'ers get the call, they get 1st & goal from the 1 right? They could have scored on 3rd or 4th down and used most if not all the clock that way, you can't assume the Ravens would have :50 left, unless I'm missing something here. They'd have had to use their time outs while the niner's were on offense I would think until/if the niner's scored. Unless the Ravens would have let them score untouched on 1st down, which might be their best choice had they found themselves in that situation.

and, how can we be so sure a ball is uncatchable when the reciever is held up on his route, maybe if he isn't held, it could be catchable? Just askin'.

[cprenegade]

I cannot understand why 49ers fans and Raven haters are saying the non-call should have gone their way and the 49ers should have won. Even IF the 49ers get the call, they still have to score a touchdown on the #1 redzone defense in the league. That's no easy task.

So let's say they do score, there was 1:46 left and the Ravens had all 3 timeouts. Assuming the Ravens use some timeouts, they get the ball back with about 50 seconds to a minute remaining with a timeout or two. They have the hottest QB in the playoffs and a kicker who was making 60 yarders in warm ups. Best case scenerio Flacco drives for a game winning TD or FG (assuming the 49ers don't convert the 2 point conversion again). Or Flacco drives for a game tying FG and forces overtime.

I'll take the Ravens with Flacco in overtime, or a game winning FG by Tucker at the end of regulation.

But the correct call was a non-call and the Ravens are WORLD CHAMPIONS!!!

Well, first of all you cannot assume the Ravens would have won that game had the 49ers gotten a TD. They might have driven for the game winner, but they might not have. Anything could have happened. Fumble, a couple of sacks. But the call was the right one. By the strictest of technicalities, it was probably holding. But the game was not being called that tight from the beginning and the db's clearly were aware of that. Most coaches, players, and even refs will tell you it is not so important as to be 100% correct with the calls, but rather to be consistent to both teams throughout the game. It would not have been consistent to start calling it tight inside of two minutes when you haven't been doing it all game long.

[Cameron]

Well, it's a "what-if" scenario which can go many ways-- I agree the Ravens would have won either way, but "if" the 49'ers get the call, they get 1st & goal from the 1 right?

You leave out the scenario where the Ravens defense could have held them at the goal line again--- like they had just done.

They could have scored on 3rd or 4th down and used most if not all the clock that way, you can't assume the Ravens would have :50 left, unless I'm missing something here. They'd have had to use their time outs while the niner's were on offense I would think until/if the niner's scored. Unless the Ravens would have let them score untouched on 1st down, which might be their best choice had they found themselves in that situation.

and, how can we be so sure a ball is uncatchable when the reciever is held up on his route, maybe if he isn't held, it could be catchable? Just askin'.

[Rael]

Well, it's a "what-if" scenario which can go many ways-- I agree the Ravens would have won either way, but "if" the 49'ers get the call, they get 1st & goal from the 1 right? They could have scored on 3rd or 4th down and used most if not all the clock that way, you can't assume the Ravens would have :50 left, unless I'm missing something here. They'd have had to use their time outs while the niner's were on offense I would think until/if the niner's scored. Unless the Ravens would have let them score untouched on 1st down, which might be their best choice had they found themselves in that situation.

and, how can we be so sure a ball is uncatchable when the reciever is held up on his route, maybe if he isn't held, it could be catchable? Just askin'.

If it was called holding, they get half the distance. PI can't be called on an un-catchable ball so they would not have gotten the ball on the one. The ball was uncatchable because it was too far out of bounds.

[Fang]

Well, it's a "what-if" scenario which can go many ways-- I agree the Ravens would have won either way, but "if" the 49'ers get the call, they get 1st & goal from the 1 right? They could have scored on 3rd or 4th down and used most if not all the clock that way, you can't assume the Ravens would have :50 left, unless I'm missing something here. They'd have had to use their time outs while the niner's were on offense I would think until/if the niner's scored. Unless the Ravens would have let them score untouched on 1st down, which might be their best choice had they found themselves in that situation.

and, how can we be so sure a ball is uncatchable when the reciever is held up on his route, maybe if he isn't held, it could be catchable? Just askin'.

No the 49ers could not have run the clock out if they had 1st and goal even if it takes them all 4 downs. The Ravens had 3 timeouts. You'd have to assume John Harbaugh starts burning the timeouts if the 49ers get 1st and goal. IF the 49ers score and John Harbaugh uses all 3 there's still more than a minute left to get into FG range for the tie or win.

[Fang]

Well, first of all you cannot assume the Ravens would have won that game had the 49ers gotten a TD. They might have driven for the game winner, but they might not have. Anything could have happened. Fumble, a couple of sacks. But the call was the right one. By the strictest of technicalities, it was probably holding. But the game was not being called that tight from the beginning and the db's clearly were aware of that. Most coaches, players, and even refs will tell you it is not so important as to be 100% correct with the calls, but rather to be consistent to both teams throughout the game. It would not have been consistent to start calling it tight inside of two minutes when you haven't been doing it all game long.

I'm not assuming the Ravens win if the 49ers score. I'm putting on my purple fan glasses and making that prediction.

Seriously, I'm merely saying those rooting for the 49ers keep saying the penalty should have been called thus giving them the game. I think it's still very much a game even if they get the call. People are so hung up on the non-call that they are forgetting the game circumstance at that point.

[bleedingorangeandblack]

The call was not made. The refs let them play football. We have the Lombardi. Who cares?

Game Set Match

[Saticon3]

If it was called holding, they get half the distance. PI can't be called on an un-catchable ball so they would not have gotten the ball on the one. The ball was uncatchable because it was too far out of bounds.

Thanks. I didn't know it was deemed uncatchable because it was out of bounds, I had thought it was just because the receiver didn't /couldn't get to it.

[Saticon3]

You leave out the scenario where the Ravens defense could have held them at the goal line again--- like they had just done.

True. I was just pursuing the "what if" I guess more from the 49'ers side.
But, I agree in no way is that a game winner for SF if they get the call. It merely gives them another shot, or two, or three as however it had of gone.

We could just as well say maybe Ray Lewis gets a sack/strip/fumble on 1st & goal, too.

[Fang]

I'm watching NFL Replay of the game right now. ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? The 49ers held Torrey Smith bigtime down the sideline in the 2nd quarter. Phil Simms even says if they don't hold him Smith runs under the ball for the TD. The Ravens didn't score on that drive either so that's 7 extra right there. It's unbelievable that people complain about that last play. The game never should have even been that close.

[Tootsie]

You leave out the scenario where the Ravens defense could have held them at the goal line again--- like they had just done.

Would have been 1st and goal at the 1. I think they would have had a very good chance to score

[cprenegade]

I'm not assuming the Ravens win if the 49ers score. I'm putting on my purple fan glasses and making that prediction.

Seriously, I'm merely saying those rooting for the 49ers keep saying the penalty should have been called thus giving them the game. I think it's still very much a game even if they get the call. People are so hung up on the non-call that they are forgetting the game circumstance at that point.

I agree that we will never know how the last minute would have played out had the call been made and the 49ers scored. What I am saying is that you forget about the technicality of the call, the game was not called that way through the first 58 minutes so you throw out whether that call should have been made or not. It wasn't called all game and should not have been called inside of two minutes. If the game was called differently all night long, it might not have gotten down to a goal line stand.