Didn't get to see it. Was it the right call? Or were we fortunate? That could've changed the entire game.

Fortunate but it wasn't horrible

We were fortunate. If he turned his head it wouldn't have been a flag.

It was definitely pass interference or holding in the least. But live it looked like the right call for them to pick it up.

God wanted us to win today so don't overthink it

We got away with that one. Finally one call going our way. They held like crazy on their one TD. Maybe a make-up call.

Probably should have been PI, but the ball was off a bit. It was pretty similar to the one they didn't call for us last week, IMO.

VikingNik said:

---

We got away with that one. Finally one call going our way. They held like crazy on their one TD. Maybe a make-up call.

---

They held like crazy all game long!!

But yeah the holding on that TD play, right in front of the official, was brutal.

Incidental, no PI

Hungry Ojos said:

---

Didn't get to see it. Was it the right call? Or were we fortunate? That could've changed the entire game.

---

He turned his head late. We were fortunate.

It was a horrible call. Both the receiver and defender were stride for stride straight down the field

The pass was thrown about 5 yards to the other side of the defender away from the receiver and the receiver tried to go through the defender to get to the ball.

The defender has a right to be where he is.

Fortunate in the sense that it often gets called… HOWEVER

I freaking LOVE that they picked up the PI flag on that first drive. It's my most hated play in football that doesn't get nearly enough scrutiny- offense is 3rd or 4th down with nothing to lose and QB is about to get destroyed, so he chunks a prayer downfield with no chance of success, under throwing the receiver by 10 yards and drawing a flag… you shouldn't get rewarded for getting beat on a play, and then trying to game the rules out of desperation

According to announcers and Mizz fans, it cost Mizz the game.

Onionman said:

---

According to announcers and Mizz fans, it cost Mizz the game.

---

Maybe mizz fans, but announcers realized it was a beating up and down today.

I did not think the ball was catchable and he pivoted to try to make a play on the ball, running into the DB. Only thing was DB never even tried to look for the ball.

riverrataggie said:

---

Onionman said:

---

According to announcers and Mizz fans, it cost Mizz the game.

---

Maybe mizz fans, but announcers realized it was a beating up and down today.

---

True, but announcers still bringing it up in the 4th qtr was weak sauce.

It probably should have been a flag but it wasn't just ridiculous for them to pick it up

Better case for holding before the pass.

It wasn't PI though, IMO.

Normally the call we think of in those situation is PI when a defender not playing the ball runs into a wide receiver who has stopped waiting for an underthrown ball. It looks similar because a wide receiver is trying to fight through a defender that doesnt see the ball, but really the defender is creating the contact while the WR is just trying to be camped under the ball.

In this situation the WR was running inside toward the posts, and the ball was thrown outside. The WR then tried to run through the DB to get outside to the ball. Therefore it was the WR initiating it. In fact if the DB had turned and saw the ball, the WR should have been called for OPI for running through the defender

I didn't think it was a catchable ball.

If one play on the opening drive costs you the game, you have an awful coach and a weak team

Onionman said:

---

riverrataggie said:

---

Onionman said:

---

According to announcers and Mizz fans, it cost Mizz the game.

---

Maybe mizz fans, but announcers realized it was a beating up and down today.

---

True, but announcers still bringing it up in the 4th qtr was weak sauce.

---

Had the game been close, ok. But this was a total beat down. It was pathetic to mention it. Kind of like Eli's FG instead of going for it.

Could have gone either way, but the receiver never really made a play towards the ball. He slowed down a little but kept going away from the ball. He doesn't catch that even without a defender there IMO. DB had really good position on an underthrown ball.

Emilio Fantastico said:

---

It was a horrible call. Both the receiver and defender were stride for stride straight down the field

The pass was thrown about 5 yards to the other side of the defender away from the receiver and the receiver tried to go through the defender to get to the ball.

The defender has a right to be where he is.

---

Receiver made zero play on the ball and would've needed to go through defender to get it. It was a good no call because he didn't interfere with the receiver catching the ball since the receiver never even tried

They made up for it by taking away our INT by calling PI on a very non-PI play.

I freaking LOVE that they picked up the PI flag on that first drive. It's my most hated play in football that doesn't get nearly enough scrutiny- offense is 3rd or 4th down with nothing to lose and QB is about to get destroyed, so he chunks a prayer downfield with no chance of success, under throwing the receiver by 10 yards and drawing a flag… you shouldn't get rewarded for getting beat on a play and then trying to game the rules

Call was for defensive holding and that's what they waved off. Wasn't for PI.

At least that's what's I thought I heard in the initial call.

Another big miss was the obvious holding on Scourton when mizz threw that big td pass. Shocked to not see a flag there.

Quote:

---

I did not think the ball was catchable and he pivoted to try to make a play on the ball, running into the DB. Only thing was DB never even tried to look for the ball.

---

Our man had position, neither player reacted to the ball until the Mizzoui turned into our defender at the last second. Like someone else said, that play is a typical tu type play where they just throw the ball up and let the rers do the rest. Didn't work for once.

riverrataggie said:

---

We were fortunate. If he turned his head it wouldn't have been a flag.

---

Turning the head is not a requirement.

Turning the head only matters if there's contact in the NFL.

Finn said:

---

I did not think the ball was catchable and he pivoted to try to make a play on the ball, running into the DB. Only thing was DB never even tried to look for the ball.

---

This.

Finally have a db who plays aggressive the whole time. We've been frustrated to not get calls against those kind of players for years.

The call could have gone either way. It wasn't as clear cut as the announcers tried to make it sound, but if they would have called it, I doubt most Aggies would have complained. I do wish the refs would hold their flag more often on plays like that. DB had great coverage. The only reason it was a PI is because the QB made a bad throw. I don't like rewarding a bad throw.

The WR needed to fight back to the ball more , and it's an easy call

Yeeeeeeeeeah, that's probably PI

I could have seen it go both ways. But I HATE referee judgement on underthrown balls. If the reciever initiates contact by stopping mid route or coming back on an underthrown ball, it should be no PI. If the defender initiates without turning his head, PI. Defender has a right to his space. Receiver doesn't get free path to the ball.

In this case, receiver initiated, and once he did, DB started looking for the ball. I like the no call.

Uncatchable ball. Receiver tried to run through the db.

No call.

Blatant hold my the Mizoo tackle on their only td though.