About the PI Flag That Was Picked Up

#1
All Vol!

All Vol!

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
3,738
Likes
2,237
#1
It's just academic now, but I will offer a theory as to why the "obvious" pass interference flag last night was picked up. Let me quickly throw in a snippet from the NCAA Football Rules and Interpretations book...

"Defensive pass interference is contact beyond the neutral zone by a [defensive player] whose intent to impede an eligible opponent is obvious AND it could prevent the opponent the opportunity of recieving a catchable forward pass. When in question, a legal forward pass is catchable."

Well, there's no question the ball was catchable I guess, since it hit him in the chin more or less, but I think maybe the contact made by the defender was not considered to have prevented the reciever the opportunity to catch the ball because the contact was before the ball got to the reciever AND the defender was not even touching him when the ball arrived. And after watching it a couple times, I'd have to say that at most, the defender may've distracted the reciever with the little push, but I tend to think the ball wasn't caught because the reciever just didn't make the catch, not because he was interfered with.
Anyway, like I said, it's all academic now, but it was interesting to me, and I thought I'd throw this food for thought out since the ref didn't offer any explanation as to why the penalty wasn't a penalty.

Comments?
 
#3
#3
That made well be the rule book definition, however, I was always taught as a DB that any contact prior to the ball being in the air, and in which you are not holding the receiver, was legal. However, once the ball was in the air, any and all contact could be called PI.

Either way, like you said, none of it matters anymore.
 
#5
#5
Then why throw the flag in the first place? He obviously saw something fishy and reached into his pocket and threw the flag. IMHO, you make that conscious decision to throw that flag as a referee, you better stand by it. From what I could see at the time (No Tivo here for me) he was on the receiver when the ball got to him. That's a PI.
 
#6
#6
Basically the same thing happened on our scoring drive, and it was called correctly. by screwed, i mean that call contributed to the death of that drive.
 
#7
#7
HawaiiVol said:
Then why throw the flag in the first place? He obviously saw something fishy and reached into his pocket and threw the flag. IMHO, you make that conscious decision to throw that flag as a referee, you better stand by it. From what I could see at the time (No Tivo here for me) he was on the receiver when the ball got to him. That's a PI.
Click to expand...
No he was not on the reciever when the ball got there; it's like he pushed him a little from behind as he ran by and then had run past him by the time the ball got there. And as to why the ref drops the flag in the first place, it's far from the first time a ref has thrown a flag, then conferred with another official who may've had a better vantage point, then picked it up. This is one reason there's more than one ref in the game, I'd say.
 
#9
#9
HawaiiVol said:
ok, the ball was still in the air when the push was made. That's still a PI.
Click to expand...
Hawaii, on common sense and the way these things usually play out, I would agree with you and it makes sense to me, but I can't find anything in the rulebook that states such a thing. And, I'm sure you'll recall that there are numerous instances where a defender will make unimpeding contact with a reciever as they run AND while the ball is in the air. I think the spirit of this rule is that the only contact that is illegal is contact that prevents the reciever the opportunity to catch the ball. I don't think that was the case here..just my opinion.
 
#10
#10
on his show, CPF said that the only explanation by the referee was, "better judgement told me to pick it up."

Said he had some choice words for him.

That is terribe, or in other words... we got screwed.

Most of the time the simplest explanation is the correct one.
 
#11
#11
I wish I could see the replay again, I coulda sworn he was on him or going thru him (but I'll take your word he wasn't), but from what I remember the receiver wasn't in a position to really catch the ball (low to the ground? foggy memory) due to the contact.
 
#12
#12
HawaiiVol said:
I wish I could see the replay again, I coulda sworn he was on him or going thru him (but I'll take your word he wasn't), but from what I remember the receiver wasn't in a position to really catch the ball (low to the ground? foggy memory) due to the contact.
Click to expand...
actually, he was standing straight up, and the ball more or less hit him around the neck I think and bounced off of him. Went right thru his hands really...but like I said before, the push DID happen, and it may have distracted the reciever, which could be argued as sufficient to throw the flag, but these things are often just judgement calls anyway on the part of the refs. He probably didn't offer an explanation because he didn't have one...:)
 
#13
#13
I'll be honest: I think the receiver acted a little, but I also still think it was enough contact for a legit PI.
 
#14
#14
Remember they called PI against us on the hail Mary pass to Hall, and there was a lot less contact on that play. Refs seem to forget that the D player has as much right to the ball as the O player.
 
#15
#15
BACKDOC said:
Remember they called PI against us on the hail Mary pass to Hall, and there was a lot less contact on that play. Refs seem to forget that the D player has as much right to the ball as the O player.
Click to expand...


Yes that was ridiculous, I mean how often do you see a pass interference on a jump ball ??
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top