Quote:
Originally Posted by bisonlj
Here's another video from a college game a couple weeks ago. Rom Gilbert featured this on his weekly picks. I think we can all agree the restriction was much greater on this play and the receiver was much closer to the ball, although it was underthrown as well.
This was Rom's poll question and 76% said there was no foul, even though one was called on the field. Here is the text Rom put in the set up of the video:
DPI and Pass Cut Off - YouTube
The discussion around this play I had with other college officials was very similar to what JRut is arguing. Until I started seeing plays like this on training videos I would have made the same arguments most others are making. The philosophy very clearly in the college level is to NOT consider this a foul. I believe that is coming from the NFL level where most supervisors work. They may not downgrade the call if you make it because technically you are true, but they would likely call it too technical and suggest you not call it in the future.
JRut may come across arrogant and I've argued with him several times, but in this case he's 100% consistent with what we've been told from those working at the highest levels of NCAA. |
I don't believe the play in the video you posted should be pass interference. I think the interference was well behind the ball and the receiver wouldn't have had a play on the ball either way.
Honestly, I think the interference on the Gronkowski play took place closer to the point of interception than the college play.
To me, the college play is not interference, and the Gronkowski play is debatable. I'm just trying to say that while I understand the philosophy that JRut and others have posted about, it's not clearly black and white. If the receiver in the college play had been right behind the defender who intercepted it, I would have pass interference. I don't think he was going to affect the play where he was, even without the contact.