Pass Interference

[chiefgil]

An eligible receiver must be afforded an un-hindered path to the football.

I don't care where the ball is, if B hinders A then it is PI.

[Snake~eyes]

So if B is moving to catch the ball and hinders A you have PI?

[sloth]

I had a play last night that I didn't drop the flag on, but could have for DPI. Freshman game, reciever is running a fly pattern defender is right behind. The pass is underthrown and the head wind didn't help out much. The recieve starts to slow up, defender slows up as well...its obvious the corner has no clue where the ball is and doesn't want to interfer with the reciever. The defender puts his hands in the air, uncler to me (at U/BJ...three man) if his intentions are to block vision or not touch the reciever. Ball falls 7-8 yards short of reciever, never any contact between the defender and the reciever. I didn't throw the flag. I understand that catch-ability isn't a criteria, but in my mind I define face gaurding as a very specific action.

In my judgement, unless the defenders hand is within a foot or two of the recievers face, it isn't face gaurding. In my mind the is a distinct difference between placing ones hands in the air and actively trying to block a reciever vision. Later the white hat said he thought that it was face gaurding, but the more i think about it and the more I reflect on my descision, I don't think I would drop the flag had the same play happened again.

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by sloth
I had a play last night that I didn't drop the flag on, but could have for DPI. Freshman game, reciever is running a fly pattern defender is right behind. The pass is underthrown and the head wind didn't help out much. The recieve starts to slow up, defender slows up as well...its obvious the corner has no clue where the ball is and doesn't want to interfer with the reciever. The defender puts his hands in the air, uncler to me (at U/BJ...three man) if his intentions are to block vision or not touch the reciever. Ball falls 7-8 yards short of reciever, never any contact between the defender and the reciever. I didn't throw the flag. I understand that catch-ability isn't a criteria, but in my mind I define face gaurding as a very specific action.

In my judgement, unless the defenders hand is within a foot or two of the recievers face, it isn't face gaurding. In my mind the is a distinct difference between placing ones hands in the air and actively trying to block a reciever vision. Later the white hat said he thought that it was face gaurding, but the more i think about it and the more I reflect on my descision, I don't think I would drop the flag had the same play happened again.

REPLY: Just my thoughts...since there was no contact, face-guarding was your only possible infraction. But if the ball was underthrown that much, the defender couldn't have effectively been blocking the reeceiver's vision of the ball. I also would have probably passed on the call. If the offense wanted a call, all they needed to do is begin to move back toward the pass and allow the DB to contact him since the DB was clearly not playing the ball. And now the 64,000 dollar question.....why was you white hat watching a fly pattern deep down your sideline and offering his opinion on it??