PI and faceguarding
 

during our game saturday night, we were flagged for faceguarding. i am one of the few little league coaches that reads the rule books and actually knows what this call is, but the officials reason for throwing the flag has me perplexed.

in his explanation he says that the DB never turned his head to find the ball. which i understand to a point. but my DB was 5 yds from the WR when the ball touched his hands and was basically in chase mode once he got beat on the pass route. so i am not sure that this penalty should have been thrown. it hurt us a little, in that the pass was incomplete, but they got the PI yds and a first down from it and proceded to score on the next play. without the penalty it would have been a 4th and long situation.

i asked how the db could have faceguarded the wr being 5 yds away, and all the ref would say is that he did not turn his head to find the ball and make a play on it. i didnt argue, but did talk to the head official (who is a good friend) and asked him. being as he didnt see the play he couldnt give me a better explanation of the call.

i just want to make sure that my interpretation of the rule is correct. in faceguarding you deliberately attempt to block the Rec's field of vision with no intent of making a play on the ball. in that i mean, i put my hands up in front of your face to distract your vision of the ball, without turning my head to find the ball and make a play on it. am i correct in this thinking?

Canadian Philosophy
 

If your arms are up and are not looking for the ball, it has to extremely obvious that your actions are not blocking the vision of the WR for us to not throw a flag.

It's a judgment call. Teach your DB to watch the eyes of the WR... when they get big - the DB turns to knock the ball away.

7-5-10 It is forward-pass interference if:
b. Any player hinders an opponent’s vision without making an attempt to catch, intercept or bat the ball, even though no contact was made.

The standard usage of this rule involves the offending player being nearly within reach of the offended player thus being able to hinder the vision while the player is trying to catch the ball. So I would say that two yards is about the limit of the range of this foul while 5 yards is not possible.

I'd like to make a minor comment to you, coach, and hope not to draw your ire. Since you seem to be a reasonable coach truly looking to learn and understand, you should probably be made aware that you will get a lot further with some of the officials here in their willingness to aid if you eliminate entirely from your posts any mention of "This play really cost us" or, "This call changed the game." Just the situation and what was called. Otherwise, you sound like all of the other coaches that come here just to complain or whine. Since you don't seem to be one of those, I am hoping this advice helps you not look like one of those.

Welcome to the site.

Who says 5 yds is not possible. 6ft 6in defender, 5 foot 6 in reciever low pass might be possible.

For me, the key is hindering the vision just as the rule states. If the A player leaps for a ball, and a B player tries to faceguard the offensive player without success and there is no contact, and the B players hands do not get into the sight line of the A player, I've got nothing. Yes, it's a judgement call, but if I'm calling it, the B players hands had better be near the eyes of the A player.

Never mind that this rule seems pretty stupid but let me just throw this out there...'

In your game it is illegal for a defender to put his hands up and block the vision of the receiver but it is okay for an onrushing defensive lineman to put hs hands up and block the QB's view downfield towards his receivers?????? Y'all need a rule change there fellas.

Please don't start the whole "NCAA rules are superior" crap.

On this one they clearly are. This is a freakin CONTACT sport for goodness sake. Making it a foul to simply put your hands up in the air to break up a pass is nuts.

There is a notable difference between these two acts.

In the case of a defender rushing the passer and raising his arms in the air, he is playing the ball.

In the case of a back pursuing a receiver and raising his arms in the air, and without looking back, he is not playing the ball.

This difference affects a fundamental rule with many sports - not just football: to play the ball (or puck, or ......) and not the man. Everything about football is the ball: forward progress, first/last touched, etc...

Putting your hands in front of a receiver's face so he cannot see while not playing the ball sounds like bad defense to me. Tell me why this shouldn't be pass interference.

For the same reason that putting your hands in front of the QB's face is not roughing the passer.

This is a really bad analogy, for the reasons JugglingReferee has already mentioned.

If I put my hands in the QB's face to block his vision I am not "playing the ball" .

You're not interfering with his attempt to catch a pass, either.

What happens if there is actually contact? I suppose if no contact at all calls for a 15 yard penalty, then if he actually makes contact, the punishment should be much more severe. Eject if he makes contact. :D Why don't the Fed just put in a "halo" rule for passes.

But you are interfering with his attempt to successfully complete a pass. What is the diff?

It's funny -- I've never considered this NOT to be interference. If we DIDN'T flag this, they'd be all over us.

REPLY: MICoach...All discussions of the value of the faceguarding rule aside, if the play occurred exactly as you have described it, it wouldn't seem that your defender's raising his hands in any way could have interfered with the receiver's attempt to catch the pass. Remember two things: (1) a defender who's not looking back and playing the ball will be a lot more suspect for passinterference than one who is, and (2) often (not always...but often), Little League football gets the services of Little League officials, many times younger inexperienced officials who are just learning the ropes.

thank you mcrowder, i wasnt in any way blaming an official for the game or anything. it might have sounded like it, but it was not meant to be. i dont blame officials for losing games (though at times i would like to :)), and i tell each and everyone of my players that the ref's dont put the pads on so they cant lose or win a game for us. being an official myself, i understand how hard it is to do your job out there on the field, and commend most that put forth the time and effort to help teach the younger players the rights and wrongs of the sport that I (we) sometimes as coaches forget to teach. it is always nice to have an official who will take the time to explain things to the kids so they understand what happened. we all know that just because you are the coach, doesnt mean they will listen to you. sometimes it takes someone outside of the coaching staff to tell them before it registers with them.

now onto the subject of the original post. that is what i was thinking about faceguarding. you have to be impeding the rec's vision to the ball. like i said previously, i wasnt sure if there was a distance in there you had to be. to me being 5 yds from the rec. makes it tough to call faceguarding, but it was called so i had to live with it and did. i just wanted a clarification on the rule to better understand and teach the players.

we always teach the DB's to watch the rec's hands and eyes, when they reach for the ball, and their eyes get big they are supposed to turn to look for the ball, and put a hand up to deflect the pass. but as stated, in this instance, the db was beat and was playing catch up.

thank you for all the replies