Video Play #1 from last friday night

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

No. It looked like they both engaged each other. There was also no advantage from the play.

Peace

Agreed. What little separation might've occured did not yield any advantage to the offensive receiver.

[Mike L]

In a word, no.

[tjones1]

I've got nothing.

[Ed Hickland]

OPI? The restriction is on the offensive player from the snap. The player knows the play therefore has an advantage over the defender.

It appears the offensive receiver initiated a block on the defender. When I was a downfield official as soon as I saw a block it was time to cover the running game. If a pass was thrown pass the line of scrimmage it was an OPI.

Thinks this meets the test.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

OPI? The restriction is on the offensive player from the snap. The player knows the play therefore has an advantage over the defender.

It appears the offensive receiver initiated a block on the defender. When I was a downfield official as soon as I saw a block it was time to cover the running game. If a pass was thrown pass the line of scrimmage it was an OPI.

Thinks this meets the test.

I agree. It looks like the receiver had the LB in his sights the entire time.

[parepat]

Are we sure that the official did not rule that the receiver was covered up? Thus, when he caught the ball he committed OPI. I know the rule changed a few years ago, but he did not throw the flag at the time of the contact. Just a thought.

[parepat]

Based on the contact I have nothing.

[PSU213]

Originally Posted by parepat

Are we sure that the official did not rule that the receiver was covered up? Thus, when he caught the ball he committed OPI. I know the rule changed a few years ago, but he did not throw the flag at the time of the contact. Just a thought.

From the press box view it seemed to me that he was clearly off the line (not that the official couldn't have seen it differently). That having been said this would be illegal touching, not OPI (which I think you were referring to in the post). Do we know for a fact that OPI was the call (and not illegal touching or something else)? But, yes, it does seem like the flag does not come down until the pass is caught, not on the contact between the players.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by parepat

Are we sure that the official did not rule that the receiver was covered up? Thus, when he caught the ball he committed OPI. I know the rule changed a few years ago, but he did not throw the flag at the time of the contact. Just a thought.

OPI was not technically committed until the ball was thrown past the line of scrimmage, therefore, the flag followed the catch.

OPI is a strange penalty because the offense knows the play. I had a blantant one on a try for point. An A player blocked the B player while another A player came underneath and caught the pass. If the play had been a run or if the pass had not crossed the line of scrimmage there was no foul.

The opposite is when an A player comes downfield and blocks a B player. Then a pass is thrown and caught behind the line of scrimmage. You are downfield and cannot judge the LOS, so, you throw the flag.

The U being in position to rule on whether the pass was completed behind or beyond the line joins the official's conference and it is determined no OPI, you wave off the flag.

OPI is complicated and probably why it is not called as often as it should. I was observing a ACC crew the other day and saw an OPI that went uncalled.

[grantsrc]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

OPI? The restriction is on the offensive player from the snap. The player knows the play therefore has an advantage over the defender.

It appears the offensive receiver initiated a block on the defender. When I was a downfield official as soon as I saw a block it was time to cover the running game. If a pass was thrown pass the line of scrimmage it was an OPI.

Thinks this meets the test.

Ed,
Your criteria are accurate for calling DPI. If you watch the LB after the contact, he continues with his pass protection. He steps up to defend the scramble, not because of the contact. Althought the WR does initiate contact, I wouldn't call it a "block" as he doesn't engage him and he continues to run his route. In addition, the contact didn't cause the separation between the two.

I would say that this is something to definitely talk about with your WR and your wing officials. I would also talk with your wing officials to finish officiating the play, even though you know it is coming back. Watch the calling official.

I say no call is the right call.

[babrown]

Terpzebra,
These video clips are VERY helpful, as they provide real life situations.
PLEASE keep sending us these kind of cases.