DPI blown call ?

[jstafan]

Hello all, first of all want to say I have learned alot these last couple of days since if found your fourm. I'm just your average Joe with a kid that plays youth football and thought that I new a little bit about the rules. after reading all the posts I have realized that I dont know what I thought I knew and the officials in my area arnt as bad as I thought they was. LOL. any way heres a call that took me a little bit to figure out.
Team A has the ball its 3rd and 38, final minute 30 of game, team A needs to score to tie game. A passes the ball, B gets flagged for DPI. The crew awards team A 15 yards its now 4th and 23. Team A exploads says it should be a automatic 1st down. I'm thinking the same thing. So when I get home I start to look up rules for DPI. I found that dpi carriers a 15yd penitly and also a auto first down. So I guessed they got that wrong. should have been 1st down. But couldnt figure just the 15 yds they assessed. Still not satisfied I kept reading and found out that you cant have DPI if the ball is behind the L.O.S. (which this pass was)So what I'm thinking now is that team B got the short end of that stick because it shouldnt have been called at all, let alone the additional 15 yds that got added to team A. So what do you all think about that one and is there any DPI that would be awarded just the 15yds?
Thanks

[JRutledge]

The question I would have was it actually a DPI call? DPI of any kind is either a first down or a loss of down (if the offense commits the foul). I only say this because you are just a fan and fans often misconstrue calls and the officials do not have a microphone to describe the call. I was not there, but something sounds missing from this story.

Peace

[jstafan]

yes they signaled pass interference

[JRutledge]

As I said I was not there. There sounds like there is more to the story. And the reason I say this, you were not likely on the field. And you were not directly informed like the coaches were I would presume. Honestly it does not matter to me what they signaled, signals have been wrong in the past. There are just so many things that would need to be answered; I would not expect you to know all those details. Only the crew or the coach would be able to answer those questions in an accurate way. Obviously the rule is clear on DPI and what the down should be.

Peace

[mbyron]

You are nearly correct about DPI, though the restriction applies to the neutral zone, not the line of scrimmage: "Pass interference restrictions only apply beyond the neutral zone and only if the legal forward pass, untouched by B in or behind the neutral zone, crosses the neutral zone."

The penalty for DPI is 15 yards plus an automatic 1st down. If everything you said is correct, then the officials either:
a) got the conditions and enforcement of DPI wrong (2 major errors)
b) gave the wrong signal for some other foul.

The only foul which would yield the result that you describe is a dead-ball PF or USC foul.

[jstafan]

Thanks for the replys. Thanks for setting me stright on the neutral zone vs the line of scrimmage. mbyron after reading your reply you have given me another question. if the ball was tipped on the pass behind the los and the ball travels past the neutral zone, can there be a dpi past the nz?

Just talk to a friend that was running the chains on that game and he said that, on that play he ask the line judge about that and the LJ said that it was not a automatic 1st down in high school. Not sure where he would have got that from because its deffinetly a first down.

[mbyron]

No, a tip behind the NZ ends the pass interference restrictions.

[Robert Goodman]

Not only that, but how, on a penalty accepted by the offense, did the down advance from 3rd to 4th?

Maybe it was actually a dead ball foul by team B after 3rd down ended in an incomplete pass. Maybe the official wasn't too clear about where he was holding his hands and what looked like interference (hands in front) was actually unsportsmanlike conduct (hands out to sides).

[jaybird]

Just talk to a friend that was running the chains on that game and he said that, on that play he ask the line judge about that and the LJ said that it was not a automatic 1st down in high school.

Two obvious things wrong with this statement.

1) Based on normal positions, if the guy on the chains asked the line judge a question, was it after the game or did he scream across the field at him?

2) If a legitimate game official said DPI did not include an automatic first down, he is either incompetent, they are using a different set of rules than NFHS or there was a misunderstanding.

[jstafan]

thanks for the replys everybody. as for " Based on normal positions, if the guy on the chains asked the line judge a question, was it after the game or did he scream across the field at him?" it was the ref to his side and apparently it was right after play. and for "If a legitimate game official said DPI did not include an automatic first down, he is either incompetent, they are using a different set of rules than NFHS or there was a misunderstanding." I think after talking to everyone they just blew that call because nobody seems to understand why they would have inforced a dpi the way they did. They also go by NFHS rules. Or as Robert Goodman suggests that maybe another call was called ie dead ball foul or usc call and the other refs misunderstood. But on that play I can only say that me or nobody else seen anything other than a dpi (behind the neutural zone) which should not have resulted in a foul at all. but i will also agree that i didnt have the advantage that the refs did ( as being right on top of the play) even if all that was true again like good ol rob pointed out if the offense accepted the pently why did the down change? thanks again all.

[bossman72]

not only did they didn't award the auto 1st, they lost a down. it went from 3rd to 4th! If anything they should have replayed 3rd down.

[Robert Goodman]

Letting my imagination run free, I can pretty easily cook up a scenario to match the enforcement I wrote of above. A pass ended incomplete behind the neutral zone, and just after the ball fell dead a player of B, in a way that was judged gratuitous, slammed into the receiver who'd missed the ball. Referee assesses an unnecessary roughness penalty after the ball became dead, i.e. after it was already 4th down. The choice being obvious, he sees no need to present the option of declining it, and just tacks on 15 yards -- but then he forgets which 15 yard penalty he's given, and signals for unsportsmanlike conduct instead of a personal foul. Because of a muscle pull, he holds his arms at an angle out in front of him instead of straight to the sides while giving this signal.

The line judge, having seen the aftermath of the foul but not its development, because his att'n was elsewhere, sees the referee's signal and thinks it's for pass interference, which is fine with him because the LJ doesn't realize the hit was late rather than early, and because the LJ had gone downfield and lost track of where the neutral zone was. So the LJ tells you it was an interference call. By the time he realizes otherwise, he has other things to do than to tell you what happened.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Letting my imagination run free, I can pretty easily cook up a scenario to match the enforcement I wrote of above. A pass ended incomplete behind the neutral zone, and just after the ball fell dead a player of B, in a way that was judged gratuitous, slammed into the receiver who'd missed the ball. Referee assesses an unnecessary roughness penalty after the ball became dead, i.e. after it was already 4th down. The choice being obvious, he sees no need to present the option of declining it, and just tacks on 15 yards -- but then he forgets which 15 yard penalty he's given, and signals for unsportsmanlike conduct instead of a personal foul. Because of a muscle pull, he holds his arms at an angle out in front of him instead of straight to the sides while giving this signal.

The line judge, having seen the aftermath of the foul but not its development, because his att'n was elsewhere, sees the referee's signal and thinks it's for pass interference, which is fine with him because the LJ doesn't realize the hit was late rather than early, and because the LJ had gone downfield and lost track of where the neutral zone was. So the LJ tells you it was an interference call. By the time he realizes otherwise, he has other things to do than to tell you what happened.

Boy, that would have to be a nasty muscle pull in the arm.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Letting my imagination run free, I can pretty easily cook up a scenario to match the enforcement I wrote of above. A pass ended incomplete behind the neutral zone, and just after the ball fell dead a player of B, in a way that was judged gratuitous, slammed into the receiver who'd missed the ball. Referee assesses an unnecessary roughness penalty after the ball became dead, i.e. after it was already 4th down. The choice being obvious, he sees no need to present the option of declining it, and just tacks on 15 yards -- but then he forgets which 15 yard penalty he's given, and signals for unsportsmanlike conduct instead of a personal foul. Because of a muscle pull, he holds his arms at an angle out in front of him instead of straight to the sides while giving this signal.

The line judge, having seen the aftermath of the foul but not its development, because his att'n was elsewhere, sees the referee's signal and thinks it's for pass interference, which is fine with him because the LJ doesn't realize the hit was late rather than early, and because the LJ had gone downfield and lost track of where the neutral zone was. So the LJ tells you it was an interference call. By the time he realizes otherwise, he has other things to do than to tell you what happened.

A very creative and possible explanation for how the penalty was enforced. It doesn't change the fact the HL told a member of the chain crew that DPI is not an automatic first down. If nothing else that official needs some training.

[mbyron]

I think that we have no idea what's going on in this situation. All the actual information presented so far has been at least 3rd hand, as interpreted by a couple non-officials, based on a peewee crew's behavior.

There's about one legitimate thing we can say: the penalty for DPI, if accepted, is 15 yards from the previous spot plus an automatic 1st down. Beyond that, who knows what happened in somebody's peewee game? Quibbling about who said what, who needs training, who made what signal, or who's a bad official -- it's all silly speculation without the officials here to explain what happened. JMHO.