How would you call this??

[The Ref of OZ!!!]

The wide receiver is heading down field with the defensive back right next to him on his inside shoulder..... The receiver turns to see the ball thown to the inside, behind the defender's back. The receiver attempts to get to the ball by running into the defender. The defender never turned to see the ball, didn't seem to be aware of where the ball was. What would you have called???

[James Neil]

Assuming the pass has crossed the NZ this sounds like defensive pass interference
NF 7-5-10a > It is PI if any player of A or B who is beyond the NZ interferes with an eligible opponent’s opportunity to move toward, catch or bat the pass

[The Ref of OZ!!!]

I agree, that's what the rule book says... But think about what that implies. Any time the QB finds all of his receivers covered, or just simply to gain 15 yards, all the QB has to do is throw the ball behind the defender, and you'll call "Pass interference" and he'll be awarded 15 yards. Is that fair to the defender?

[HighSchoolWhiteHat]

Thats called DPI 15 yards and a 1st down

now if the defender turned to see the ball we may have OPI, but you said he didn't so we have DPI

The reciever can come back for the ball, but if the defender runs into him (while the balls in the air)without making an attempt for the ball I got DPI

[ABoselli]

That's what makes PI such a fun call! It is incumbent on B to know where the ball is, but there is so much gray area that each call must be made on it's own particular merits. If the pass is way underthrown, I won't throw it unless the defender puts his hands on the A player to keep him from moving. If it's just a little underthrown and A is trying to make a play on the ball and B doesn't look for it but runs into A, I'll throw it. If B never looks back for it, in most cases he'll get a flag from me if he hinders A.

With high school kids, QB's don't always get it where they want it, and receivers have to adjust, come back, slow down etc. It's always a dicey call.

[AndrewMcCarthy]

Yes, maybe it's a bit unfair but B has to know to look back or you'll get some cheap-looking fouls.

I don't mind giving A this "advantage" in the passing game for HS or lower levels. In the NFL sometimes the DPI calls are ridiculous.

[Derock1986]

Oh no, not another one. I can see I am going to be the most controversial official in here. In the original post, you said the receiver runs into the defender. If the defensive player is running with the receiver and the receiver initiates contact then I have a no-call. If the defensive player is aware and playing the ball and the receiver intiates contact, I have offensive pass interference. Just because the defensive player is unaware of the location of the ball and running blindly with the receiver I do not agree that it is PI on the defense if the receiver runs into the defender. The defensive player has every right to his position as the offensive player does. If the defensive player runs blindly into the receiver, then definitely PI but I would not expect the defender to give up his position on the field so the receiver can better position himself to receive the pass. The defensive back unfairly loses most of these calls but I see no reason to penalize either player in this particular situation.

[ABoselli]

...eligible opponent’s opportunity to move toward, catch or bat the pass

Nothing in there about initiating contact. Lets say B1 is just standing there and is run into by A1, who is attempting to move toward, catch or bat the pass. B1 is not. He's just standing there. A1 did indeed initiate contact (more of a basketball term) but B1 interfered with A1's ability to move toward, catch or bat the pass. 'Right to position' is also a basketball term that has no bearing here. If they're both trying to move toward, catch or bat the pass - different story.

Getting back to the original example, B was not attempting to move toward, catch or bat the pass, but A was. Just like on a kick, it's incumbent upon B to know where the ball is. If it's terribly underthrown, nothing. If it's not, and A is unable to change direction due to B's position, throw it. Now what's horribly underthrown vs. kind of underthrown vs. kind of off line.....? That's why we get the big bucks - except in Oregon apparently.

That being said, if you get a room full of 100 officials and derock, and then show a series of pass plays and say, "after each play, whoever thinks there is pass interference, raise your hand", you'd probably get half the guys raising their hands after each play and the other half shaking their heads no. It's that subjective.


[Edited by ABoselli on Dec 11th, 2002 at 10:57 PM]

[The Ref of OZ!!!]

That's how I called it, and like ABoselli says, about half the officials I work with call it one way, and the others the other way.

I especially agree with Derock1986, it was a no call. The rule reads "interferes with an eligible opponent’s opportunity to move toward, catch or bat the pass..." To me, the word "interferes" implies an action which impeads the opponent's opportunity. Simply running down the field is not that action. If the defender does anything with his arms or hand to impead the reciever, then he's going to get a flag from me. But he has every right to run down the field, whether he knows where the ball is or not.

I can't find the term "Unfair advantage" anywhere in the rulebook, but it seems to be a good term to use in this example. All of us know, we could throw a flag on every play, and, like someone else said on this forum, we'd spend 2 hours just marching off the yardage. I try to judge a situation like I described at the beginning of this thread by the ideal of "Unfair advantage". The defender was not attempting to take an unfair advantage of the reciever. He didn't have a grasp on his jersey, or hold him so he couldn't get to the ball. If I'd thrown a flag, I'd have given an "Unfair advantage" to the offensive players. Like I said above, all the QB would have to do if he got in trouble, is throw the ball at the back of a defender, and the offense would get 15 yards, and that's an "Unfair Advantage"!

[BktBallRef]

You guys can throw that flag all you want to. I'm not. If you do, you'd better be throwing every hold you see as well.

[nvfoa15]

I agree with BBR (and even Derock!) that this a no call. I can't see how you can call DPI when A's action hinders himself from catching the pass. I can't see OPI since B is not attempting to catch the pass; how can you "hinder" a player from catching a pass their not attemping to catch?

[AndrewMcCarthy]

A does not hinder himself- the defender was between A and the ball. B interferes A’s opportunity to move toward the ball while making no attempt to get to the pass himself. It's DPI.

You can say that B has every right to run down the field, whether he knows where the ball is or not, but ONLY IF he doesn't interfere with an eligible opponent’s opportunity to move toward, catch or bat the pass.

In this case he interferes. Flag down.

[HighSchoolWhiteHat]

If youre talking nfhs rules its pass DPI, reguardless if he can catch the ball or not. If a is coming back and trying to make a catch on the ball and b runs threw him thats dpi to me.Why would it be a no call? There was contact while the ball was in the air.so you better have dpi or opi.
nfhs rules

[nvfoa15]

WhiteHat, Andrew, etal,

The original play has A running into B in order to catch the ball. B is not aware of the ball. A and B are running down the field side-by-side. A turns to see the ball and runs into the defender in order to catch the ball. This is at most OPI. According to the original play, B makes no attempt to catch the ball, wave arms, etc. to prevent/hinder A's opportunity to catch the ball; all contact is initiated by A. (Yes, I know that intention and catchability are not requirements for PI per NF rules.) All B is doing is occuping his rightful spot on the field! In the situation described, B need to do more than just be there to draw DPI.

[HighSchoolWhiteHat]

NVFOA15


The receiver turns to see the ball thrown to the inside, behind the defenders back. The receiver ATTEMPTS to get to the ball by running into the receiver.
To me this is DPI, you do not, by NFHS rules have to be trying to catch the ball for it to be dpi. Also the receiver ATTEMPTS to get to the ball by ruuning into the defender,(OPI???)MAYBE.

My way of seeing this is since both can be called for PI, but the receiver is making an attempt to get to the ball, we have DPI.
I just can't see where we have a no call in NFHS rules when theres contact with the ball in flight.

Just think of it like this? If a receiver is coming across the field and see's the ball thrown behind him. He changes directions and while running back to get to the ball he runs into the defender(who doesn't know the balls coming)(not that he needs to either) while the ball is in flight. DPI or OPI which one?

I guess we'd have to see the play to make a call on a play like this.

What i think is the key word here is ATTEMPT even though you don't have to make an attempt to catch the ball(in NFHS) at lets the receiver did and the defender didn't.

Just my way of looking at this play I guess.