The Official Forum
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Football (https://forum.officiating.com/football/)
-   -   PI question (https://forum.officiating.com/football/92370-pi-question.html)

chsbaseball Sun Sep 09, 2012 04:45pm
PI question
 
In a CA high school football game, there was a defensive pass interference call on a TD pass. The TD was good and they marked 15 yards off on the ensuing kickoff. Was that the correct enforcement?

HLin NC Sun Sep 09, 2012 04:50pm
Yup, new rule from 2-3 years back. Gets rid of the "free shot" on a scoring play.

chsbaseball Sun Sep 09, 2012 04:58pm
Thanks....never saw it before

WestCoaster Sun Sep 09, 2012 05:43pm
Rule 8.2.2 if you want to look it up.

Robert Goodman Sun Sep 09, 2012 07:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HLin NC (Post 853831)
Yup, new rule from 2-3 years back. Gets rid of the "free shot" on a scoring play.
That's weird when you consider the enforcement after a non-scoring play. On 3rd & 10 you complete a pass for a 25 yard gain that gets you to the 1 yard line, during the pass there was DPI, you decline the penalty because it gets you only to the 13 yard line. But if you scored on the play, you get a 2nd bite of the apple now?

maven Sun Sep 09, 2012 07:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCoaster (Post 853844)
Rule 8.2.2 if you want to look it up.
You mean 8-2-2 (rules use hyphens, cases use periods):

"If an opponent of the scoring team commits a foul (other than
unsportsmanlike conduct on a nonplayer foul) during a down in which a touchdown
is scored and there was not a change in possession during the down, A
may accept the results of the play and choose enforcement of the penalty:
a. On the try, or
b. On the subsequent kickoff."

Robert Goodman Sun Sep 09, 2012 07:24pm
I predict that within a season or 2, Fed changes this to apply only to fouls that would otherwise have been penalized from the end of the run that resulted in the TD.

HLin NC Sun Sep 09, 2012 07:35pm
And I predict that in a season or two, you'll be wrong.

JRutledge Sun Sep 09, 2012 08:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman (Post 853857)
That's weird when you consider the enforcement after a non-scoring play. On 3rd & 10 you complete a pass for a 25 yard gain that gets you to the 1 yard line, during the pass there was DPI, you decline the penalty because it gets you only to the 13 yard line. But if you scored on the play, you get a 2nd bite of the apple now?
I think you are thinking way too much. ;)

Peace

BktBallRef Sun Sep 09, 2012 08:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HLin NC (Post 853865)
And I predict that in a season or two, you'll be wrong.
You don't need to wait a season or two. He's wrong on a regular basis.

BktBallRef Sun Sep 09, 2012 08:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCoaster (Post 853844)
Rule 8.2.2 if you want to look it up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maven (Post 853859)
You mean 8-2-2 (rules use hyphens, cases use periods):

"If an opponent of the scoring team commits a foul (other than
unsportsmanlike conduct on a nonplayer foul) during a down in which a touchdown
is scored and there was not a change in possession during the down, A
may accept the results of the play and choose enforcement of the penalty:
a. On the try, or
b. On the subsequent kickoff."
No, he means 8.2.2. He was referring to the case plays under 8.2.2.

maven Mon Sep 10, 2012 06:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BktBallRef (Post 853878)
No, he means 8.2.2. He was referring to the case plays under 8.2.2.
No, he called it "Rule 8.2.2." :p

Forksref Mon Sep 10, 2012 06:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by HLin NC (Post 853865)
And I predict that in a season or two, you'll be wrong.
I predict that since there hasn't been a groundswell of support to change the new rule in the years since it was implemented that the rule will stay.

The purpose of the rule was to eliminate cheap shot fouls that had to be declined in order to score. Nuff said.

Robert Goodman Mon Sep 10, 2012 01:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forksref (Post 853917)
I predict that since there hasn't been a groundswell of support to change the new rule in the years since it was implemented that the rule will stay.

The purpose of the rule was to eliminate cheap shot fouls that had to be declined in order to score. Nuff said.
But PI is not usually a cheap shot.

Rich Mon Sep 10, 2012 01:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman (Post 853984)
But PI is not usually a cheap shot.
But nobody cares. I haven't heard one person (until you) advocate changing the existing rule.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:55am.
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1