Fed Face guarding?
 

I don't see a flag from the B


Play Of The Day: Amazing High School Catch - YouTube


http://s3.amazonaws.com/winito_prod/...7d_normal_.JPG

Me neither. Good call!

We get a good shot of the BJ in the youtube vid. I gotta believe he is going to throw that flag if there isn't a reception by A. Then again, who knows.

Rule: 7-5-10



ART. 10 . . . It is forward-pass interference if:

a. Any player of A or B who is beyond the neutral zone interferes with an eligible opponent's opportunity to move toward, catch or bat the pass.

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.

If you think this was face guarding, take a look at the Aloha Clinic 2012 video on PI (you have to download it: right click the link and "Save As"). The first two plays provide the correct philosophy on calling this foul.

This is not face guarding. It might be attempted face guarding - but just like attempting to block in the back and failing, attempting is not a foul. (Unless receivers eyes are in his shoulders.)

What's up with that link? My PC won't open it and neither will Safari on my iPhone.

I got faceguarding. It might be a bad attempt, but the flag is out before this catch. Rare call, but I feel confident in making it here.

Peace

I agree, this is a clear case of DPI - faceguarding. Question - do you still have a DPI IF the defender looks back for the ball at the last second? In other words, do you watch this whole play through before throwing a flag?

See my parenthetical note next to the link. ;)

I call this once I have faceguarding. Now I tend to wait for the play to end anyway, but the flag would likely come out before it was clear he had a catch in this specific situation.

Peace

Play #9 (5:56). Is the slot receiver that is highlighted an eligible receiver? Sure looks like he is covered up to me

-Josh

I should have prefaced my comments with the fact that I was using the picture to make that statement, and not the video. I can't see youtube video at work - so it may have been more obviously faceguarding based on the video than it is based on the picture posted.

Yep, hard to put either guy on that side in the backfield.

From the video, not even close to face guarding. The player in white never looked toward the ball, but was watching the player in black all the way. The player in black was playing the ball. So not only was it not face guarding because he was making an attempt to catch it (which succeeded), it was not face guarding because he didn't hinder the opponent's vision -- the opponent was looking the wrong way to begin with. I don't know what you guys who are calling it face guarding are seeing, from such a good video.

It is based on interpretation. Again we do not judge whether they actually succeed in obstructing vision, we judge based on the fact the arms are up and attempting to do nothing else but get in the way of the vision. There is no other reason a player puts their arms up in that manner unless you are trying to "face guard." The problem is that players often do this when they are clearly beat and as a last resort. But to say this is clearly not a foul is laughable. This has been show as evidence over the years by the NF in video and in their Simplified and Illustrated book.

Peace