![]() |
Quote:
Honestly, I think the interference on the Gronkowski play took place closer to the point of interception than the college play. To me, the college play is not interference, and the Gronkowski play is debatable. I'm just trying to say that while I understand the philosophy that JRut and others have posted about, it's not clearly black and white. If the receiver in the college play had been right behind the defender who intercepted it, I would have pass interference. I don't think he was going to affect the play where he was, even without the contact. |
If you think it's pointless debating with someone, then don't. No need to say it's pointless and proceed to do it anyway.
|
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
You know, that philosophy thing again. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Note, I think the advantage in the contact on Gronk was obvious, and would have been DPI had the pass not been intercepted. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Without that defender in front? No brainer DPI. The BJ's flag was proper absent the second defender in the way. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
If a ball is tipped at the line, the interval in which pass interference could be called would be infinitesimal or nonexistent, especially in NCAA or Fed where the restriction on either team exists only if the ball passed the neutral zone. Since interference is immaterial once the ball is touched, that leaves very little time. OTOH, if the ball has traveled a considerable distance downfield, interference is taken off the table late, and if a spot of possible interference is close to where the ball was touched, then unless it pops high into the air, there will be only a short interval in which players of either side going for the ball can be interfered with legally by contact with opponents. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:35am. |