Carolina vs New England last play

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am very aware of what the NFL said. But they did not say that it was a foul either. And the call is not only based on the ball being uncatchable. There also has to be restriction, which there are categories for calling DPI or OPI in NFL training. I think the catchable part of this is only a small part of this not being called.

"Restriction" is a consideration for holding. It doesn't have to be one for interference. What sealed the play as I can see from that video loop is not holding, but the initial push that was given by an opponent to A87 to knock him off balance.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

"Restriction" is a consideration for holding. It doesn't have to be one for interference. What sealed the play as I can see from that video loop is not holding, but the initial push that was given by an opponent to A87 to knock him off balance.

Robert, there are guidelines the NCAA uses that puts PI into about 6 categories. Each category described what constitutes PI and in order to call PI, you the action must fit into such category. I am almost positive that these came from the NFL and their philosophies.

And I looked it up, these categories are in the CCA Manual on page 27. There are 6 categories for DPI. There are 4 categories for OPI. And I know the NFL uses the same guidelines as these have been discussed by the association I work with and there are both NFL officials and NFL evaluators in this group. And one of the NFL evaluators is the person I work for in D3 in my area.

Peace

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Robert, there are guidelines the NCAA uses that puts PI into about 6 categories. Each category described what constitutes PI and in order to call PI, you the action must fit into such category. I am almost positive that these came from the NFL and their philosophies.

And I looked it up, these categories are in the CCA Manual on page 27. There are 6 categories for DPI. There are 4 categories for OPI. And I know the NFL uses the same guidelines as these have been discussed by the association I work with and there are both NFL officials and NFL evaluators in this group. And one of the NFL evaluators is the person I work for in D3 in my area.

Peace

Just to clarify, do you have DPI on this play if the defender who intercepted it isn't there?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by hbk314

Just to clarify, do you have DPI on this play if the defender who intercepted it isn't there?

Yes. The ball would have gone much further, and could conceivably have been caught by the receiver before it made it to the ground.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by hbk314

Just to clarify, do you have DPI on this play if the defender who intercepted it isn't there?

Very likely because the facts are now changed. The philosophy I've been taught (again at the NCAA level but as JRut states likely comes from the NFL) is if a pass is underthrown and a separate player intercepts the ball, the contact behind him is ignored. It's a simple philosophy and applies on this play.

If the pass is not intercepted you have different facts on the play. Since you can now consider the contact the category would be early contact not playing the ball.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

Very likely because the facts are now changed. The philosophy I've been taught (again at the NCAA level but as JRut states likely comes from the NFL) is if a pass is underthrown and a separate player intercepts the ball, the contact behind him is ignored. It's a simple philosophy and applies on this play.

If the pass is not intercepted you have different facts on the play. Since you can now consider the contact the category would be early contact not playing the ball.

I understand the philosophy, but I don't think it applies on this play.

The intercepting defender and the interference happened almost right next to each other, within a couple yards.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by hbk314

I understand the philosophy, but I don't think it applies on this play.

The intercepting defender and the interference happened almost right next to each other, within a couple yards.

Seriously? They happened about 7 yards apart.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Seriously? They happened about 7 yards apart.

Try watching the play. You'll sound less ridiculous that way.

The point where Gronkowski is initially interfered with and the point where the ball is intercepted are maybe two yards apart.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Seriously? They happened about 7 yards apart.

That's where the interference ended (and where the hard to miss interference happened). The important interference, the hand pushing on the shoulder, starts quite close to the point of interception.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

The philosophy I've been taught (again at the NCAA level but as JRut states likely comes from the NFL) is if a pass is underthrown and a separate player intercepts the ball, the contact behind him is ignored.

Regardless how far behind/beyond him? Or how much time between? If so, that philosophy materially changes the rule!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Regardless how far behind/beyond him? Or how much time between? If so, that philosophy materially changes the rule!

No it doesn't. You just do not understand the philosophy. Hardly any rule does not have some kind of philosophy as to how to rule on something. Officials at the higher levels tend to understand that better than guys you work high school. High school officials often do not have the same level of training or scrutiny or accountability.

Peace

[zm1283]

I want you guys in the "No DPI" camp on the NE/Carolina play to watch this play starting at the 4:00 mark in the video:

GameDay: Denver Broncos vs. New England Patriots highlights - NFL Videos

The Denver receiver is running a "go" route straight down the field. Talib for NE does hold the receiver, but Manning severely underthrows the ball and there is zero chance the receiver would have caught it. It gets intercepted, but they stick with the holding call.

How is this any different than last week's play? I thought if the ball was underthrown and not catchable by the offensive player and it was intercepted, they "philosophy" was to ignore the defensive penalty. When Talib catches Manning's underthrown pass he is eight yards in front of the receiver who was running the complete opposite direction.

Edit: Go to 5:20 and watch the PI no-call when the Patriots have the ball in OT also. How is that not DPI?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by hbk314

Just to clarify, do you have DPI on this play if the defender who intercepted it isn't there?

Yes because it is probably early contact on the receiver that had a chance to catch the ball. But the ball never got there and at that level the ball must be there to stick with a foul.

Peace

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Yes because it is probably early contact on the receiver that had a chance to catch the ball. But the ball never got there and at that level the ball must be there to stick with a foul.

Peace

Tough for the ball to get to the receiver when the receiver's being dragged away from the ball.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by hbk314

Tough for the ball to get to the receiver when the receiver's being dragged away from the ball.

If the ball is tipped on the way to a receiver, we do not call DPI in those situations. Why is this so hard to understand in this situation?

Peace