Interference - Cowboys Lions

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Nope, I mentioned in my post that Dez was on the field but thought it was marginal. Do you know how far was he on the field?

Actually, how far he was on the field is immaterial. What MATTERS is whether the official, who the comments were directed at, judged the behavior as worthy of an UNC penalty, or better served the game by taking an alternate response, and how the player responded to the response chosen.

Apparently the player responded PROPERLY to whatever instructions he received - and the game continued without further action, or consequence, being necessary.

Those are decisions made by field officials at every level (PopWarner through NFL) regarding spontaneous, usually overly emotional reactions to game conditions or situations, by non-players, and are far more often handled by some level of corrective instruction, rather than penalty.

[MD Longhorn]

The threshold for getting a USC foul is far different in the NFL than elsewhere. I've seen them pass on seemingly FAR worse than this many many times. If the player obeys the stop sign, they generally don't draw a flag.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Actually, how far he was on the field is immaterial. What MATTERS is whether the official, who the comments were directed at, judged the behavior as worthy of an UNC penalty, or better served the game by taking an alternate response, and how the player responded to the response chosen.

Apparently the player responded PROPERLY to whatever instructions he received - and the game continued without further action, or consequence, being necessary.

Those are decisions made by field officials at every level (PopWarner through NFL) regarding spontaneous, usually overly emotional reactions to game conditions or situations, by non-players, and are far more often handled by some level of corrective instruction, rather than penalty.

This is exactly how I heard it described. Since he wasn't in on the previous play, he wasn't a player who removed his helmet while still on the field. He was asked to leave and he immediately complied.

Originally Posted by ajmc

Actually, how far he was on the field is immaterial. What MATTERS is whether the official, who the comments were directed at, judged the behavior as worthy of an UNC penalty, or better served the game by taking an alternate response, and how the player responded to the response chosen.

Apparently the player responded PROPERLY to whatever instructions he received - and the game continued without further action, or consequence, being necessary.

Those are decisions made by field officials at every level (PopWarner through NFL) regarding spontaneous, usually overly emotional reactions to game conditions or situations, by non-players, and are far more often handled by some level of corrective instruction, rather than penalty.

Great post, thanks.

[Texas Aggie]

Cowboy fan here -- surprised the flag was picked up, and don't necessarily agree with it. But then, I don't know the exact wording of the NFL DPI rules nor do I know what their philosophies are.

On the Dez thing, that would get an immediate flag in college, but again, NFL has a different set of guidelines. One thing to keep in mind about the NFL is that they will fine a player regardless of whether he's flagged. College and high school officials don't have that backing them up so it isn't like totally bad behavior is going to be ignored in the NFL.

[hbk314]

On a slightly related note, do you think there's going to be a point where pass interference penalties, being a spot foul, will be reviewable?

Perhaps where penalties called on the field can be look at and overturned, but you can't go to replay to call pass interference. If it were ever to come to that, I'd hope the decision would involve the calling official or officials responsible for covering that area. They know why they flagged it, they should be the ones to go to replay to confirm what they based the flag on happened or not.

Thoughts?

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by hbk314

On a slightly related note, do you think there's going to be a point where pass interference penalties, being a spot foul, will be reviewable?

Perhaps where penalties called on the field can be look at and overturned, but you can't go to replay to call pass interference. If it were ever to come to that, I'd hope the decision would involve the calling official or officials responsible for covering that area. They know why they flagged it, they should be the ones to go to replay to confirm what they based the flag on happened or not. Thoughts?

Considering the unbelievable success of football, at all levels, especially the NFL, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" sounds like good advice even to those nit pickers who strive for some imaginary perfection.

Football is a game planned by humans, played by humans and currently officiated by humans all of which are subject to error and mistakes, which as long as they are honest and unbiased, are part of the challenge that makes the game so popular.

Humans aren't perfect meaning all levels of Judges aren't perfect, why would anyone realisticly expect sports officiating to be perfect. The clamor about "mistakes" comes largely from fans (short for fanatics) who usually have little actual knowledge about what they are complaining about, Coaches, who by definition and purpose are clearly biased and Sportscasters and other Pundits whose job it is to babble.

Having the ability to turn EVERYTHING into video games doesn't mean it will be a good idea. Enjoy the game, as it is, with all it's challenges, twists, turns and occassional questions, that people choose to NEVER agree about. We all need to be really careful about messing with any Goose that lays golden eggs, year after year after year.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Considering the unbelievable success of football, at all levels, especially the NFL, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" sounds like good advice even to those nit pickers who strive for some imaginary perfection.

Football is a game planned by humans, played by humans and currently officiated by humans all of which are subject to error and mistakes, which as long as they are honest and unbiased, are part of the challenge that makes the game so popular.

Humans aren't perfect meaning all levels of Judges aren't perfect, why would anyone realisticly expect sports officiating to be perfect. The clamor about "mistakes" comes largely from fans (short for fanatics) who usually have little actual knowledge about what they are complaining about, Coaches, who by definition and purpose are clearly biased and Sportscasters and other Pundits whose job it is to babble.

Having the ability to turn EVERYTHING into video games doesn't mean it will be a good idea. Enjoy the game, as it is, with all it's challenges, twists, turns and occassional questions, that people choose to NEVER agree about. We all need to be really careful about messing with any Goose that lays golden eggs, year after year after year.

But what's your opinion on my proposed implementation if it got to that point? I wouldn't want it to change how plays are officiated, leading to flags being thrown because they can "fix" it on replay.

I brought it up because it's been talked about over the last few years. The only other thing I could see adding to review would be the illegal hits on defenseless receivers.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by hbk314

But what's your opinion on my proposed implementation if it got to that point? I wouldn't want it to change how plays are officiated, leading to flags being thrown because they can "fix" it on replay.

I brought it up because it's been talked about over the last few years. The only other thing I could see adding to review would be the illegal hits on defenseless receivers.

Personally, I don't think it will add any benefit to the game. The field official views the action between the players and determines, based on his knowledge of the rule and its intent and experience developed over his career when, and if, contact between players provides either with a disadvantage or unfair advantage that may, or may not, be a result of the contact, which it seems more often than not, there is some degree of.

Perhaps some day the result will be achieved by a show of hands from spectators viewing precise slow motion videos, but I hope we never get that far as it will not help the game.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Personally, I don't think it will add any benefit to the game. The field official views the action between the players and determines, based on his knowledge of the rule and its intent and experience developed over his career when, and if, contact between players provides either with a disadvantage or unfair advantage that may, or may not, be a result of the contact, which it seems more often than not, there is some degree of.

Perhaps some day the result will be achieved by a show of hands from spectators viewing precise slow motion videos, but I hope we never get that far as it will not help the game.

That's why I would have the calling official(s) be involved in the process. They know why they threw the flag, and replay will either confirm that reason for them or not.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by hbk314

That's why I would have the calling official(s) be involved in the process. They know why they threw the flag, and replay will either confirm that reason for them or not.

I don't like it, but I assume we'll eventually have it. Then we'll review all personal fouls because they are 15-yard penalties. Then they'll want to look at all holding fouls. Then eventually anything and everything will be reviewable. Anything that could have been a downgrade by a grader could be reviewed and corrected in real time. Why wait until after the game? And I don't like it.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by hbk314

That's why I would have the calling official(s) be involved in the process. They know why they threw the flag, and replay will either confirm that reason for them or not.

Every job entails some level of review and accountability, but if that effort becomes nitpicking and debating everything someone does, the result is intimidating to the employee and eventually negatively affects their performance.

There will never be pure perfection, no matter how much the results are examined, not is pure perfection a reasonable, or even necessary, requirement. Weighing the alleged benefit versus the potential damage suggests, "When it ain't broke, don't fix it".