Should pass interference be challengable?

[casmith07]

It SHOULD be 15 yards.

The smartest post you've ever made.

 

[2233boys]

The smartest post you've ever made.

It shouldn't be just a 15 yard penalty. That would be a horrible idea, figures you would support it though.

 

[kmd24]

I've always thought there should be a major pass interference (spot foul) and a minor pass interference (10 yards, automatic first down) based on the degree of contact and the likelihood of completing the pass.

However, after watching the officiating this year, I'm going to recant on that. It would be an unmitigated disaster.

 

[Risen Star]

No. Because I don't want to watch 4 hour long games.

And, no, it shouldn't be 15 yards either. Then you'd just have a lot of intentional PI calls to save big plays.

Other than allowing a little more contact between the players, I think it's fine the way it is.

 

[KJJ]

Haven't read through the thread so don't know if this has already been mentioned but the problem with changing the penalty from a spot foul to a 15 yard penalty is defenders will mug receivers to avoid giving up the big play if it only results in a 15 yard penalty.

They would rather commit the foul and take the 15 yards instead of giving up 45 yards or more on the reception. On spot fouls the NFL should make those plays challengeable to see if it was indeed pass interference.

 

[ZeroClub]

The NFL needs to review every rule change over the last 25 years and honestly try and evaluate its impact on the game.

Rule changes are a slippery slope, and the NFL is slipping up.

I agree.

The rules should be simplified, not amplified by game stoppages.

 

[arglebargle]

I think you should be able to challenge when refs miss pass interference. Look at the game we lost to Denver when Champ Bailey corralled Sam Hurd.

The game shouldn't be changed based on a bad call or a non call.

Absolutely not. The NFL doesn't want that level of picking at the refs. Just like there's holding on every play, there's likely 'P.I.' on every passing play. It would become a coaches tactical decision to throw the red flag, not based on the severity of the intereference, but on the game situation.

The NFL doesn't allow it now, for any other transgression iirc.

Reviewing a called penalty might make it through the NFL decision process, but I tend to doubt it.

 

[ElGatoGrande]

In principle I would agree, the penalties can be so severe and many times the calls are bogus, but implementation would be very subjective and tricky because there is almost always contact and hand checking going on.

 

[dadymat]

Also you would still have the same amount of challenges, there wouldnt be flags after every incomplete pass.

yeah, i guess thats correct.....

 

[BourbonBalz]

I hate PI calls, but they're a necessary evil. My heart says yes, they should be reviewable, but my head says no. They're subjective calls and they're often game changers, but I don't know if we really want them to be reviewed. Since they often result in BIG yardage gains, coaches would spend all of their challenges on PI calls. Not necessarily a good thing considering I don't know what would be required to overturn a PI call. If PIs were to be reviewable, why not holding? Where would it end?

 

[theogt]

Yes. Everything should be reviewable, with the same caveat that it takes irrefutable evidence to overturn. The idea that a call takes a certain level of judgment is not reason to have not subject to review, but rather is *THE* reason that it should be reviewable.

 

[BourbonBalz]

That's just the problem. What is irrefutable evidence to overturn a PI call? Absolutely no contact? I don't think so. There's generally a little contact on close pass completions? What really constitutes PI? It's subjective. It's sort of like pornography. I know it when I see it, but it's differrent to each individual. There's incidental contact, but again, that can be different things to different people. The one thing I would say about it is that reviewing PI calls would potentially overturn some of the horrible calls that are made. You know, the ones that are just blatantly missed. The problem is that missed PI calls are just as common as bad ones that aren't called. It's just a tough thing for offcials to consistently call.

 

[theogt]

That's just the problem. What is irrefutable evidence to overturn a PI call? Absolutely no contact? I don't think so. There's generally a little contact on close pass completions? What really constitutes PI? It's subjective. It's sort of like pornography. I know it when I see it, but it's differrent to each individual. There's incidental contact, but again, that can be different things to different people. The one thing I would say about it is that reviewing PI calls would potentially overturn some of the horrible calls that are made. You know, the ones that are just blatantly missed. The problem is that missed PI calls are just as common as bad ones that aren't called. It's just a tough thing for offcials to consistently call.

If a ref can't look at a clear, up-close, slow-motion video and tell someone whether pass interference occurs, they shouldn't be on the field, in real time, from a long distance telling people whether pass interference occurs.

 

[SaltwaterServr]

While I've met with mixed reactions, I've felt that each HC should have a single blue challenge flag that allows them to spot and call out missed major penalties by the officiating crew.

One shot per half to fix a mistake by the officials. You miss in the first half, you lose the one for the second half.

No, it's not going to make the game any longer by any appreciable margin when weighed against a major screw up by the officials deciding the game instead of legal play on the field.

Use it the same way to challenge any call made on the field as well.

You do that and the uncalled clipping at the end of the first half on the Pittsburgh INT TD gets the TD nullified. Anything that screws over the Steelers is definitely in the best interest of the league.

 

[Risen Star]

Yes. Everything should be reviewable, with the same caveat that it takes irrefutable evidence to overturn. The idea that a call takes a certain level of judgment is not reason to have not subject to review, but rather is *THE* reason that it should be reviewable.

Yes. We should take a minute after every play to review what happened. That's a great idea.

 

[Gibby!]

There is no face guarding in the NFL. No contact = no foul (unless the refs sucks...).

It used to be. The change (around 2003 I think) was to clarify that unless the defender specifically impedes the receivers ability (e.g. Touches him), there can not be face guarding. There was a play in the Ravens / 9ers game that would have been "face guarding" under the old rules (he wasn't playing the ball). The safety jumped up with his back turned and threw his arms and legs out to block the receivers vision, but no contact, in the end zone. No flag.

OT, I also agree that it shouldn't be challenge-able, but the rule needs to be clarified. Especial for an under thrown ball. If the receiver is running down field and has to slow down to let the ball catch up and the db makes contact, that should not be PI. If I am the QB, and the defender is even close, I'm throwing it short every time so the DB has no option but to impede the receiver. 9 times out of 10, any contact between a defender and receiver is going against the defender.

 

[AbeBeta]

It SHOULD be 15 yards.

so a play like Newman made that might take away a TD would only be 15 yards? That would be terrible, you'd see CBs tackling WRs all the time

 

[Apollo Creed]

How about interference plays over 30 yards or plays that result in the ball being spotted on the 1.

Would slow the game down a bit but the coaches would be allowed the same amount of challenges so it would just add one more element to polishing up the human errors courtesy of technology.

Let's say Jimmy had a challenge in 95, threw the flag on Deion's interference on Irvin, 4 in a row.

I'm for it. But no other penalty should be reviewable and don't allow the coaches any more challenges, keep it at 2.

 

[theogt]

Yes. We should take a minute after every play to review what happened. That's a great idea.

I didn't say ever play should be reviewed. I said every type of play should be reviewable.

 

[Clove]

I think PI's should only be called after a small meeting with the refs for like 20 seconds or so to make sure all are in agreement, including the ref in the booth. It's a monster penalty and it needs to be right. But also, corners need to learn how to play corner before entering the NFL.