Has there been changes to P.I.?

[btownqbcoach1]

Recently (3 years-ish)... have there been changes to the wording of the definition of defensive pass interference? 

Personally, I think officials regularly struggle with this call from watching too much Sunday football, unless the wording is changed... I don't think contact auto-means flag, unless I'm remembering the rule incorrectly. Feet getting tangled up for instance?... why is that a defensive penalty? 

Again, I think this rule is very poorly called on Friday nights. 

[Bobref]

17 hours ago, btownqbcoach1 said:

Recently (3 years-ish)... have there been changes to the wording of the definition of defensive pass interference? 

Personally, I think officials regularly struggle with this call from watching too much Sunday football, unless the wording is changed... I don't think contact auto-means flag, unless I'm remembering the rule incorrectly. Feet getting tangled up for instance?... why is that a defensive penalty? 

Again, I think this rule is very poorly called on Friday nights. 

It’s very hard to provide what coaches, fans, etc., call “consistency,” in a play where, literally, every play is unique. And there is general agreement that PI is among the hardest calls to officiate, at every level. There are 6 categories of DPI, and we are taught that if you can’t fit the action into one of these 6 categories, keep the flag in your pocket:

1. Playing through the back.
2. Hook and turn.
3. Playing the man instead of the ball.
4. Grabbing the arm.
5. The cutoff or arm bar.
6. Early contact.

Speaking specifically of “tangled feet,” the philosophy is well defined. If the players are running even with one another and they tangle feet, no foul. If the defender is in the trail position and they tangle feet, it is only a foul for DPI if the receiver is looking for the ball and the defender isn’t. If neither is looking for the ball, it’s never a foul.

[btownqbcoach1]

45 minutes ago, Bobref said:

It’s very hard to provide what coaches, fans, etc., call “consistency,” in a play where, literally, every play is unique. And there is general agreement that PI is among the hardest calls to officiate, at every level. There are 6 categories of DPI, and we are taught that if you can’t fit the action into one of these 6 categories, keep the flag in your pocket:

1. Playing through the back.
2. Hook and turn.
3. Playing the man instead of the ball.
4. Grabbing the arm.
5. The cutoff or arm bar.
6. Early contact.

Speaking specifically of “tangled feet,” the philosophy is well defined. If the players are running even with one another and they tangle feet, no foul. If the defender is in the trail position and they tangle feet, it is only a foul for DPI if the receiver is looking for the ball and the defender isn’t. If neither is looking for the ball, it’s never a foul.

Playing the man instead of the ball, so face guarding in HS isn't allowed? I'm not sure I understand that one. I appreciate the response.  

[jets]

DPI = most "over-officiated" part of the game. In my opinion of course

In that same vein, Offensive pass interference is almost NEVER called. WR's get away with murder sometimes

 

[Bobref]

35 minutes ago, btownqbcoach1 said:

Playing the man instead of the ball, so face guarding in HS isn't allowed? I'm not sure I understand that one. I appreciate the response.  

There must be contact in order to call DPI. Face guarding with contact = DPI.

[btownqbcoach1]

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

There must be contact in order to call DPI. Face guarding with contact = DPI.

My issue is.... contact, what if the WR initiates it? Then what? 

2 hours ago, Bobref said:

It’s very hard to provide what coaches, fans, etc., call “consistency,” in a play where, literally, every play is unique. And there is general agreement that PI is among the hardest calls to officiate, at every level. There are 6 categories of DPI, and we are taught that if you can’t fit the action into one of these 6 categories, keep the flag in your pocket:

1. Playing through the back.
2. Hook and turn.
3. Playing the man instead of the ball.
4. Grabbing the arm.
5. The cutoff or arm bar.
6. Early contact.

Speaking specifically of “tangled feet,” the philosophy is well defined. If the players are running even with one another and they tangle feet, no foul. If the defender is in the trail position and they tangle feet, it is only a foul for DPI if the receiver is looking for the ball and the defender isn’t. If neither is looking for the ball, it’s never a foul.

What if both are looking for the ball? 

The consistency of the calls, meh. Not really a complaint of mine. 

I think it's called entirely too much. I'm trying to download a video now, hudl seems to be going slow. I'll post it when I get it. 

2 hours ago, jets said:

DPI = most "over-officiated" part of the game. In my opinion of course

In that same vein, Offensive pass interference is almost NEVER called. WR's get away with murder sometimes

 

That's how I see it, as well. I am to the point, I do know how to even coach my DBs. 

[cloudofdust]

2 hours ago, jets said:

DPI = most "over-officiated" part of the game. In my opinion of course

In that same vein, Offensive pass interference is almost NEVER called. WR's get away with murder sometimes

 

I second this. It seems to be easily forgotten that the defender has the same right to the ball as the receiver.

Awful to see your guy in perfect position to make a play, then a quick disregarded push off nullifies the effort.

[Bobref]

8 hours ago, btownqbcoach1 said:

What if both are looking for the ball? 

If both are looking for the ball, tangled feet is not a foul.

[Yuccaguy]

FYI.  

(we) Had 2 Offensive Pass Interference penalties TONIGHT in a lower level game.  So YES, it is called sometimes.  

 

[btownqbcoach1]

12 hours ago, Bobref said:

If both are looking for the ball, tangled feet is not a foul.

And that's what I thought.  Which is what happened on this particular play. 

[SoIndRef]

The thing that drives me crazy when DPI is called.... "But the ball was uncatchable".....

 

🙃

[Daniel_Bragg]

On 9/20/2024 at 2:24 PM, SoIndRef said:

The thing that drives me crazy when DPI is called.... "But the ball was uncatchable".....

 

🙃

Is this not a part of the determination of whether there is a foul or not?  If the ball is 5 yards out of bounds, but there is contact, are you going to throw a flag?

[Bobref]

On 9/20/2024 at 1:24 PM, SoIndRef said:

The thing that drives me crazy when DPI is called.... "But the ball was uncatchable".....

 

🙃

 

4 minutes ago, Daniel_Bragg said:

Is this not a part of the determination of whether there is a foul or not?  If the ball is 5 yards out of bounds, but there is contact, are you going to throw a flag?

Simply put, the receiver gets the benefit of every doubt as to whether the ball was catchable. But if it’s really not, there’s no foul for DPI.

[JustRules]

On 9/25/2024 at 12:13 PM, Daniel_Bragg said:

Is this not a part of the determination of whether there is a foul or not?  If the ball is 5 yards out of bounds, but there is contact, are you going to throw a flag?

No such thing as "uncatchable" in the NFHS rule book. Even the NFL and NCAA threshold for "uncatchable" is pretty high. It's even higher for high school. The officials aren't looking to throw flags, but if the foul is there, it's there.

[Daniel_Bragg]

9 hours ago, JustRules said:

No such thing as "uncatchable" in the NFHS rule book. Even the NFL and NCAA threshold for "uncatchable" is pretty high. It's even higher for high school. The officials aren't looking to throw flags, but if the foul is there, it's there.

Didn't really answer the question.  If the ball is 5 yards out of bounds, but there is contact, would YOU throw a flag?

[Bobref]

47 minutes ago, Daniel_Bragg said:

Didn't really answer the question.  If the ball is 5 yards out of bounds, but there is contact, would YOU throw a flag?

It’s hardly that simple. A ball that lands 5 yds out of bounds can be caught by a player at the sideline if the trajectory is right. Let me rephrase the question:

“If you were convinced 100% that even an extraordinary effort would not have been able to catch the ball, but there is contact, would YOU throw a flag?” The answer is “no.”