I have never cared for the NFL’s defensive pass interference rule. It’s a spot foul and therefore assumes that the receiver would have made the catch. On a long pass play, the penalty can be huge. My question is, why not make the same assumption in the case of offensive interference? We would see a lot less of receivers pushing off (cough, Randy Moss) if the defense were awarded the ball. Ideally, the NFL would switch to the college rule of a 15 yard penalty, but in lieu of that, I’d like to see things made a little more even.
It would be nice if they distinguished between a simple contact penalty (not assuming a catch), which was 15 yards, and a blatant interference penalty that assumes the catch (spot of the foul). But that would probably open a giant can of worms.
I HATE the college rule. It’s an invitation for intentional penalties. The NFL rule is perfect, as most pass interference is done when the defender is beat, and it’s a last ditch effort to prevent the pass, because they know it’s likely a TD or a huge gain if they don’t.
In the college game, on a bomb: if you’re even close to beat, just tackle the guy before the ball gets there, especially at the end of the game…it will prevent the 60 yard hail mary every time. It’s just 15 yards. It makes those last ditch plays useless, at the end of the game, as you can just interfere if you’re beat and do it over. If I’m in college and I’m beat, and it’s beyond 20 yards? I’d interfere every time.
In fact, aside from overtime, in my opinion, the college PI penalty is the worst rule in the college game.
As for the offensive pass interference…that would be terrible for most offensive PI calls, as the receiver usually is pushing off to gain an advantage to catch the ball, not to prevent an interception. I’d be kind of OK for distinguishing offensive, PI, though…if the interference is to gain an advantage to catch the ball, it’s the same as it is now…if the player interferes on a defensive interception attempt - award the ball to the other team. However, I kind of view it this way…the offensive team has possession of the ball…the defense needs to forcibly take it away…the pass is not intended for the defender, so assuming an interception is not the best way to play the game, IMO.
Isn’t that sort of how it is with facemask? Intentional vs. incidental contact? Maybe something like that could work with PI. Intentional gets a spot foul, incidental gets 15 yards.
The NFL got rid of the 5-yard facemask penalty a few years ago. Now, there’s only the 15-yard variety.
College also got rid of the 5 yard facemask penalty.
BTW, I don’t see many cases in college where the defender tackles a receiver to get a 15 yard PI call. It happens but I don’t see it being a big problem.
While most pi calls might happen the way that you describe, it is not a perfect rule, imho; I’ve seen plenty of questionable calls on long plays where the contact was mutual between the receiver and the defender, and others where strong arguments could be made that the receiver had no chance to get to a ball.
Did you ever watch the Florida fun and gun under Spurrier? It happened all the time.
Eh…I don’t disagree, but I think in the NFL it seems like just tossing it up and hoping for a flag is the more likely result.
Maybe college and the NFL should swap rules.
I disagree that most DPI’s in the NFL are deliberate prevent-a-sure-touchdown actions. I can only recall maybe one or two in the games I’ve seen this year. My no-statistics WAG is that at about half are fairly intentional holds/grabs done to get a little advantage, but not when the receiver is clearly open and going to catch a big gain. The rest are maybe split evenly between unintentional but clearly interfering with the receiver, unintentional and incidental contact that should probably be let go, and contact that was clearly the receiver’s fault.