mcdonut16

The NFL's penalty structure for defensive holding and pass interference makes no sense at all.

If Assante Samuel had grabbed Lelie by the arm and thrown him out of bounds, taking him totally out of the play before Plummer through the ball, he would have got a defensive holding penalty for 15 yards. Instead he plays perfect coverage, looks back for the ball, established position, and is pushed by Lelie at least 3 times and gets an interference call and the ball is place at the one yard line. Normally interference is a spot foul but because the "penalty" occured in the end zone the ball was place at the 1. It is no worse to hold that it is to interfere. Does the fact that the ball is in the air make the outcome any different. In either case the play is a pass play and the intent is to pass the ball. Why should it matter if the defender impedes the progress of the reciever regardless if the ball has been thrown or not.

My point here is that I am suggesting the NFL institute an additional level of pass interfence call that awards the offense 15 yards and a first down instead of spot fouls when the interference is not "a blatant attempt to prevent the reciever from catching the ball". Pass interference at all other levels of football is 15 yards and a first down. There is no penalty in sports as severe as the pass interference penalty other than maybe a penalty kick in soccer.

I am not suggesting that the spot foul interference penalty be removed, but that it only be used in cases of blatant interference. I don't believe that Samuel commited any interference on the now infamous play, but the back judge (I think) thought he saw something. Rather than letting the opinion of one referee swing the entire momentum of the game, if he had the option of levying a lesser penalty maybe he would have taken that, therefore in his mind awarding Denver a first down and 15 yards and making the wrong a right, without completely upheaving the game by placing the ball at the one, effectively awarding the Broncos a TD. Video review could also be used in the case where one ref and another disagree as to an interference call. The ref closest to the play did not think Samuel commited a penalty, but the ref half a field away felt obligated to call something that wasn't there. The referee could then take a look at the play himself (if the coach asks for a replay) and make the final call.

The basis for my idea somewhat already exist in the NFL for the face mask penalty.

It is the descretion of the referee to objectively determine if a defenders hand was just on the face mask (5 yards and a first down) or if the defender was grabbing and pulling the face mask (15 yards and a first down). The referee can dish out the appropriate punishment for the appropriate level of infraction.

primetime

I just find it to be an exception to every other NFL penalty. Every penalty besides interference is an amount of yardage from the spot of the foul or line of scrimmage, and possibly an automatic first down. Only defensive pass interference has the ball placed at the spot of the foul.

BelichickFan

The penalty is ridiculous, it assumes that every deep ball would be caught.

Like you're saying there should be a two tiered system - a spot foul for a flagrant PI in which the DB dives and tackles a guy who's got 2 steps on him. And a 15 yarder, like in college, for pushing and shoving.

onegameatatime

Doesn't college now have a fixed yardage? Do they find people intentionally taken out to avoid obvious catches?

I've always thought the penalty was excessive, and it's called too much and too inconsistently. The idea that the defender has an equal right to the ball is a sham in practice. On Saturday, they should have held the flag, but if it was caled, it should have been on Lelie.

... not to make excuses for the loss -- the Pats turned the ball over themselves.

PATSNUTme

That would open up a can of worms and take a 3 to 3.5 hour game into a 5 hour game.

There are some calls that have to be left to the judgement of the offcials. We got screwed it's true, but the league has to deal with the ref that called it. We will never know how much heat he got and how much of a downgrade he got on his review.

letekro

That should be the rule. However the rule as is promotes deep pass attempts and scoring - two things the NFL presumably wants to encourage.

Pats_Bryan

Placing the ball at the 1 yard line for pass interference in the end zone basically makes the penalty distance as far as the QB's arm can throw. And in most cases it will result in a TD on the next play. That's just too severe for pass interference. If they're not going to make the call reviewable, they should at least change the penalty. 15 yards is sufficient, though I could be persuaded by a two-tiered system as noted previously.

__________________
"We had some protection problems"

-Peyton Manning

Julius

Pass interference has always been my least favorite call in football. It promotes the mind set of just throwing deep even if no one is open. I agree about a two tier system. I also think receivers should get a penalty for pushing off defensive backs more often.

hwc

The NFL should just go ahead and institute the rule they really want: a total ban on pass defense. Maybe award an automatic touchdown if any defender drops back more than 15 yards off the line of scrimmage at any time during a play.

workhorse

I think that if you have fixed yardage like college that you would see guys just tackling receivers if they were about to get burnt. Better to give up a 15 yard penalty than a 50 yard score. They can use illegal contact and defensive holding to lessen the penalty yardage, but once the ball is in play they are kind of limited to either calling PI or not calling it. Putting in a lesser penalty like they have with face mask is one possibility, but how easy would it be to set a distinct difference?