Welcome to PatsFans.com

A temporary fix for PI calls

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by ctpatsfan77, Nov 30, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    21,443
    Likes Received:
    474
    Ratings:
    +1,286 / 18 / -8

    #3 Jersey

    Obviously, you can't just turn PI into a 15-yard foul like a personal foul, because then it would give defenders an incentive to just mug receivers on every deep ball.

    That said, something needs to be done. What I suggest is that this be the minimum change:

    PI calls must add two things above and beyond what is currently announced: (1) the number of the referee who claims PI occurred, and (2) a clear description of the action taken by the penalized player who caused the foul. In other words, the referee must say "official number 110 states the defender tripped the receiver" or "official number 130 states the defender used an arm bar to impede the receiver's progress."

    I'd really love to see Mike Pereira defend these howlingly bad calls if they had to be that specific.
     
  2. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,872
    Likes Received:
    278
    Ratings:
    +737 / 17 / -19

    #24 Jersey

    Sure you can. It works in college and you can't just give up 15 yards on a whim. Not every deep ball is caught, in fact most aren't. 15 yards is a big penalty. Giving a spot foul on PI, therefore assuming the ball is caught, is the same as holding being 10 yards AND a loss of down on passing plays assuming the QB would be sacked if the OL had to hold.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2009
  3. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    21,443
    Likes Received:
    474
    Ratings:
    +1,286 / 18 / -8

    #3 Jersey

    And so an arm bar on a 6-yard pass play should result in a 15-yard penalty, too? :confused:
     
  4. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    566
    Ratings:
    +1,671 / 9 / -2

    #50 Jersey

    I think you can, as long as you add a more punitive "flagrant foul" to prevent flat-out tackles of the receiver.
     
  5. Tunescribe

    Tunescribe PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    17,104
    Likes Received:
    595
    Ratings:
    +1,964 / 14 / -22

    #61 Jersey

    Try making that argument to the Detroit Lions after their game vs. Cleveland a week ago. I agree something needs to be done about all these phantom PI calls, but going to the college rule doesn't cut it for me. Because so much is at stake, I think pass interference should require automatic replay review by a pressbox official. It won't slow the game down that much. Either that, or allow coaches to challenge PI calls.
     
  6. ausbacker

    ausbacker Brady > Manning. PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    14,098
    Likes Received:
    438
    Ratings:
    +1,392 / 19 / -5

    #87 Jersey

    How about the officials stop paying PI calls that blatantly aren't and Magnum PI Mike is sacked from officiating duties.
     
  7. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    21,443
    Likes Received:
    474
    Ratings:
    +1,286 / 18 / -8

    #3 Jersey

    Do you think my suggestion would help in the interim (i.e., while people try and figure out what the penalty SHOULD be), in order to cut down on the cr*pPI calls?
     
  8. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,872
    Likes Received:
    278
    Ratings:
    +737 / 17 / -19

    #24 Jersey

    It could be a spot foul for under 15 yarders.

    15 yards would have given them a first down around the 20, not bad for a PI on a pass that almost certainly would have been incomplete.
     
  9. PatsChamp88

    PatsChamp88 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,217
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +68 / 3 / -0

    #75 Jersey

    I agree it should be like the college rule...
     
  10. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    32,772
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Ratings:
    +3,399 / 30 / -10

    Of course you can turn PI into a 15 yard penalty. People said you couldn't take away the forceout rule because defenders would just forceout receivers going for the ball near the sidelines causing more injuries. And guess what? Nothing has changed.

    Sorry, there are far too many game changing phantom and/or ticky tack pass interference calls going on in the league. I know of two that the Colts have benefitted from on TD drives in games where they won by 7 points or less this year alone. I would rather avoid such game changing bad calls than risk a few intentional offensive PI to avoid INTs (which happens now anyway).

    The Pats lost the AFC championship game to the Colts by 4 points in part because Ellis Hobbs was called for PI in the end zone for a PI rule that no longer existed which turned what would have been a third and 7 on the Pats' 20 to a first and goal on the one. At least with a 15 yard rule, it would have been half the distance to the goal and at least given the Pats a fighting chance to hold the Colts to 3 points on a bogus call that the league admitted they were wrong. And the year before, the Pats

    The college ranks have had the 15 yard penalty for ages and there isn't a problem. I would rather have a few more blatant PIs by the defenders than bogus PI that unfairly gives a team 40-50 yards on a penalty that doesn't occur. You'll have a hard time arguing to me that there will be a huge increase of blatant pass interference penalties when 15 yards is still a huge foul and defenders don't blatantly tackle receivers when they lose a step on them on what would be a sure TD if the QB connects with the receiver. I think it is a weak argument myself.
     
  11. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    32,772
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Ratings:
    +3,399 / 30 / -10

    Yeah, that's going to happen. The league will never pass an automatic review and make some games go 6 hours long. They need to make PI reviewable which will probably never happen since it is a judgment call (which in itself is crime that the most costly penalty in football is based on the judgement of the ref and not a penalty where judgement is taken out of the equation).
     
  12. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    32,772
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Ratings:
    +3,399 / 30 / -10

    Well, the college rule has it at the spot of the foul anything less than 15 yards. Besides, if an offensive lineman gets flagged for holding a player who is nowhere near the play and had no chance of making any play gets the same 10 yard penalty as the offensive player who holds the defenders who gets past him for a clear shot at the QB for a sack, why would this be a big issue.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2009
  13. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    32,772
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Ratings:
    +3,399 / 30 / -10

    Sounds like a good rule to me.
     
  14. bigcountry75

    bigcountry75 Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    614
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0 / -0

    See that is the problem with PI.....It is always going to be a judgement call....I have been trying to think of a solution for years and can't think of one to take the judgement out of it.....They can lay down the exact rules of what you can call PI on and still there is judgement.....Did there feet just get tangled or did the defender trip him? Was he playing the ball or the man when he is running and barely turns his head around at the last second and swipes at the ball?

    Now there are some stupid rules they can get rid of like faceguarding.....I believe that is what they called on hobbs in the endzone where he wasn't even close to wayne and the ball hit him in the back.....Who cares if the defender sticks his arms up running down the field and doesn't look back for the ball.....They need to take crap like this out of the rule book and simplify the rules as best they can....
     
  15. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    32,772
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Ratings:
    +3,399 / 30 / -10

    That is my issue with PI. It is a judgement call and at the sole disgression of the ref and no two refs call it the same way and yet it can be upwards to a 60-70 yard penalty. The college rule isn't perfect, but it will avoid a team from getting a game changing penalty on a bad call. The refs shouldn't determine the outcomes of games and with a bad PI call, they can.
     
  16. oldskool138

    oldskool138 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,708
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    #75 Jersey

    You're in luck. Facguarding hasn't been a penalty since 2005.
     
  17. Metaphors

    Metaphors In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,670
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    Here is my comprehensive plan:

    1) Make all plays on the field reviewable by instant replay (keep the challenge rules the same).

    2) Have an extra official in the booth evaluate the replay and communicate the result to the umpire on the field. 16 officials X 16 weeks isn't an outrageous expense and replays would be over by the time the umpire would get to that stupid hooded video contraption on the sidelines.

    3) Rate officials on the number of calls overturned by replay. Not so much the fumble/possession calls, but the PI, holding/tripping and endless return penalties.
    Too many overturned calls = No playoff assignments = Less $$$$$

    Making officials accountable in the open is the only way to end the bogus calls and conspiracy theories. Officals can use PI, holding and return penalties pretty much any time they want to affect the outcome of a game. If the team that is the best story or gets the best ratings (2007 Pats included) keep winning, even in games where they are outplayed, then the NFL gets the same perception as professional wrestling.
     
  18. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    32,772
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Ratings:
    +3,399 / 30 / -10

    Refs are evaluated similiarly as you sugguest and the playoffs assignments are based on these evaluations.
     
  19. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    You already technically know who the Ref that called the PI is by watching who throws a flag in that general direction of the play.

    As long as you don't have cut and dry rules, like knee on the ground = down. Then you will have Refs with room to fudge, and implement their own personal bias.
     
  20. brady et al fan

    brady et al fan Practice Squad Player

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Messages:
    161
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I like the college rule as described. Beyond that PI should be reviewable. That would be the single biggest improvement on the penalty. I've never bought into the excuse that its a judgement call and therefore ineligible for review. PI is something clearly defined as illegal downfield contact with a receiver (beyond 5 yds) while the ball is in the air. Refs at this level, supposedly the best in the business, should be able to objectively establish whether such a thing actually occurred upon further review.

    Pet peeve note. Anyone else see the bogus PI call against the Texans yesterday? There seems to be an unwritten rule that if Manning is involved and the Colts are losing that a flag must be thrown on a long incompletion.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>