PDA

View Full Version : Offensive Pass Interference


BattleRedToro
08-21-2011, 02:53 PM
When Mario Williams was trying to intercept the pass yesterday, his feet were taken out from under him by an Offensive Lineman. How is that not Offensive Pass Interference?

DocBar
08-21-2011, 02:59 PM
When Mario Williams was trying to intercept the pass yesterday, his feet were taken out from under him by an Offensive Lineman. How is that not Offensive Pass Interference?How would it not be illegal lineman downfield if nothing else? I didn't see the play, so I don't know.

TexansFanatic
08-21-2011, 03:06 PM
When Mario Williams was trying to intercept the pass yesterday, his feet were taken out from under him by an Offensive Lineman. How is that not Offensive Pass Interference?

That's a really intriguing concept/question.

If there's an actual rule on the books addressing that particular situation, I'd like to see how it's worded. Perhaps an offensive lineman, by rule, is immune from that kind of penalty, provided he is within a certain distance from the line of scrimmage.

The Pencil Neck
08-21-2011, 03:09 PM
When Mario Williams was trying to intercept the pass yesterday, his feet were taken out from under him by an Offensive Lineman. How is that not Offensive Pass Interference?

It's almost impossible to get pass interference one way or another on a screen play or for passes around the line in traffic.

Lucky
08-21-2011, 03:40 PM
It's almost impossible to get pass interference one way or another on a screen play or for passes around the line in traffic.
See: Antonio Smith's "tackle" of Darren Sproles prior to a screen pass.

run-david-run
08-21-2011, 03:56 PM
I was wondering the same thing actually when I saw the play, since the ball was in the air when Mario was taken out.
And overall, the refs have definitely been in preseason form: the obvious facemask on Schaub in the first series vs the Jets, about 4 really unnecessary personal foul calls last night, Smith getting away with tackling Sproles on the same play Brees gets away with grounding, etc.

The Pencil Neck
08-21-2011, 04:44 PM
I was wondering the same thing actually when I saw the play, since the ball was in the air when Mario was taken out.

And overall, the refs have definitely been in preseason form: the obvious facemask on Schaub in the first series vs the Jets, about 4 really unnecessary personal foul calls last night, Smith getting away with tackling Sproles on the same play Brees gets away with grounding, etc.

Those calls are actually all fairly correct.

They've changed the "blow to the head" calls against the QBs. The defender can touch the QBs head and facemask with incidental contact now. So that sack on Schaub, that was OK.

The personal foul calls show the new emphasis on calling late hits.

Smith tackling Sproles was a good play on his part. That's not pass interference because it's behind the line of scrimmage and in traffic.

Brees throwing the ball into the ground isn't grounding because he threw it at a legal receiver's feet.

ObsiWan
08-21-2011, 04:52 PM
Those calls are actually all fairly correct.

They've changed the "blow to the head" calls against the QBs. The defender can touch the QBs head and facemask with incidental contact now. So that sack on Schaub, that was OK.

The personal foul calls show the new emphasis on calling late hits.

Smith tackling Sproles was a good play on his part. That's not pass interference because it's behind the line of scrimmage and in traffic.

Brees throwing the ball into the ground isn't grounding because he threw it at a legal receiver's feet.

I have to admit, the Zebras were correct this time.

Ole Miss Texan
08-21-2011, 05:25 PM
I have to admit, the Zebras were correct this time.

I'd have to go back and rewatch the play but wasn't the ball tipped in the air? You can pretty much do anything once it's tipped.

JB
08-21-2011, 05:30 PM
I'd have to go back and rewatch the play but wasn't the ball tipped in the air? You can pretty much do anything once it's tipped.

Yeah, pretty sure it was.

Ole Miss Texan
08-22-2011, 08:24 AM
I'd have to go back and rewatch the play but wasn't the ball tipped in the air? You can pretty much do anything once it's tipped.

So I rewatched the play last night. It was just a really long, high lob pass by Brees and actually never got tipped, despite my earlier beliefs. It did land right around the line of scrimmage so I'm not sure if that would effect a PI call or not. Regardless, it was really a bang bang play with Mario's legs getting hit. As much as a PI call would have been cool I'm not really upset with the no call. If it were the other way around, I'd probably be upset if Duane Brown were called for PI in that situation.

HOU-TEX
08-22-2011, 10:27 AM
See: Antonio Smith's "tackle" of Darren Sproles prior to a screen pass.

:lol: I rewound that play a dozen times just to watch it again. I laughed my butt off every time I saw it. I thought that was hilarious

pbat488
08-22-2011, 10:56 AM
to clear it up there is no offensive or defensive pass interference behind the line of scrimmage..

there is however defensive holding if a defensive player interferes with a receiver behind the line of scrimmage

the refs got this one right assuming the ball and alleged interference was behind the line of scrimmage

Pantherstang84
08-22-2011, 11:05 AM
:lol: I rewound that play a dozen times just to watch it again. I laughed my butt off every time I saw it. I thought that was hilarious

I don't get what Breesus was griping about. The argument could me made that Sproles tried to block Smith and failed. Then Payton wanted an explanation from the refs. Really? Do they not know the rule book?

Good on Smith for recognizing the play and busting it.

HOU-TEX
08-22-2011, 11:32 AM
I don't get what Breesus was griping about. The argument could me made that Sproles tried to block Smith and failed. Then Payton wanted an explanation from the refs. Really? Do they not know the rule book?

Good on Smith for recognizing the play and busting it.

It should've been a defensive holding penalty.

As far as the Mario getting cut play. If the contact was made within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage it's totally legal.

Blake
08-22-2011, 11:39 AM
I don't get what Breesus was griping about. The argument could me made that Sproles tried to block Smith and failed. Then Payton wanted an explanation from the refs. Really? Do they not know the rule book?

Good on Smith for recognizing the play and busting it.

Yeah that was bogus. Thats like having an OL engage in a block, then say he was going out for a pass but couldnt because he was being held. Dont go both ways fellas.

The Pencil Neck
08-22-2011, 02:28 PM
It should've been a defensive holding penalty.

How in the world should it have been a defensive holding penalty? The guy was standing right behind the line within the tackle box. It's totally legal to maul that guy.

Ole Miss Texan
08-22-2011, 02:34 PM
How in the world should it have been a defensive holding penalty? The guy was standing right behind the line within the tackle box. It's totally legal to maul that guy.
That play cracked me up. Was it play action? As fast as those guys move it seemed to me that Smith was engaged with the O-lineman and got by just in time to see the RB. If a RB is in the middle of the lane, he's fair game to be tackled if the defense has reason to believe the ball was handed off to him!!

Plus it was TOTALLY and COMPLETELY obvious that Brees was looking downfield and had nothing so he looked to the RB as a safety valve and intentionally threw it on the ground by him. That's fine and not intentional grounding, it was a smart play by Brees, but I don't think Smith did anything wrong. Brees was just trying to pull his veteranship and try and sway the refs for a bogus call. Not a bad try but they didn't bite.

HOU-TEX
08-22-2011, 02:39 PM
How in the world should it have been a defensive holding penalty? The guy was standing right behind the line within the tackle box. It's totally legal to maul that guy.

I was looking at it similar to that of a Dlineman grabbing an Olineman to keep him off the LB's. They call that defensive holding. Why wouldn't grabbing a RB in the same area be called the same?

I thought it should've been a holding call. Guess I might be wrong?

GP
08-22-2011, 03:03 PM
It should've been a defensive holding penalty.

As far as the Mario getting cut play. If the contact was made within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage it's totally legal.

Yep, contact is legal when it's within the first five yards of the LOS. That's why there is no penalty on that Saints LT on the play where Mario was going after the wounded duck pass by Brees.

And it should have been a defensive holding against Antonio Smith on the separate play when Smith tackled Sproles to the ground. It's the same as if a defensive guy holds a RG or RT or C so that another defensive guy can shoot that gap and get by the blocker.

The Line Of Scrimmage seems to be the key issue here. From the LOS a forward line of 5 yards is "Anybody's turf" and can be used to jam, hold, slobber-knock, etc. BEHIND the LOS, you're looking at defensive or offensive holding calls. A note on this, however: If a ball carrier is in the area of a CB and WR (who are both in that five-yard "forward" range of the LOS) and said WR holds onto the CB to help out the ball carrier...it's offensive holding.

The refs missed the call on Smith, IMO. Unless there is a separate interpretation of the rules that we don't know about.

This is why I don't understand why we don't do that more with our CBs. Are they smaller, compared to most NFL WRs? Yes. But you throw a WR off his timing, getting off the LOS, and you can disrupt the whole play....especially with safety help. I feel like we have the personnel to do that now.

The Pencil Neck
08-22-2011, 03:40 PM
I was looking at it similar to that of a Dlineman grabbing an Olineman to keep him off the LB's. They call that defensive holding. Why wouldn't grabbing a RB in the same area be called the same?

I thought it should've been a holding call. Guess I might be wrong?

Because a running back could have the football and an offensive lineman can't. A defensive lineman just fought through a block and there's a running back there, the guy is fair game.

If this had been a flare pass where the running back was behind the line but it was obvious the RB was a receiver, then... yes... that's defensive holding. But in a middle screen situation where there's a possibility that there was play action? No way that gets called.

Pass Interference Rules from NFL.com: (http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/passinterference)
Note 4: There can be no pass interference at or behind the line of scrimmage, but defensive actions such as tackling a receiver can still result in a 5-yard penalty for defensive holding, if accepted.


Use of Hands Rules from NFL.com (http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/useofhands)
Any offensive player who pretends to possess the ball or to whom a teammate pretends to give the ball may be tackled provided he is crossing his scrimmage line between the ends of a normal tight offensive line.

HOU-TEX
08-22-2011, 04:06 PM
Because a running back could have the football and an offensive lineman can't. A defensive lineman just fought through a block and there's a running back there, the guy is fair game.

If this had been a flare pass where the running back was behind the line but it was obvious the RB was a receiver, then... yes... that's defensive holding. But in a middle screen situation where there's a possibility that there was play action? No way that gets called.

Pass Interference Rules from NFL.com: (http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/passinterference)


Use of Hands Rules from NFL.com (http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/useofhands)

Note 4: There can be no pass interference at or behind the line of scrimmage, but defensive actions such as tackling a receiver can still result in a 5-yard penalty for defensive holding, if accepted.

It says no pass interference, but can be called for holding, right? Or am I reading that wrong? That quote proves it was holding

GP
08-22-2011, 04:07 PM
It says no pass interference, but can be called for holding, right? Or am I reading that wrong? That quote proves it was holding

Was kinda' interpreting it the same way you did.

Glad I'm not crazy (don't ask my wife's opinion on this, though!)

The Pencil Neck
08-22-2011, 04:10 PM
It says no pass interference, but can be called for holding, right? Or am I reading that wrong? That quote proves it was holding

The second quote I included (that you left out) was about what constitutes Defensive Holding. And according to that quote, Smith was totally within his rights to tackle the guy.

No penalty.

Good call.

HOU-TEX
08-22-2011, 04:17 PM
The second quote I included (that you left out) was about what constitutes Defensive Holding. And according to that quote, Smith was totally within his rights to tackle the guy.

No penalty.

Good call.

I left it out because I didn't see him "pretending" to carry the ball.

In the end, I'm happy it was a no call. But I still think it could've been called

GP
08-22-2011, 04:21 PM
I left it out because I didn't see him "pretending" to carry the ball.

In the end, I'm happy it was a no call. But I still think it could've been called

Exactly.

He was running out to the flat to receive the pass, never even acted like he had the ball, and Smith tackles him to the ground.

My IMMEDIATE reaction was "Oh shit, that's a flag. Definitely defensive holding."

Drew Brees knew it, too. PN, I'm gonna' trust that Drew Brees knows the rules better than all of us here. LOL.

HOU-TEX
08-22-2011, 04:26 PM
Actually, PN makes a good point. Which, imo, makes it a judgement call by the official. I just think it was obvious the RB was setting up for a screen. Which would draw a flag

The Pencil Neck
08-22-2011, 04:26 PM
Exactly.

He was running out to the flat to receive the pass, never even acted like he had the ball, and Smith tackles him to the ground.

My IMMEDIATE reaction was "Oh shit, that's a flag. Definitely defensive holding."

Drew Brees knew it, too. PN, I'm gonna' trust that Drew Brees knows the rules better than all of us here. LOL.

If you saw him running flat out to receive a pass, then you're talking about a different play.

The Pencil Neck
08-22-2011, 04:29 PM
I left it out because I didn't see him "pretending" to carry the ball.

In the end, I'm happy it was a no call. But I still think it could've been called

The point is though that he was right there at the line of scrimmage. There's no way that a defensive lineman can know when he fights through a block and sees a running back whether there was a play fake or not. He just knows that there's a running back there hunkering down in front of him. So he grabs him.

There's no official that's going to call that defensive holding. Not in the middle of the line of scrimmage like that.

That's why I differentiated between a middle screen and a flare pass.

GP
08-22-2011, 04:31 PM
If you saw him running flat out to receive a pass, then you're talking about a different play.

I see it in my head as we speak.

He was about over C or LG when he was tackled, all his blockers were rolling to the left edge to set up for the screen play. Sproles was not pretending to carry the ball. He was in the process of participating in the play as a receiver, and Smith tackled him.

He was NOT at the LOS, PN. He was a good 1-2 yards behind it. Smith had knifed through and was in the backfield to tackle Sproles. Brees was backpedaling because he saw Smith grabbing Sproles. That's when Brees dumped it at Sproles' feet, to at least make it an incompletion and not lose yardage.

He was, IMO, right to argue for the flag there.

HOU-TEX
08-22-2011, 04:32 PM
The point is though that he was right there at the line of scrimmage. There's no way that a defensive lineman can know when he fights through a block and sees a running back whether there was a play fake or not. He just knows that there's a running back there hunkering down in front of him. So he grabs him.

There's no official that's going to call that defensive holding. Not in the middle of the line of scrimmage like that.

That's why I differentiated between a middle screen and a flare pass.

Okay, whether we agree or not....can we at least agree it was funny as heck looking? I still giggle just thinking/talking about it. Heck, I might watch it again tonight if the MNF sucks

GP
08-22-2011, 04:37 PM
The point is though that he was right there at the line of scrimmage. There's no way that a defensive lineman can know when he fights through a block and sees a running back whether there was a play fake or not. He just knows that there's a running back there hunkering down in front of him. So he grabs him.

Your position is based on the fact that the ref didn't flag Smith on the play.

That doesn't make the ref's interpretation the correct the call, just by virtue of "that's what the ref ruled."

Brees was hopping mad, and with just cause. Schaub would have been just as pissed off. The call should have been defensive holding. One of the smartest QBs in the NFL knew it was bogus.

The Pencil Neck
08-22-2011, 04:57 PM
Sigh.

Let me say this one more time, really, really slowly.

1) It can't be pass interference if it's behind the line. Period. But it can be defensive holding.

2) If a defensive lineman sees a running back within the tackle box and at or a little behind the line of scrimmage, they can tackle them and it won't get called as defensive holding except in some really, really weird situations. Although it might technically be defensive holding, the referees won't call it. Drew Brees and Sean Payton can argue that all day long but I've seen it happen several times and it doesn't get called.

And it all comes back to the second rule I quoted. The referee can't know whether the defensive lineman knows whether or not that running back has the ball. And according to the rules, if the defensive lineman thinks the running back has the ball, they can tackle them. So referees allow a lot of leeway.

That's the danger with middle screens and passes where you play action to someone and then throw to them when they release through the line. The line doesn't have to allow those guys through.

Ole Miss Texan
08-22-2011, 05:03 PM
So Brees is smarter than all of us and that should have been a flag... yet the REFEREE is not as smart as Brees and blew the call? Referees mess up sometimes. Franchise QBs try and pull their weight and get calls.

And Brees did not just see Smith tackle Sproles and throw it at the ground. Brees may have seen that but he was still looking for a pass downfield. He kept looking for a while and when he knew he couldn't safely get it downfield he tried to throw it away. The smart move was throw it straight down in the ground because nobody could intercept it and he knew he had a guy in the area so he wouldn't get flagged for intentional grounding.

If Brees was SO sure that the play warranted a flag, why would he throw it down immediately (which he didn't)? He would have pushed it downfield because they either make a big player or they just take the penalty no matter what happened.

Sproles may not have been overtly acting like he had the ball, but he run right by Brees off the snap just as he would have if it were a running play. Smith was engaged with the O-lineman, got off of him quickly and jumped on Sproles to tackle him... behind the line of scrimmage. That's not a flag even if Sproles didn't have the ball.

Ole Miss Texan
08-22-2011, 06:31 PM
Alright I got back home and pulled up the DVR. Here's the synopsis rewatching it.

Pierre Thomas was lined up next to Brees at the snap and went straight forward behind where the RG was. No playaction and was further from Brees than I originally thought.

Smith was lined up as the left DT in the 43 over the RG. Exploded off the snap and had a GREAT rip move going to his led of the G. He was off balance as he ran past the G and saw the RB right in front of his path. First contact with the RB was 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage and slightly under 2 seconds from the snap. He wrapped his arms around the RB and dragged him down.

Brees was looking downfield from the start. Secondary covered receivers well. From the time Smith made contact with the RB, Brees took 4-5 steps back in the pocket with his eyes downfield. Appeared to be looking middle of field for a TE and then right, Jackson had WR well covered. After this steps Bress turned and threw it straight down on the ground bearish Thomas (the RB). What's great is Brees started pointing at the RB down where he was throwing before the ball even hit the ground.

Brees likely saw Thomas blown up as the snap happened and had zero intention of actually throwing to him.

I can understand some confusion but Smith tackled the RB less than 2 seconds from the snap 5 yards behind the LOS. No ref in their right mind should throw a flag in that situation.

Interestingly enough, this was the play immediately after Mario was clipped on the screen pass he almost intercepted!

BattleRedToro
08-22-2011, 08:30 PM
As far as the Mario getting cut play. If the contact was made within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage it's totally legal.

Is contact legal within 5 yards while the ball is in the air?

I don't think it is legal for a defensive player to create contact with a legal receiver even within 5 yards if the ball is in the air.

DocBar
08-22-2011, 08:41 PM
Is contact legal within 5 yards while the ball is in the air?

I don't think it is legal for a defensive player to create contact with a legal receiver even within 5 yards if the ball is in the air.'m pretty sure it is.

GP
08-22-2011, 08:46 PM
Sigh.

Let me say this one more time, really, really slowly.

1) It can't be pass interference if it's behind the line. Period. But it can be defensive holding.

2) If a defensive lineman sees a running back within the tackle box and at or a little behind the line of scrimmage, they can tackle them and it won't get called as defensive holding except in some really, really weird situations. Although it might technically be defensive holding, the referees won't call it. Drew Brees and Sean Payton can argue that all day long but I've seen it happen several times and it doesn't get called.

And it all comes back to the second rule I quoted. The referee can't know whether the defensive lineman knows whether or not that running back has the ball. And according to the rules, if the defensive lineman thinks the running back has the ball, they can tackle them. So referees allow a lot of leeway.

That's the danger with middle screens and passes where you play action to someone and then throw to them when they release through the line. The line doesn't have to allow those guys through.

So, how do we know if the RB is a blocker or not?

If he's a blocker on that play, protecting the QB on a boot or an intentional QB scramble (a rushing play by the QB), then he can't be held just like a RG can't be held.

Only the guys on the LOS (the o-linemen) are eligible to be considered "illegally held" by a defensive player? One step back from the LOS, or two steps, and it's no longer considered to be "defensive holding?"

Texan_Bill
08-22-2011, 08:48 PM
It's almost impossible to get pass interference one way or another on a screen play or for passes around the line in traffic.
Yeah... BTW, There's no way that O-lineman interefered MW.. It just so happened, ummmmm (WOW, what an amazing concept), it was a play in the natural course of a game. Non-Issue, although it would've been nice if MW could've come up with the pick!!!!

See: Antonio Smith's "tackle" of Darren Sproles prior to a screen pass.

Actually (and I am homer, obviously), Drew Brees had a valid argument on that play. Clearly Sproles was tackled long before Brees finished his drop... if nothing else, #DefensiveHolding

The Pencil Neck
08-22-2011, 08:53 PM
So, how do we know if the RB is a blocker or not?

If he's a blocker on that play, protecting the QB on a boot or an intentional QB scramble (a rushing play by the QB), then he can't be held just like a RG can't be held.

See?

No need to act like you're speaking to children or anything. It's not AS cut and dry as you're trying to make it.

There was a legitimate argument, by Brees, for that to be defensive holding.

Because, as you stated, there's no way for the ref to know the intentions of the RB on that play...see? For all we know, he was just as much of a blocker on that play as any of the o-linemen out there around him.

And it doesn't matter because being a ball carrier trumps everything. And the purpose of the defense is to tackle the ball carrier. The refs will not penalize someone for tackling someone who may have the ball.

The defense can tackle the RB in that area around the line of scrimmage whether he's blocking or running or faking or going out on a pattern. The refs will not call defensive holding unless there are some weird extenuating circumstances.

Outside the tackles, yes. Inside the tackles around the line of scrimmage, no.

BattleRedToro
08-22-2011, 11:00 PM
'm pretty sure it is.

From NFL.com:

It is pass interference by either team when any player movement beyond the line of scrimmage significantly hinders the progress of an eligible player of such player’s opportunity to catch the ball. Offensive pass interference rules apply from the time the ball is snapped until the ball is touched. Defensive pass interference rules apply from the time the ball is thrown until the ball is touched.

run-david-run
08-23-2011, 11:58 AM
It should've been a defensive holding penalty.

As far as the Mario getting cut play. If the contact was made within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage it's totally legal.

Even once the ball is in the air?