Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Could Pass Interference Change to a 15-Yard Penalty?

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
NFL VP: Changing PI to 15-yard penalty a possibility

By Dan Hanzus
Around the NFL Writer

Updated: Feb. 24, 2015 at 02:08 p.m.

Rams coach and longtime NFL Competition Committee member Jeff Fisher made it clear last week that instant replay will be a major topic of discussion when the committee convenes next week in Naples, Fla.

NFL Media's Judy Battista spoke with Troy Vincent, the NFL's executive vice president for football operations, who explained that the league is receptive to change but is also hesitant to open "Pandora's Box."

"We do understand reviewing what was called on the field," Vincent said. "For a coach to potentially challenge something that was not called, we run the risk of creating fouls. 'Yeah, that was a hold. Yeah, that was an illegal hands to the face.' "

"We saw 12 different proposals on replay, which means it's something we have to look at," Vincent added. "You want to get it right but you could be creating fouls. And long term, if we start here, you just continue adding year in and year out and is that what you want? You don't want to go down the road of opening Pandora's Box and this year it's expanding this and next year it's expanding that."

Defensive pass interference enforcement is a topic to watch in the wake of the Lions' controversial playoff loss to the Cowboys. Vincent suggested an alternate solution to replay that would make PI a 15-yard penalty rather than a spot foul. There's concern that making pass interference reviewable would undermine game officials, who have to make difficult calls in real time.

"We must keep in mind that officials and players are moving at game speed, and those of us who are making decisions on rules have the luxury of slow motion video," Vincent said. "Sometimes game speed and rule changes aren't always compatible."

Giants president John Mara told Battista the proposal with the best chance to pass is allowing review of hits on defenseless receivers. Even that is far from a guarantee, however.
 
Hell no. I don't want to see WRs get mugged every time a ball is thrown more than 15 yards downfield.

This would make it disproportionate.
 
Hell no. I don't want to see WRs get mugged every time a ball is thrown more than 15 yards downfield.

This would make it disproportionate.

As much as I often hate the call (due to perceived judgments), this is my concern especially late in close games.
 
Hell no. I don't want to see WRs get mugged every time a ball is thrown more than 15 yards downfield.

This would make it disproportionate.

So, you throw it up for grabs late in the game and get 40 yards because the ref saw DPI, and that's not disproportionate? You get 15 yards for kicking someone in the head. I don't think PI deserves more. The game is already geared in favor of the passing game. I'd like to see one go the other way. And I think this is the right one.
 
So, you throw it up for grabs late in the game and get 40 yards because the ref saw DPI, and that's not disproportionate?

Refs basically hold their hankies except for flagrant fouls on hail mary attempts. And in that event, no it's not disproportionate at all.

And let's not create a false argument on the few hail mary jump balls that occur per year. We're talking open season on any WR more than 15 yds down field. Trip him, hack him, tackle him - that's ridiculous.
 
Refs basically hold their hankies except for flagrant fouls on hail mary attempts. And in that event, no it's not disproportionate at all.

And let's not create a false argument on the few hail mary jump balls that occur per year. We're talking open season on any WR more than 15 yds down field. Trip him, hack him, tackle him - that's ridiculous.

Sure, open season 15 yards at a time. I think that's still a tough penalty and much more appropriate. Let's not pretend like 15 yards is nothing, and the mugging will go unpunished.

Just for the record, I don't think it'll happen. I've heard owners mention multiple times in the past how they want to encourage the deep ball, and that's what this penalty is all about.
 
At first I thought this would be a good idea, but on reflection it would open up the WR's to being mugged on deep balls.

Instead, have them replay the down and if it happens a second time in the same quarter, charge the guilty team a timeout.


:kitten:
 
At first I thought this would be a good idea, but on reflection it would open up the WR's to being mugged on deep balls.

Instead, have them replay the down and if it happens a second time in the same quarter, charge the guilty team a timeout.


:kitten:

That's the duality of it. You hate it when called on your defense, but love it when your offense gets the ball down the field with a new set of downs.
 
That's the duality of it. You hate it when called on your defense, but love it when your offense gets the ball down the field with a new set of downs.

That's exactly how I feel, and that's why I think 15 yards is appropriate, especially when you consider that you could potentially literally murder someone on the field and still only get 15 yards. Why such special treatment for deep balls?
 
That's the duality of it. You hate it when called on your defense, but love it when your offense gets the ball down the field with a new set of downs.

Yeah, like any other penalty, just wish they would become a bit more consistent from crew to crew.
 
That's exactly how I feel, and that's why I think 15 yards is appropriate, especially when you consider that you could potentially literally murder someone on the field and still only get 15 yards. Why such special treatment for deep balls?

It's not special treatment for deep balls. It's a spot foul. Interfere with a 1 yd pass, it's a 1 yd penalty. Interfere with a 30 yd pass, it's a 30 yd penalty. The distance is as proportional as you can get. If anything you could say the automatic 1st down is most disproportionate on passes short of the 1st down marker.
 
That's exactly how I feel, and that's why I think 15 yards is appropriate, especially when you consider that you could potentially literally murder someone on the field and still only get 15 yards. Why such special treatment for deep balls?

I don't see any special treatment for deep balls. It's a spot foul no matter where it happens. Defenders just panic more on deep balls
 
This is a bad idea. As stated in this thread, WRs would get leveled on long routes.
 
Really didn't expect the support for this rule to be so high. I personally hate it because I don't want one call to be a game changer and clearly disagree with it.

I also don't buy the argument that making it a 15 yarder means open season for mugging everyone beyond 15 yards. You still get penalized 15 yards. You get one or two of these in a row and those who believe in momentum will start talking about a momentum shift. 15 yards is not nothing.
 
Refs basically hold their hankies except for flagrant fouls on hail mary attempts. And in that event, no it's not disproportionate at all.

And let's not create a false argument on the few hail mary jump balls that occur per year. We're talking open season on any WR more than 15 yds down field. Trip him, hack him, tackle him - that's ridiculous.

Yep more of God'ell/Fisher messing up the sport.
 
Really didn't expect the support for this rule to be so high. I personally hate it because I don't want one call to be a game changer and clearly disagree with it.

I also don't buy the argument that making it a 15 yarder means open season for mugging everyone beyond 15 yards. You still get penalized 15 yards. You get one or two of these in a row and those who believe in momentum will start talking about a momentum shift. 15 yards is not nothing.

If there's a 50 yd bomb into the endzone that a CB is beaten on and he tackles the WR does that have the ability to change the outcome of a game.
 
Let the rule go in play. WR get away with so many bad calls, while DBs get flagged for breathing on them wrong. This levels the playing field.
 
Either side of the coin people will get butt hurt, if your team commits penalty, your happy it's 15. If it happens to your team at the 5 under 2:00, you'll cry for the spot not the 15
 
How 'bout don't try to fix what ain't broke?

Why does the offense get punished when they could have had a 40 yard play, a 55 yard TD pass, etc, had the receiver not been interfered with?

PI, as is, is not a problem. How it's called, the consistency of calling it, that's more of a concern.
 
I hate PI but I don't think you can change the rule to that degree at this point. If anything, the only change that they need to look at is to start holding WRs to the same rules they hold DBs to. It's ridiculous how much contact WRs are allowed to get away with, and there are times where the WR absolutely mugs the DB and they throw the flag on the defense.

Another thing I would like to see them look at is getting rid of automatic first downs on penalties. A five yard holding penalty on 3rd and 8 should create 3rd and 3, not 1st and 10.
 
Another thing I would like to see them look at is getting rid of automatic first downs on penalties. A five yard holding penalty on 3rd and 8 should create 3rd and 3, not 1st and 10.

I guess the point of that rule is to keep defenders from holding 2-3 consecutive plays on a 3rd and 16 and still not giving up a 1st down.

I guess they want the thought of holding to cause cornerbacks nightmares.
 
This.

In high school, we just PI'd the hell out of every receiver that was going to get a TD.

I'd rather see the rule tweaked in some fashion than changed to this. I know they're reluctant to use instant replay on PI calls but I'd be more accepting of a mandatory replay review of any PI call over "x" number of yards than I would changing it to a 15 yard penalty across the board. Not instant replay on every single one, just anything over say 20 yards (just throwing that out there). Get the big ones right because those are the ones people complain about possibly changing the outcome of games.
 
Isn't it a 15-yd penalty in college? College football may suck, but I don't remember hearing people complain about the PI rules in college any worse than they do for those of the NFL. I don't think I have a hard opinion on it either way, but it seems to me when an offense is in a 2-minute game-on-the-line situation, they do their best to exploit the possibility of a PI call to get down the field as it is. In the end, it doesn't really matter. Whatever rule is in place, the teams will game it. If it's a spot foul, they'll do what they do now - get PI calls to move down the field. If it changes to 15-yds, they'll start mugging WRs. Given the direction the game has gone in the last 35 years, maybe some WRs need to be mugged.
 
I hope the rule doesn't change. We still get the PI on long passes now, and I can imagine how many 15-yarders a defender would take without a second thought.
 
If there's a 50 yd bomb into the endzone that a CB is beaten on and he tackles the WR does that have the ability to change the outcome of a game.

If the CB is beaten, he shouldn't be able to tackle the WR on a good throw. I like the proposed change. Any rule change that lessens the impact of the referees and moves the game away from the pass happy flag football league it has turned into is a good change, IMO.
 
When the crime costs 50 yards, the penalty should also cost 50 yards. But it should be a crime and not a phantom call.

All kind of penalties prevent bigger plays from happening yet nobody argues for stiffer penalties...

When a LT tackles a pass rusher to prevent his QB from getting blind-sided, it is a 10 yd penalty and the down is repeated. How often would it be a sack and fumble if not for the hold?
 
What they really need to look at is stop calling PI on underthrown balls because the WR can't get through his defender to get back to it.

If the defender is physically stopping the WR by grabbing or pushing it should be a penalty. But the defender should not be penalized simply for being in the way. That's his job.
 
All kind of penalties prevent bigger plays from happening yet nobody argues for stiffer penalties...

When a LT tackles a pass rusher to prevent his QB from getting blind-sided, it is a 10 yd penalty and the down is repeated. How often would it be a sack and fumble if not for the hold?

The FUMBLE is not presumed. The penalty is consistent with taking the sack except perhaps it should be a loss of down as well.
 
If the CB is beaten, he shouldn't be able to tackle the WR on a good throw. I like the proposed change. Any rule change that lessens the impact of the referees and moves the game away from the pass happy flag football league it has turned into is a good change, IMO.

So lessen the penalty and it will make the CB less likely to tackle the WR? Yeah, that makes sense.

And why would refs be less likely to throw flags if the penalty was less?

What they really need to look at is stop calling PI on underthrown balls because the WR can't get through his defender to get back to it.

If the defender is physically stopping the WR by grabbing or pushing it should be a penalty. But the defender should not be penalized simply for being in the way. That's his job.

Not a bad idea and doesn't even need a rule change. Just a "reemphasis" on the WR not creating the contact.
 
A bad PI call on a deep throw can have devestating consequences. A paltry 15 yd penalty for an intentional mugging to prevent a TD is clearly not enough. Seems we need a 3rd way... How about making DPI challengable?
 
A bad PI call on a deep throw can have devestating consequences. A paltry 15 yd penalty for an intentional mugging to prevent a TD is clearly not enough. Seems we need a 3rd way... How about making DPI challengable?

You shouldn't write the rule for bad calls. You should discipline the refs.
 
So lessen the penalty and it will make the CB less likely to tackle the WR? Yeah, that makes sense.

And why would refs be less likely to throw flags if the penalty was less?



Not a bad idea and doesn't even need a rule change. Just a "reemphasis" on the WR not creating the contact.

Lazy officials are to blame. They look only for contact and forget the part about who initiated the contact.
 
Back
Top