Let's Talk Defensive Pass Interference

[RTR91]

I've heard numerous commentators say a DPI would not have been called if the DB turned his head around. I know the NFL doesn't allow face guarding, but I didn't remember the NCAA rule saying that. I looked up the rule in the 2015 NCAA Football Rulebook.

Forget about a DB being able to get a pick or knocking the ball down if he turns his head around. I'm solely talking about the DPI rule. From what I can tell, a college DB doesn't have to turn his head around.

Illegal Contact and Pass Interference

ARTICLE 8. a. During a down in which a legal forward pass crosses the neutralzone, illegal contact by Team A and Team B players is prohibited from the timethe ball is snapped until it is touched by any player or an official (A.R. 7-3-8-II).
b. Offensive pass interference by a Team A player beyond the neutral zoneduring a legal forward pass play in which a forward pass crosses theneutral zone is contact that interferes with a Team B eligible player. It isthe responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents. It is notoffensive pass interference (A.R. 7-3-8-IV, V, X, XV and XVI):

1. When, after the snap, a Team A ineligible player immediately charges and contacts an opponent at a point not more than one yard beyond the neutral zone and maintains the contact for no more than three yards beyond the neutral zone.
2. When two or more eligible players are making a simultaneous and bonafide attempt to reach, catch or bat the pass. Eligible players of either team have equal rights to the ball (A.R. 7-3-8-IX).
3. When the pass is in flight and two or more eligible players are in the areawhere they might receive or intercept the pass and an offensive player inthat area impedes an opponent, and the pass is not catchable.

PENALTY—15 yards from the previous spot [S33].
c. Defensive pass interference is contact beyond the neutral zone by a Team Bplayer whose intent to impede an eligible opponent is obvious and it couldprevent the opponent the opportunity of receiving a catchable forward pass. When in question, a legal forward pass is catchable. Defensive passinterference occurs only after a legal forward pass is thrown (A. R. 7-3-8-VII, VIII, XI and XII). It is not defensive pass interference (A.R. 7-3-8-IIIand 7-3-9-III):

1. When, after the snap, opposing players immediately charge and establishcontact with opponents at a point that is within one yard beyond the neutral zone.
2. When two or more eligible players are making a simultaneous and bonafide attempt to reach, catch or bat the pass. Eligible players of either team have equal rights to the ball (A.R. 7-3-8-IX).
3. When a Team B player legally contacts an opponent before the pass isthrown (A.R. 7-3-8-III and X).
4. When a Team A potential kicker, from scrimmage kick formation,simulates a scrimmage kick by throwing the ball high and deep, and contact by a Team B player occurs.

PENALTY—Team A’s ball at the spot of the foul, first down, if the fouloccurs fewer than 15 yards beyond the previous spot. If the fouloccurs 15 or more yards beyond the previous spot, Team A’sball, first down, 15 yards from the previous spot [S33].
When the ball is snapped on or inside the Team B 17-yard line and outside the Team B two-yard line, and the spot of the foulis on or inside the two-yard line, the penalty from the previousspot shall place the ball at the two-yard line, first down (A.R.7-3-8-XIV).
No penalty enforced from outside the two-yard line may placethe ball inside the two-yard line (Exception: On the Try whenthe snap is at the three-yard line, Rule 10-2-5-b).
If the previous spot was on or inside the two-yard line, firstdown halfway between the previous spot and the goal line (Rule10-2-6 Exception).

Contact Interference
ARTICLE 9. a. Either Team A or Team B legally may interfere with opponentsbehind the neutral zone.
b. Players of either team legally may interfere beyond the neutral zone after thepass has been touched (A.R. 7-3-9-I).
c. Defensive players legally may contact opponents who have crossed the neutral zone if the opponents are not in a position to receive a catchable forward pass.

1. Those infractions that occur during a down in which a forward passcrosses the neutral zone are pass interference infractions only if thereceiver had the opportunity to receive a catchable forward pass.
2. Those infractions that occur during a down in which a forward pass does not cross the neutral zone are Rule 9-3-4 infractions and the penalty is enforced from the previous spot.

d. Pass interference rules apply only during a down in which a legal forward pass crosses the neutral zone (Rules 2-19-3 and 7-3-8-a, b and c).
e. Contact by Team B with an eligible receiver involving a personal foul thatinterferes with the reception of a catchable pass may be ruled either aspass interference or as a personal foul with the 15-yard penalty enforcedfrom the previous spot. Rule 7-3-8 is specific about contact during a pass. However, if the interference involves an act that ordinarily would result indisqualification, the fouling player must leave the game.
f. Physical contact is required to establish interference.
g. Each player has territorial rights, and incidental contact is ruled under “attempt to reach...the pass’’ in Rule 7-3-8. If opponents who are beyondthe line collide while moving toward the pass, a foul by one or both playersis indicated only if intent to impede the opponent is obvious. It is passinterference only if a catchable forward pass is involved.
h. Pass interference rules do not apply after the pass has been touched anywhere inbounds by an inbounds player or has touched an official. If an opponent is fouled, the penalty is for the foul and not pass interference (A.R. 7-3-9-I).
i. After the pass has been touched, any player may execute a legal blockduring the remaining flight of the pass.
j. Tackling or grasping a receiver or any other intentional contact before hetouches the pass is evidence that the tackler is disregarding the ball and is therefore illegal.
k. Tackling or running into a receiver when a forward pass obviously isunderthrown or overthrown is disregarding the ball and is illegal. This is notpass interference but a violation of Rule 9-1-12-a, which carries a penalty of 15 yards from the previous spot plus a first down. Flagrant offenders shallbe disqualified.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I've been wondering the same thing - they're incredibly selective in application on it. All most of us want - I think - is consistency both ways.

 

[Snuffy Smith]

I think it is all in the interpretation. The refs give some leeway with contact when the defensive player is "playing the ball". When the head is not turned and the defender runs through the receiver who has turned to come back to the ball it is a pretty easy call.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[whatsamatta U]

We probably need to send that to the refs before the next game.
I thought the refs called a pretty good game last night, I think they missed the hold on Ridley in the first half, but overall did a good job.

 

[OakMtn4Bama]

We probably need to send that to the refs before the next game.
I thought the refs called a pretty good game last night, I think they missed the hold on Ridley in the first half, but overall did a good job.

You must not be reading ITAT. ��

 

[crimsonaudio]

There's no such thing s face guarding in the NCAA, but if a DB turns his head to look for the ball, minor contact is generally considered to be incidental - both are playing for the ball. When a DB doesn't turn his head but makes contact with the WR, it's going to be called more often than not. Ignoring the fact that locating the ball can result in more passes knocked away or intercepted, I think we'd get far fewer PI calls against us if our DBs played the ball. That's how it's called.

 

[Crimson1967]

I think pass interference is something that could be called every time two players are going for the ball if the official was super picky about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bama-94-00]

Seems the officials call PI as a knee jerk reaction. It is a fair call if the defender makes clear contact with the receiver.

 

[bamacpa]

I agree. Every PI that got called against us last night was a fair call in my view. It feels like we would have had a shot at a bunch of picks this year if the CBs had turned to see the underthrown passes. Thiscould hurt us against Clemson.

There's no such thing s face guarding in the NCAA, but if a DB turns his head to look for the ball, minor contact is generally considered to be incidental - both are playing for the ball. When a DB doesn't turn his head but makes contact with the WR, it's going to be called more often than not. Ignoring the fact that locating the ball can result in more passes knocked away or intercepted, I think we'd get far fewer PI calls against us if our DBs played the ball. That's how it's called.

 

[fundytide]

I thought the refs called a pretty good game last night, I think they missed the hold on Ridley in the first half, but overall did a good job.

I thought so too. As Herbie pointed out, they blew the 'should have been' intentional grounding call on Coker in the 3rd quarter but I wonder if that was a make-up call for the ticky-tack chop block call a few plays before that. Jackson barely touched the MSU defender and seemed to just be trying to make sure he didn't get his knees taken out when Shank went low on the block. It sure didn't look like a planned chop.

 

[IndyBison]

The DPI philosophy must are taught us to put the action into one of six categories. If you can't put it into one of these categories, it's not a foul:

Arm bar (prevent receiver's arms from going up to make a catch)
Arm grab
Hook and turn
Playing through the back
Cut off the route
Early contact not paying the ball

The last one is the one you are talking about here. If the defender doesn't turn to play the ball, he gets much less leeway. Defenders are often trying to time it so they make the contact as the ball arrives. If he can do that he's OK. The defender is entitled to his space if he's playing the ball so that's why the contact is considered incidental unless it's one of the other categories. Once you understand these categories and watch a lot of video, you see the guys in D1 are much more consistent.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk

 

[Tide1986]

I've heard numerous commentators say a DPI would not have been called if the DB turned his head around. I know the NFL doesn't allow face guarding, but I didn't remember the NCAA rule saying that. I looked up the rule in the 2015 NCAA Football Rulebook.

Forget about a DB being able to get a pick or knocking the ball down if he turns his head around. I'm solely talking about the DPI rule. From what I can tell, a college DB doesn't have to turn his head around.

The commentators are correct to the extent that turning the head is indicative of attempting to catch the pass and there is contact with the offensive receiver. If there is no contact with the offensive receiver and the defender does not turn his head toward the ball, then of course there is no defensive pass interference even if the defender blocks the view of the offensive receiver with his hands and arms.

 

[JBama_in_PCOLA]

Saw the two PI calls last night that were mentioned last night. They were both were correct calls, IMHO.


Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

 

[IndyBison]

I thought so too. As Herbie pointed out, they blew the 'should have been' intentional grounding call on Coker in the 3rd quarter but I wonder if that was a make-up call for the ticky-tack chop block call a few plays before that. Jackson barely touched the MSU defender and seemed to just be trying to make sure he didn't get his knees taken out when Shank went low on the block. It sure didn't look like a planned chop.

Chop blocks are almost never planned. It's usually a miscommunication between linemen on who has which defender. 90% of the time when I'm enforcing a chop block I hear the players arguing over which one was wrong.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk

 

[Snuffy Smith]

Chop blocks are almost never planned. It's usually a miscommunication between linemen on who has which defender. 90% of the time when I'm enforcing a chop block I hear the players arguing over which one was wrong.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk

Looking at the replay again this morning that chop block looked more like incidental contact- he looked like he was pushing off on the guy as he was headed down the line to block someone else.

Doesn't change the fact that he made contact high while he was engaged low.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CajunCrimson]

I thought so too. As Herbie pointed out, they blew the 'should have been' intentional grounding call on Coker in the 3rd quarter but I wonder if that was a make-up call for the ticky-tack chop block call a few plays before that. Jackson barely touched the MSU defender and seemed to just be trying to make sure he didn't get his knees taken out when Shank went low on the block. It sure didn't look like a planned chop.

Did they miss it? Because if I recall, the LOS extends past the sidelines....it went OOB at the 34... But it was still going forward....and went past the 35. The line judge was looking right at it.

 

[Tide1986]

I thought so too. As Herbie pointed out, they blew the 'should have been' intentional grounding call on Coker in the 3rd quarter but I wonder if that was a make-up call for the ticky-tack chop block call a few plays before that. Jackson barely touched the MSU defender and seemed to just be trying to make sure he didn't get his knees taken out when Shank went low on the block. It sure didn't look like a planned chop.

I don't believe there was a missed intentional grounding call on Coker. Per the NCAA rule book:

"[Exception: If the passer is or has been outside the tackle box he may throw the ball so that it crosses or lands beyond the neutral zone or neutral zone extended (Rule 2-19-3).]"

In this case, the neutral zone extends beyond the sidelines, and the ball landed beyond the neutral zone so no penalty for intentional grounding.

 

[Skeeterpop]

PI should be called when the defender grabs or hits the arms of the Reciever prior to the ball arriving in a way that prevents or hinders the WR from making the catch.

There should be some responsibility for the WR to beat the DB with his route and gain a position advantage to have more right to the ball than the DB. The pass should also be "catchable". This includes throwing to the back of the DB. Rarely is that catchable.

Until the college rules change it should be called as written and not as felt!

 

[fundytide]

I don't believe there was a missed intentional grounding call on Coker. Per the NCAA rule book:

"[Exception: If the passer is or has been outside the tackle box he may throw the ball so that it crosses or lands beyond the neutral zone or neutral zone extended (Rule 2-19-3).]"

In this case, the neutral zone extends beyond the sidelines, and the ball landed beyond the neutral zone so no penalty for intentional grounding.

Thanks! Well, in that case, the officials did an even better job last night than I thought at the time. The chop block call still doesn't sit well with me but I understand the importance of putting first the protection of vulnerable players.

 

[RTR91]

The chop block call had to be made by an official that saw the tail end of Dom moving his hand. If the official saw the entire incident, he would have seen Dom was never engaged with the DL.