Thoughts on the Shakir PI call

[RichRiderBills]

1 minute ago, May Day 10 said:

It was interference, but this kind of PI needs to be different or something and not a spot-foul.  The underthrown deep ball where the receiver needs to stop and the defender runs into him.  It is kind of a cheap way to pick up 30 yards.

 

I've heard talk in other games of changing the rule for underthrown balls. It's a tough one though. I personally think spot foul for pi is too much and I prefer kind of the college model. 

[boyst]

Just now, Simon said:

 

Neither of those things are penalties in the NFL.

Impeding the path with contact is; there was a call later against them that was an example (maybe Coleman).

 

There was another time where White (I think it was) had the same type of play that Shakir had against him but no contact.

[Billzgobowlin]

1 minute ago, Simon said:

 

Neither of those things are penalties in the NFL.

It is most defeinitely a criterion commonly used for DPI 

[GolfandBills]

The DB made contact with Shakir and didn’t have his head turned around.  That’s a textbook PI that gets called almost every time.   

[Pecker]

The defender wasn’t even looking back at all, then impedes Shakir who is trying to work towards it.  Obvious PI in every circumstance.  
 

it also had to be a catch because the ball didn’t hit the ground. Now, shakri had it in his arms and fell straight to the ground.  The guy who wasn’t even looking at the ball couldn’t possibly have caught it.  
 

two obvious and easy calls. 

[JP51]

I will say only this... I thought the calls that were made were all technically correct...  I am not saying they were called consistently that ticky tack all game....  I am also not complaining about the refs this week...  McDermott for not challenging that call/ New York for not reviewing the dropped 3rd and long that led to the 1st TD I take a bit of issue with... other than that I would say we for once were not screwed by the officials...  

[DCOrange]

7 minutes ago, Billzgobowlin said:

This doesn't matter if the ball was tipped

This applies to pass interference because that illegal contact occurs after the ball has been tipped. The holding was far in advance of the tipped pass so it should have been called.

[buffalo2218]

10 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:

It was interference, but this kind of PI needs to be different or something and not a spot-foul.  The underthrown deep ball where the receiver needs to stop and the defender runs into him.  It is kind of a cheap way to pick up 30 yards.

And something like this is where you absolutely have to use instant replay to make that determination. I've advocated for years about either stop making PI spot fouls or make offensive PI more punishing like a 15 yard penalty instead of 10

Edited 5 hours ago by buffalo2218

[mjt328]

The DPI against Shakir was the correct call, and very obvious.  Not sure who actually caught the ball, because they never showed a good angle.  Tie does go to the offensive player.  And since the ball ends up in the same spot with the penalty, I guess it really didn't make a difference.

 

I was really nervous they were going to call pass interference on Tre White's one-handed INT.  There was a lot of contact, and one of the flag-happy officiating crews probably would have thrown it.

 

Since we are talking about the refs, I know a lot of people were upset about the refs using replay assist to take away Brandin Cook's catch on the first drive, but not Kayshon Boutte's.  The purpose of that rule is to adjust obvious mistakes in real-time.  I think they did the right thing.  Cook's bobble was very clear.  Boutte's needed multiple angles and was still iffy.  

[Simon]

28 minutes ago, Billzgobowlin said:

It is most defeinitely a criterion commonly used for DPI 

 

There's not even any such thing as "faceguarding" and DB's are coached NOT to look back for the ball in many instances.

Both of them are entirely irrelevant to any penalty.

[balln]

This is the unfortunate part of the rules where a deep ball that’s underthrown and the db w back to ball (correct technique) interferes with the wr trying to come back (this play Shakir did this minimally) to catch. 
 

I believe Greg Olsen was talking about it last week. Wants it changed in rules. Never will be changed 

9 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:

It was interference, but this kind of PI needs to be different or something and not a spot-foul.  The underthrown deep ball where the receiver needs to stop and the defender runs into him.  It is kind of a cheap way to pick up 30 yards.

Yep. Sorry I didn’t read before my post

[DCOrange]

6 minutes ago, boyst said:

Impeding the path with contact is; there was a call later against them that was an example (maybe Coleman).

 

There was another time where White (I think it was) had the same type of play that Shakir had against him but no contact.

If you're referring to White's INT, there was PLENTY of contact lol. Think it would have been a farce to call that pass interference on White though; he had outside leverage and Maye threw it over White's shoulder. He basically just maintained his position between Hollins and the ball the entire play and made the catch. It's probably been called pass interference here and there in the past, but if you're really looking for that to be pass interference, you're basically just asking DBs to get out of the WR's way at all times.

[boyst]

5 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

If you're referring to White's INT, there was PLENTY of contact lol. Think it would have been a farce to call that pass interference on White though; he had outside leverage and Maye threw it over White's shoulder. He basically just maintained his position between Hollins and the ball the entire play and made the catch. It's probably been called pass interference here and there in the past, but if you're really looking for that to be pass interference, you're basically just asking DBs to get out of the WR's way at all times.

It wasn't that one. Maybe it wasn't White in coverage.

 

I just saw some contact that could have been called against someone. 

[Rousseauisnoschmo]

Cheats had the refs and the league in their back pockets for twenty years. Time for them to spend some time in the back of the line.

[boyst]

18 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:

It was interference, but this kind of PI needs to be different or something and not a spot-foul.  The underthrown deep ball where the receiver needs to stop and the defender runs into him.  It is kind of a cheap way to pick up 30 yards.

Brady made a hobby of this. 

[balln]

But isn’t this a Moot point? They ruled Shakir caught it / tie possession. ?

[DCOrange]

I think both the Shakir play, and the White INT that Pats fans are complaining about probably both come down to the same aspect of pass interference:

Quote

Acts that are pass interference include, but are not limited to:

(e) Cutting off the path of an opponent by making contact with him, without playing the ball

On the Shakir play, Jones cut off Shakir's ability to come back to the ball BEFORE turning his head at the last second (and honestly, would argue he turned his head so late that he wasn't really making a play on the ball and simply lucked into the ball ending up in his hands). On the White play, he had position the entire play and was turned tracking the ball coming in the entire play and cut off Hollins' ability to get to the ball while doing it. If there was any DPI on that play, you could maybe say the slight push off at the end, but it would have been a pretty weak one.

[CircleTheWagons99]

No matter what, it was PI.  He RAN INTO the WR before turning his head.....

 

On the White INT, White was playing the ball, Hollins was playing DB......

Edited 5 hours ago by CircleTheWagons99

[Cray51]

30 minutes ago, Billy Claude said:

Josh Allen is the face of the NFL these days.  If you go to the Jets board they don't quite complain about Allen getting the calls as Mahines but it's starting to get there.

Good!  You aren't good if you aren't hated.  Let teams hate the Bills and what they do to them.  It means something is going right.

[Epstein's Mother]

26 minutes ago, RichRiderBills said:

 

I've heard talk in other games of changing the rule for underthrown balls. It's a tough one though. I personally think spot foul for pi is too much and I prefer kind of the college model. 

 

I agree with you on the severity of defensive pass interference.  I have always looked at as when you make it a spot foul it assumes the receiver in the absence of interference was going to make the catch.  Why then is offensive pass interference only a 10 yard penalty?  Why do they not also assume the defensive player was going to make the interception in the absence of interference?