pjd Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Presumeably because I am biased, but to me, the defensive back instigated contact rather than Reed, although I am sure Reed would have eventually. So why wasn't defensive interference called rather than offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Presumeably because I am biased, but to me, the defensive back instigated contact rather than Reed, although I am sure Reed would have eventually. So whywasn't defensive interference called rather than offensive. 779948[/snapback] A DB can make contact with an offensive player within 5 yards of the LoS. That would be my guess as to why there would be no defensive pass interference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SACTOBILLSFAN Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 A DB can make contact with an offensive player within 5 yards of the LoS. That would be my guess as to why there would be no defensive pass interference. 779952[/snapback] Not while the ball is in the air i don't believe. Once the ball is in the air the DB cannot make contact with a WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Kelso made a point... Wasn't it behind the line of scrimmage? How can it be pass interference... Wouldn't it be a block? I didn't see the play... Just heard the call... Was it a pick play? And my recollection of the play is foggy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SACTOBILLSFAN Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 It was a forward pass but caught behind the LOS so i don't know. Can anyone clarify this rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric/Hawaii Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Reed was trying to redeem himself from the series before. he gave up on a block and the DB caught WM from behind when it looked like WM was going to break one. You could see Reed angry with himself after the play. so I think he got a little over zealous on that play. It was pass interference. You cannot block on the D backfield until the ball is caught (or tipped) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Defensive Pass Interference: Defender touches a New England Patriot Offensive Pass Interference: New England Patriot defender touches an opposing receiver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Defensive Pass Interference: Defender touches a New England PatriotOffensive Pass Interference: New England Patriot defender touches an opposing receiver 780048[/snapback] Thanks for clarifying that...I knew you would know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightRider Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Kelso made a point... Wasn't it behind the line of scrimmage? How can it be pass interference... Wouldn't it be a block? I didn't see the play... Just heard the call... Was it a pick play? And my recollection of the play is foggy... 779963[/snapback] I think Kelso was saying it was technically not a pass but a lateral, therefore PI was not applicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 It was pass interference. You cannot block on the D backfield until the ball is caught (or tipped) 780045[/snapback] That is true, but that call doesn't make sense to me. If it was an illegal block downfield or something I could understand, but why PI? Reed and the DB ran into each other (yes, it was designed, but that's still what happened), why wouldn't it be PI on the DB as well? I think the result was correct. He blocked the defender a second before he was supposed to, so the play got called back. I just thought it was strange that it was called pass interference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 the good thing here is we know that Parrish is a good slot reciever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 It was caught behind the line of scrimmage, but was nowhere near a lateral. LOS was just outside the 15; Losman threw from the 23; Parrish made the reception at the 17. Reed definitely makes contact with the Miami DB (at the 12) while the ball is in the air... but that doesn't matter anyway. From the NFL Digest of Rules: 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. (Further down) Actions that constitute offensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Blocking downfield by an offensive player prior to the ball being touched. If Reed had made contact behind the line of scrimmage, it would've been a touchdown: 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. But since he was downfield, it's an easy call for the officials to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 It was caught behind the line of scrimmage, but was nowhere near a lateral. LOS was just outside the 15; Losman threw from the 23; Parrish made the reception at the 17. Reed definitely makes contact with the Miami DB (at the 12) while the ball is in the air... but that doesn't matter anyway. From the NFL Digest of Rules:If Reed had made contact behind the line of scrimmage, it would've been a touchdown: But since he was downfield, it's an easy call for the officials to make. 780126[/snapback] huh? your saying that if Reed made contact behind the line of scrimmage it would not be PI ... well duh ... but what WR do you know, would take a step back and wait for the DB to come to him, and then block? The fact is that if it was a screen to McGahee behind the line of scrimmage (as it was) and Reed makes that same block I bet it doesnt get called. I think the ref just blew the call. He saw a receiver catch a ball and he saw Reed block the defender. Yet you watch Westbrook catch the ball behind the line of scrimmage and his WR's are already blocking downfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Read the rules. You might learn something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Read the rules. You might learn something. 780308[/snapback] Ouch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 It was caught behind the line of scrimmage, but was nowhere near a lateral. LOS was just outside the 15; Losman threw from the 23; Parrish made the reception at the 17. Reed definitely makes contact with the Miami DB (at the 12) while the ball is in the air... but that doesn't matter anyway. From the NFL Digest of Rules:If Reed had made contact behind the line of scrimmage, it would've been a touchdown: But since he was downfield, it's an easy call for the officials to make. 780126[/snapback] Nicely done. That rule, no PI behind the LOS, is why defensive lineman can haul down a RB who is trying to slide into position for a screen. That is one of the reasons why it can be very difficult to pull off a decent screen pass, especially a middle screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightRider Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 It was caught behind the line of scrimmage, but was nowhere near a lateral. 780126[/snapback] I guess my memory is a little fuzzy, too. BTW, I'm looking forward to the Broom avatar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 I really wish you would stop making sense. I hated the call but is was the right call (unless Reed was a Patriot). It was caught behind the line of scrimmage, but was nowhere near a lateral. LOS was just outside the 15; Losman threw from the 23; Parrish made the reception at the 17. Reed definitely makes contact with the Miami DB (at the 12) while the ball is in the air... but that doesn't matter anyway. From the NFL Digest of Rules:If Reed had made contact behind the line of scrimmage, it would've been a touchdown: But since he was downfield, it's an easy call for the officials to make. 780126[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Kelso made a point... Wasn't it behind the line of scrimmage? How can it be pass interference... Wouldn't it be a block? I didn't see the play... Just heard the call... Was it a pick play? And my recollection of the play is foggy... 779963[/snapback] Because the pass went forwards, the WR cannot make contact with the DB downfield until the ball is caught. My team got called on this A LOT in preseason when we ran the exact same bubble screen as the Bills ran. The hardest thing is getting the timing right to get the ball in the hands of the WR and the other WR making the block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pkwwjd Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 One of the original questions still begs to be answered: Is it simply a judgment call by the official as to who instigates the contact? B/C it does seem that Reed is holding off charging into the DB and the DB makes the contact with Reed. Anyone answer that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 One of the original questions still begs to be answered: Is it simply a judgment call by the official as to who instigates the contact? B/C it does seem that Reed is holding off charging into the DB and the DB makes the contact with Reed. Anyone answer that? 780386[/snapback] No it is not a judgement call. While JR may not initiate the contact, he is causing contact to the benefit of the offence, hence - the flag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pkwwjd Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 So you're saying that in that instance, even if Reed plays way off, waiting for the catch, if the DB rushes up and makes contact, it would be Offensive Interference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 That's the part that didn't make sense to me too. Reed didn't run into the DB. To me it looked he was running a route and they ran into each other. (Again, I know it was designed, but that's what it looked like). He didn't really throw a block, but they ran into each other. Like I said, it really doesn't matter since the correct call was made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 That's the part that didn't make sense to me too. Reed didn't run into the DB. To me it looked he was running a route and they ran into each other. (Again, I know it was designed, but that's what it looked like).He didn't really throw a block, but they ran into each other. Like I said, it really doesn't matter since the correct call was made. 780548[/snapback] I didn't see the game...but it sounds like it was viewed by the refs as some sort of pick. Dunno. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt in KC Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 I didn't see the game...but it sounds like it was viewed by the refs as some sort of pick. Dunno. 780563[/snapback] It was very clearly a pick. The play was drawn up very well (all defenders accounted for), but while Reed slowed or stopped right before the contact, he targeted the defender and ran right at him, creating contact just before the ball was caught. If the timing was right, it looks like this would consistently be a huge play. Roscoe is the right guy to scoot through the space that opens up on a play like this. He has a lot to prove still, but count me among those that thik he is a dangerous weapon for the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 The play isn't designed to be a pick. It's designed to get Roscoe the ball quickly and for the other players to block their men. Reed engaged his defender a little too early, for whatever reason, hence the flag. Bet it doesn't happen like that again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Because the pass went forwards, the WR cannot make contact with the DB downfield until the ball is caught. My team got called on this A LOT in preseason when we ran the exact same bubble screen as the Bills ran. The hardest thing is getting the timing right to get the ball in the hands of the WR and the other WR making the block. 780369[/snapback] I thought the hardest part was getting the guys to use their hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jukester Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 The penalty call was correct. From what I remember, the timing was thrown off because a Dolphin was in J.P's face forcing him to hold onto the ball a second longer than planned. This is why Reed's block ended up a bit early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Read the rules. You might learn something. 780308[/snapback] So thats the answer to my question? What I am saying is this. When a screen is thrown to a WR on the out (just as the Dolphins did to chambers when McGee made the nice tackle) ... the Dolphins WR's were engaged in their blocks well before Chambers caughtnthe ball. So why if your theory is correct wasnt there PI on every Dolphin receiver on that play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 That rule, no PI behind the LOS, is why defensive lineman can haul down a RB who is trying to slide into position for a screen. They can give him a chuck but they can't grab him and haul him down. Screens are designed to fool DLinemen os the instances of a DLinemen actually recognizing it in time and then actively seeking out contact on the RB are exceedingly rare. Schobel did it once vs miamuh (on the 2nd Culpepper fumble) but he actually grabbed Brown by the jersey and it should have been a penalty. Cya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts