Author Topic: Pass Interference  (Read 290 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Coach12

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Pass Interference
« Reply #15 on: November 07, 2018, 03:43:11 pm »


It is the type of contact that I was talking about above.  a defensive player can chuck (with hands) a receiver as long as the ball is not in the air in NFHS. 
They cannot hold though or take them out with their shoulder and or helmet.

This is exactly what I was referring to and looking for more clarification on. The shucking, I understand and agree with. But full on hitting a WR in his route, with no use of hands, is more of what I'm concerned with.

CoachEmUp"

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
  • Karma: +27/-37
Re: Pass Interference
« Reply #16 on: November 07, 2018, 04:23:57 pm »
 Coach12 what play number is it on frontrow! and both team names and date and grade Bobbie can look at it and let you know exactly what should have been called.
Free Agent

Coach12

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Pass Interference
« Reply #17 on: November 07, 2018, 04:35:09 pm »
I went and looked for it, and with the camera being so close/low to the field, you can't see the WR/play in question. The OL/DL are in the way. It had no impact on the outcome of the game. Also, the second play I had initially questioned as well, was a hand shuck... Just a violent one! lol Thanks for the clarification all!

snowkylegc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
  • Karma: +35/-8
Re: Pass Interference
« Reply #18 on: November 07, 2018, 10:01:32 pm »


Yes, this I agree with.. so the statement above that the referee would just be making rules up if he called that a penalty is potentially inaccurate...

Also, if I didnít mention I have not had any issues with this ever but saw the response above and felt we needed more clarification.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
i wouldn't exactly say that the statement is "potentially inaccurate".  He was commenting that that particular action would not be a "pass interference" penalty, which is what this thread started out as.

The play I see in question is stated that the receiver is basically tackled and that is why I stated it should be called a foul, Iím not sure what question you are stating the thread was started about.

Regardless, I wanted to get additional clarification for my own knowledge..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well, the title of the thread is "pass interference", so my understanding was the explanations were coming from that viewpoint on whether it was P I or not, and not any other penalty.  That's why i said stated that saying his explanation was inaccurate isn't exactly correct. But i understand where you're coming from as far as it being some OTHER penalty (i.e. targeting, defenseless player, etc.)  I wasn't trying to start an argument, just explaining how that call wouldn't be pass interference, as the thread title indicates.  That's all.

Lackey4Prez

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Pass Interference
« Reply #19 on: November 07, 2018, 10:03:04 pm »


Yes, this I agree with.. so the statement above that the referee would just be making rules up if he called that a penalty is potentially inaccurate...

Also, if I didnít mention I have not had any issues with this ever but saw the response above and felt we needed more clarification.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
i wouldn't exactly say that the statement is "potentially inaccurate".  He was commenting that that particular action would not be a "pass interference" penalty, which is what this thread started out as.

The play I see in question is stated that the receiver is basically tackled and that is why I stated it should be called a foul, Iím not sure what question you are stating the thread was started about.

Regardless, I wanted to get additional clarification for my own knowledge..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well, the title of the thread is "pass interference", so my understanding was the explanations were coming from that viewpoint on whether it was P I or not, and not any other penalty.  That's why i said stated that saying his explanation was inaccurate isn't exactly correct. But i understand where you're coming from as far as it being some OTHER penalty (i.e. targeting, defenseless player, etc.)  I wasn't trying to start an argument, just explaining how that call wouldn't be pass interference, as the thread title indicates.  That's all.

No worries man, I donít get my feelings hurt. I see your point of view now also.. see you around..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk