PI on Fake Punt called before (1 Viewer)

[VPCajun]

So somebody explain how Payton can have that trick play in our playbook knowing that a PI or holding can't be called on the gunner lined up wide? Remember, he's on the rules committee.

That indeed is the $100,000 question!

(I guess, adjusted for inflation, the $1,000,000 question.)

Knowing SP, he was being CLEVER and expecting a Holding call to bail him out.

 

[maybellineo]

No dude holding is supposed to be called!

I thought I heard the ref on TV that gives his opinion on calls Dean Blandino ?, saying that the holding wasn't called because something about the ball in the air? I had it muted because I listen to the radio but had the closed caption on so I may be mistaken about this. Anybody see or heard the ball in the air excuse.

 

[VPCajun]

Our QB is not a punter. No fake punt involved. Not our fault we fooled the defense

How did they fool the defense?

SF lined up 4 linemen, 4 LB's. 2 on the gunner's and 1 deep.

They were full on playing for a Fake.

But, what probably happened, IN PRACTICE, was that the ST NEVER EVEN SURMISED A FAKE PUNT COULD EVER HAPPEN!

 

[State Of Affairs]

So what’s suppose to happen? Is the gunner allowed to just run down the field uncontested? The blockers don’t know it’s a pass play. That’s why it’s not a penalty. If it is a penalty it will be the death of punt returns.

It’s unfortunate that the Saints lost butany objective person can very easily understand why it was a no-penalty. The only thing I hated about the situation was that the “rules expert” decided to completely gloss over the question of defensive holding. If he would have said “there was nothing there out of the ordinary on their blocking of a gunner running down field on what they conceived was a punt”, I wouldn’t have been happy about the outcome, but I could understand the rationale.

you’re completely right about giving the defender the ability to slow the “gunner down” I see it and it makes sense.

but as yousaid, we still have the issue with holding the entire way down the field...

 

[bigdaddysaints]

Here you go:

Rule 8: Section 5 Pass Interference
Article (3)(e) Note(3):
Whenever a team presents an apparent punting formation and until the ball is kicked, defensive acts that normally constitute pass interference against the end man on the line of scrimmage, or against an eligible receiver behind the line of scrimmage who is aligned or in motion more than one yard outside the end man on the line, provided that the acts do not constitute illegal holding. Defensive holding, such as tackling a receiver, still can be called a result in a five-yard penalty, from the previous spot, if accepted. Offensive pass interference rules still apply.

IMO, it should have been textbook 5 yard penalty and automatic first down, the bold part is exactly what happened.

 

[neworleanshoo]

It was holding, and it was blatant.
It was also a horrible play-call and 100% on Sean Payton. Both are true.

 

[VPCajun]

That's my question. What in the rules defines punt formation? We had a QB in shotgun who threw a pass. Is it just because it was 4th down or because of certain players in the game? Kind of an odd rule as it was not a fake punt (punter was not deep).

I couldn't find much, but I did find this:

"if a team does not present a standard punt formation (an equal number of players on either side of the snapper in a tight formation, and one player split out wide to either side) "

See Page 36; R9 S1 A3(2) : https://operations.nfl.com/media/3831/2019-playing-rules.pdf

And, FWIW, here's the blurb on non-PI on Punts (Page 33) [note the underlined (by me) part]:

ARTICLE 3. PERMISSIBLE ACTS BY BOTH TEAMS WHILE THE BALL IS IN THE AIR. Acts that are permissible by a player include, but are not limited to:
(a) Incidental contact by an opponent’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball, or neither player is looking for the ball. If there is any question whether contact is incidental, the ruling shall be no interference.
(b) Inadvertent tangling of feet when both players are playing the ball or neither player is playing the ball.
(c) Contact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the pass is clearly uncatchable by the involved players, except as specified in 8-3-2 and 8-5-4 pertaining to blocking downfield by the offense.
(d) Laying a hand on an opponent that does not restrict him in an attempt to make a play on the ball.
(e) Contact by a player who has gained position on an opponent in an attempt to catch the ball.

Notes:
(1) When the ball is in the air, eligible offensive and defensive receivers have the same right to the path of the ball and are subject to the same restrictions.
(2) Acts that do not occur more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage are not pass interference, but could be offensive or defensive holding (see 12-1-3 and 12-1-6).
(3) Whenever a team presents an apparent punting formation and until the ball is kicked, defensive acts that normally constitute pass interference are permitted against the end man on the line of scrimmage, or against an eligible receiver behind the line of scrimmage who is aligned or in motion more than one yard outside the end man on the line, provided that the acts do not constitute illegal holding. Defensive holding, such as tackling a receiver, still can be called and result in a five-yard penalty from the previous spot, if accepted. Offensive pass interference rules still apply.

------------------------------------

It only says Five Yard Penalty - I don't see where Automatic First Down is addressed. So... even if the Holding was called, it seems that it would still be 4th and 13.


.

 

[VPCajun]

Anytime a fake punt is run, the defense should tackle everyone on the kicking team.

That only works if it's the Saints doing the kicking...

Cuz if the Saints do the tackling of everyone, then of course, the Refs remember the Correct Call is Defensive Holding!!!

 

[VPCajun]

I thought I heard the ref on TV that gives his opinion on calls Dean Blandino ?, saying that the holding wasn't called because something about the ball in the air? I had it muted because I listen to the radio but had the closed caption on so I may be mistaken about this. Anybody see or heard the ball in the air excuse.

Blandino never addressed the holding issue, only the DPI issue.


He was being very dishonest, though as he should have known D Holding was indeed an issue and the Refs FAILED to call it!

The only mention of D Holding by the announcers was to the effect that is what SP is calling for, and that D Holding is not reviewable.

Also stated the D Holding only applies before the ball is in the air.


(No, I don't have a good memory, just a DVR!)

 

[The Moose]

I thought I heard the ref on TV that gives his opinion on calls Dean Blandino ?, saying that the holding wasn't called because something about the ball in the air? I had it muted because I listen to the radio but had the closed caption on so I may be mistaken about this. Anybody see or heard the ball in the air excuse.

Watch the video he held him at the line of scrimmage. Held him for 30 yards!

I know what they said on TV. Unless hill threw a McDonald's arch of a pass he was held before the ball was in the air.

Yes I understand trying it at that time of the game. I also understand his right shoulder was held from the line of scrimmage to the end of the play.

That should be called either way.

It should especially be called when you throw the ball to him!

 

[efil4stnias]

Here you go:

Rule 8: Section 5 Pass Interference
Article (3)(e) Note(3):

thanks!

So to those who say TQS shoulda just tossed him aside, see last sentence.

So now we get into "what is a punt formation" - is punt formation incumbent upon having the PUNTER back? Or the long snapper?

gray area for sure.

 

[sammymvpknight]

It was holding, and it was blatant.
It was also a horrible play-call and 100% on Sean Payton. Both are true.

The problem is enforcement. At just about any moment in the game, something that can be perceived as holding can be taking place. The blocking of the gunner down the field looked like EVERY OTHER situation in which a gunner is getting blocked down the field. The precedent is to allow the blocking team to be handsy with the gunner. Of course Saints fans are going to hate the result...but I would expect that if it wasn't a passing play that defensive holding would have been called in less than 5% of similar situations.

TreQuan Smith double teamed on the play, and has been inept all season long. There is no way that Sean Payton expected a Hill to Smith connection in that scenario. It was actually probably about as close to catch as possible. The probability of a catch was easily sub 5%. Payton is an analytics guy...I'm sure he knew that. He was hoping for a penalty...which is bad, because he was banking a defensive holding call that almost never gets called in a punt scenario. It was horrible play calling on many levels.

 

[SaintJ]

So what’s suppose to happen? Is the gunner allowed to just run down the field uncontested? The blockers don’t know it’s a pass play. That’s why it’s not a penalty. If it is a penalty it will be the death of punt returns.

It’s unfortunate that the Saints lost butany objective person can very easily understand why it was a no-penalty. The only thing I hated about the situation was that the “rules expert” decided to completely gloss over the question of defensive holding. If he would have said “there was nothing there out of the ordinary on their blocking of a gunner running down field on what they conceived was a punt”, I wouldn’t have been happy about the outcome, but I could understand the rationale.

But that's kind of the whole point, right? Two different penalties. But my operating thesis is that the ref was so proud of himself knowing the rule, he quit on the play completely.

What else can you do on that play? Block below the waist? Just tackle him? Block him from behind? Punch him in the nuts?

I absolutely understand the rule and it makes a lot of sense in principle. but once again a guy in stripes ganks and we happen to be on the short end.

 

[RichB]

I don't think Smith was the intended target. I haven't watched a replay, but watching live it seemed like Taysom was looking left for someone to come open who never came open. He eventually decided to toss it toward Smith.

This is also further evidence that they were holding Smith, as it took Taysom a good while before deciding to throw that way.

 

[NeverGiveUP2]

But we’re in a punt formation

Our QB was in a shotgun formation. Our WR is not our gunner. In a league where the rule definition overrides what we all see how do you determine intention