PI on Fake Punt called before (1 Viewer)

[FullMonte]

Birdog - Thx much. But does it still allow clear holding of the gunners jerseys while the ball is in the air? Thx much

No. The rule specifically states that holding is still illegal.

 

[FullMonte]

Of course is a defensive PI, or defensive holding....call it what you like..

But this play is a pass play. The way the offense lines up is called "gamesmanship"...which means, the offense tries to keep the D confused, thinking is a punt, while the offense is setting up the pass!.....it happens all the time on 4th down plays, when the O tries to convert on that down.

But as soon the ball is snapped, it is quite clear this is a pass play. the fact that the defender thinks this is a punt, is his own fault....he should have looked back to make sure of that. But he is stupidly clings to his mistaken belief that this play is a punt....in which case the ferenghi rule of aqusition #53 applies....

"stupidity is not an excuse".....

I hope it helps....LMAO!

So you think that a defender should be looking back at the backfield AND running stride for stride with (and blocking) a gunner?

The refs blew both infractions, which raises suspicion that it was intentional on their part the refusal of acknowledgement of both infractions. They didn't call it b/c they didn't want to call it.

No wonder many fans of different teams call the refs "incompetent, or downright dishonest" when they make such a stupid decision.

They didn't blow "both" infractions. There is no defensive pass interference call on an apparent punt formation. The rules specifically state that.

 

[Swimmer]

But your question is a fair question....what infraction does the defender commit first? B/c the defender commits 2 faults on this play...

PI or DH? As both the receiver and the defender run stride by stride, the defender grabs the receiver's jersey first, then blocks him out of bounce. The refs should have called both penalties which should have resulted in a 1st down play. However, usually the lesser penalty is refused by the team against who the infraction occurred, and the most serious infraction is accepted...in this case PI.

The refs blew both infractions, which raises suspicion that it was intentional on their part the refusal of acknowledgement of both infractions. They didn't call it b/c they didn't want to call it.

No wonder many fans of different teams call the refs "incompetent, or downright dishonest" when they make such a stupid decision.

And what really inflamed my Hemroids was the announcers, and then Blando being called in. I don't really get upset by announcers. Except for 2-3 crews, I just accept they are incompetent. I thought the young kid did a pretty good job of calling the game. But it's 100% clear he in no way would say anything that could be viewed as negative to the NFL. But replay after replay showed the Niner defender not just holding our gunner by the jersey but to the extent of trying to take his uniform off. I would have loved the Niner defender actually ripping the shirt off our gunner and see if the officials would have made the right call as our half-naked gunner was running on the field.

 

[birdog]

No. The rule specifically states that holding is still illegal.

True.....but this is a pass play....nobody is punting the ball...somebody is 'throwing' the ball with his hands, which makes it a pass play. By interfering on that pass play....the defender does not allow any chance for the receiver to catch the ball which makes the infraction more serious than just a defensive holding.

The refs should have called it a defensive PI also...

 

[sammymvpknight]

Sammy - great point. I still have not seen a question answered after the game. I get the weird no PI rule and it's a clear rule, but does that allow the defenders to literally hold tight the jersey of the gunners during the entire kick? Thx somebody?

Technically, it could be a penalty. But it's a matter of enforcement. It REGULARLY happens and rarely gets called. There is a ton of grey when it comes to NFL rules. For example, offensive holding and defensive pass interference happens WAY more than it is called. But the refs (and the league) has determined what level of holding/interference is allowable to prevent the game from being unwatchable. Tugging of the jersey, extending the arms while holding, and significant deterring the movement of another player typically gets called. There is pretty significant subjectivity, and I think that's what's killing the Saints. There is pretty clear bias (at least subconsciousnessly by the refs and league) against the Saints. So when you see that grey area, that's when the bias is revealed.

 

[birdog]

So you think that a defender should be looking back at the backfield AND running stride for stride with (and blocking) a gunner?



They didn't blow "both" infractions. There is no defensive pass interference call on an apparent punt formation. The rules specifically state that.

Wrong on both accounts. When the defender lines up facing the gunner he does not "look back"....he has every opportunity to see the play AT THE SNAP looking at the play. He doesn't have to look back to notice what the true intentions of the team is at the snap. remember before the snap, the teams who snaps the ball is not moving.

On the second point....this is pure gamesmanship lining up in punt formation and then changing the last couple of seconds into a pass play...how many times we have seen that? But even if there is no change, the snapper has every right to snap the ball NOT TO THE PUNTER, but to another player who lines up between the snapper and the punter. Only in that case the play results in a running play, which fools the defense exactly the same way as if the team throws the ball.

This play was a pass play and the refs blew the call

 

[NeverGiveUP2]

So you think that a defender should be looking back at the backfield AND running stride for stride with (and blocking) a gunner?



They didn't blow "both" infractions. There is no defensive pass interference call on an apparent punt formation. The rules specifically state that.

QB on the field instead of the punter. WR on the field instead of the gunner. What makes this an obvious punt? Because the QB lined up 3 yards deeper than a normal shotgun? Where’s the line? 1 yard? 2 yard? The 9ers had their regular defense on the field. Why do we have to accept the explanation given

 

[Seattle49er]

 

[FullMonte]

On the second point....this is pure gamesmanship lining up in punt formation and then changing the last couple of seconds into a pass play...how many times we have seen that? But even if there is no change, the snapper has every right to snap the ball NOT TO THE PUNTER, but to another player who lines up between the snapper and the punter. Only in that case the play results in a running play, which fools the defense exactly the same way as if the team throws the ball.

This play was a pass play and the refs blew the call

No...they didn't. I'm not sure how you can't grasp a simple concept. There is a rule, in the rule book, that specifically states that. Here is a link to the rule book. The rule in question is Rule 8, Section 5 "Pass Interference." Article 3, Note 3 states:

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.

https://operations.nfl.com/media/3831/2019-playing-rules.pdf

 

[birdog]

No...they didn't. I'm not sure how you can't grasp a simple concept. There is a rule, in the rule book, that specifically states that. Here is a link to the rule book. The rule in question is Rule 8, Section 5 "Pass Interference." Article 3, Note 3 states:

https://operations.nfl.com/media/3831/2019-playing-rules.pdf

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.

https://operations.nfl.com/media/3831/2019-playing-rules.pdf

But this wasn't a punting act....that's the whole point. You have shown me the rule regarding a PUNT, not a pass play. (I highlighted that point) When there is a punt, the rule is clear, but when it is a pass, the punting rule does not, or should not apply. . The rule clearly says "until the ball is kicked". But the ball is never kicked on a pass play....the ball is thrown with hand and is not kicked. That is the whole point regarding converting on a 4th down pass play....... deceiving the opponent ....

Here's the relevant question... can an offense line up in an apparent punting formation, and then throw a pass to the gunner? Yes or no? You say that they can't.....I disagree. It is not against the rule to throw a pass to the gunner instead of a punt, therefore the punting rule should not apply. At that point the pass interference rules should be considered.

Now I agree....if this is not clearly stated in the rule book, then I predict this rule will be changed this next offseason.

 

[Seattle49er]

But this wasn't a punting act....that's the whole point. You have shown me the rule regarding a PUNT, not a pass play. (I highlighted that point) When there is a punt, the rule is clear, but when it is a pass, the punting rule does not, or should not apply. . The rule clearly says "until the ball is kicked". But the ball is never kicked on a pass play....the ball is thrown with hand and is not kicked. That is the whole point regarding converting on a 4th down pass play....... deceiving the opponent ....

Here's the relevant question... can an offense line up in an apparent punting formation, and then throw a pass to the gunner? Yes or no? You say that they can't.....I disagree. It is not against the rule to throw a pass to the gunner instead of a punt, therefore the punting rule should not apply. At that point the pass interference rules should be considered.

Now I agree....if this is not clearly stated in the rule book, then I predict this rule will be changed this next offseason.

The defender running with back turned has no idea the punt is faked. Doubt they change the rule. If it had succeeded you'd be singing the praises of SP, since it failed you're following his lead complaining about it. Face it, it was a dumb decision just like going for two.

 

[SubmarineMike]

yes its PI. Becuase the receiver wasnt lined up as widest man in formation. He came from LOS on a wheel route. So at the snap, he was "inside" the widest man.

Had we thrown that to say the TE ( in formation ) then it would have been PI. but because it was TQS as the Gunner, thats why no foul.

Yep - that mistake was on Payton (though it's pretty obscure, not really pointing a finger). Need to watch the play again and see if there was an inside runner that was a viable target for Hill.

 

[birdog]

The defender running with back turned has no idea the punt is faked. .

Wrong...the defender knew in the instant the ball was snapped that it was a pass play. Before the snap he sees the LOS, and is not turned backwards, for the gunner did not take off at that point. Therefore he sees who got the ball, and knows that it is a pass play after the ball was snapped.

 

[Seattle49er]

Wrong...the defender knew in the instant the ball was snapped that it was a pass play. Before the snap he sees the LOS, and is not turned backwards, for the gunner did not take off at that point. Therefore he sees who got the ball, and knows that it is a pass play after the ball was snapped.

Was there a PI? No, did the play work? No.

 

[birdog]

Was there a PI? No, did the play work? No.

Remember...what goes around, comes around....its just a matter of time