1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Officials apologize for wrong call on Trevor Davis PI

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Packers907, Sep 29, 2016.

  1. Packers907

    Packers907 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2015
    Messages:
    106
    Ratings:
    +22
  2. Twiddlemylobes

    Twiddlemylobes Fat Tuesday Orleans

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    1,092
    Ratings:
    +511
    I'm just going from memory but after the replay it looked like there was ongoing contact until the legs got tangled. It was a close call but not an outrageous bad call either way..either way, the ref called it
    I think sometimes if they see a player getting interfered with on a consistent basis with no calls then the ref is more sensitive to this kinda call.
    Also vice Versa if the defender has been playing "clean" for the most part throughout the game, they'll get away with Some stuff they could've been flagged on.
    I think it's similar to a comment that's verbalized. You have to get the before and after to see the full context of the intent
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. Pokerbrat2000

    Pokerbrat2000 Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Messages:
    4,670
    Ratings:
    +2,895
    Always a few of those every year, glad this one worked in our favor. I recall a Fail Mary against Seattle that didn't, even after it was reviewed.

    I wouldn't be opposed to having certain penalties reviewable (if challenged), in a timely fashion. But some of them are strict judgement calls which can vary from official to official, so the consistency of what constitutes PI should first be addressed. I also think it should have to come as a challenge from the coach. Otherwise, officials in the booth could find pass interference/holding etc. occurring on too many plays, at or away from the ball. If they buzzed down to correct each one, the game would go 6 hours and if they didn't, someone would complain at how many they missed.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Pokerbrat2000

    Pokerbrat2000 Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Messages:
    4,670
    Ratings:
    +2,895
    I agree and I also think the call changes based on the situation/timing in the game when it occurs. Kind of like the last 2 minutes in Hockey and Basketball, some refs seem to swallow their whistles a bit, when they feel the game could be decided by one of their calls.
     
  5. Twiddlemylobes

    Twiddlemylobes Fat Tuesday Orleans

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    1,092
    Ratings:
    +511
    Yes. They could put a net yardage threshold to reduce the frivolous. E.g, If it results in more than an approximate 25 yards swing? My logic here is coming from ST holding calls that are 10 yards away from the PUnt Return guy but result in a 25 yard return being erased and going back an additional 10 for -35 net
     
  6. azrsx05

    azrsx05 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    349
    Ratings:
    +215
    I like the college Pass interference rule. It's always 15 yds. I hate that one call can really change the field that much and it's not even reviewable. Make it 15 yards and you get a first down. That's a reasonable yardage and also keeps defenses from really interfering cause they'll be giving them 15 and a first down
     
  7. Poppa San

    Poppa San SB I trophy First of four Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    5,830
    Ratings:
    +1,626
    So in the two minute offense I'm a DB getting burned 40 yards downfield near the endzone I can tackle OBjr to prevent the TD?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. azrsx05

    azrsx05 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    349
    Ratings:
    +215
    Then at that point it would probably be called holding.
     
  9. mradtke66

    mradtke66 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    595
    Ratings:
    +290
    Depends if the ball is in the air or not.
     
  10. azrsx05

    azrsx05 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    349
    Ratings:
    +215
    True. But I just feel that's too much advantage for an offense to have for something that is not reviewable. A lot of time the receivers will flop for it and they get free 30+ yards.
     
  11. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    12,614
    Ratings:
    +6,597
    I don´t think the NFL should put a yards threshold on pass interference. Otherwise defensive backs getting burned on a deep ball would always take the penalty not allowing the receiver to catch the ball.

    Absolutely hate the college rule on pass interference for reasons mentioned above in this post.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. Mondio

    Mondio Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Messages:
    2,812
    Ratings:
    +1,779
    make the rule and offenses and defenses will adjust to take their shots, so whatever they do, I don't care a whole lot. I think it's fine like it is.

    That said, I just briefly saw a replay this morning on the news, and the guy reaches out and grabs his arm and pulls him back, then lets go. I'm ok calling it or not, just be consistent. That's my biggest issue with PI calls. Overall I think they benefit the offense a bit much, but they've gotten better about letting some play happen the past 2 seasons over previous years. 4 years ago, that's easily a penalty and nobody is apologizing for anthying.
     
  13. Crazy Packers Fan

    Crazy Packers Fan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Messages:
    400
    Ratings:
    +117
    The NFL still owes us one for the "Fail Mary," so I don't feel too bad about getting the calls early on in this season. However, it concerns me a bit that the Packers are relying so much on getting the PI calls rather than making the plays. As for the rule, I'd like to see a hybrid of the college rule and the NFL rule. 15 yards on an "unintentional" PI like that one, spot of the foul on an "blatant" foul. Of course then we'll have debates on what's intentional or not, and it won't really solve anything, but that might help a bit.
     
  14. PackerDNA

    PackerDNA Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,165
    Ratings:
    +937
    The 'always 15' rule cost Iowa a playoff berth. The Michigan St defender was badley beaten about 40 yards downfield, reached out and grabbed the WR's shirt. Otherwise, TD, Iowa wins.
     
  15. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    12,614
    Ratings:
    +6,597
    That would make it even harder for the officials to call pass interference the right way.
     

Share This Page