I assume the logic is it (the contact) has no impact on the play because it is not "catchable".
How come that even matters? Holding by the wide receiver on the far right side is a penalty even if it is a quick sweep left? His holding has no impact on the play so by the same logic it shouldn't count, right?

You can't really interfere with a pass if it isn't catchable. It's the nature of the penalty.

quote:

---

Holding by the wide receiver on the far right side is a penalty even if it is a quick sweep left? His holding has no impact on the play so by the same logic it shouldn't count, right?

---

Holding by the defensive back on the right even if its a quick sweep to the left could be called a penalty, too.

Pass interference is a penalty against physical contact in the unique situation that it hinders a receiver (or defensive back) from catching the pass. If a pass is uncatchable, how can you hinder the receiver from catching the football?

They don't want to make physical contact illegal (well, maybe they do ), but it would be way to easy to play defense if you could make normal physical contact against an intended receiver.

They aren't usually going to call it uncatchable unless there is NO WAY he can get it. OOB is best example. But, like anything else, it could have been missed.

Because in order to be penalized, a player is supposed to gain a competitive advantage from the foul. If there's no chance at a catch, nobody gains any advantage from the interference.

quote:

---

Holding by the wide receiver on the far right side is a penalty even if it is a quick sweep left? His holding has no impact on the play so by the same logic it shouldn't count, right?

---

There are actually a lot of holds on the back side of plays just like you described that don't get called because they don't really have an impact on the play.

How have you disadvantaged the offensive player if he couldn't catch it anyway? In other words: "you can't lose what you have never had."

It has to be a massively bad hold to be called completely away from the play. Even then, no one may be looking at it at the time.

When you see refs pick up a pi flag after their pow wow, it's because they decided it wasn't catchable.

If a tree falls in the forest....

Agree with the what OP was getting at, as it doesn't make sense at times. After all, I don't know how many times I've seen a punt or kickoff return called back because the ref threw a flag for a BS behind the back block that occurred on the opposite side of the field from where the play was.


[This message has been edited by JFS61 (edited 9/2/2012 9:10a).]

The fact that the OP let those words escape his electronic mouth without answering his own question in the same thought bottles the mind.

quote:

---

The fact that the OP let those words escape his electronic mouth without answering his own question in the same thought bottles the mind.

---

Did you just say mind-bottling?

JFS61: I'm guessing the difference between a punt return clipping call on the other side of the field is because the clip can do serious injury to the offensive player...where pass interference is usually not painful. If similar occurred on a passing play...it would be unnecessary roughness or targeting. Whole reason you can't block in the back or chop block..both evolved from injuries being sustained.

Stupid question. OP must be female.

Harley nailed it. Safety penalties are called regardless if they affect the play. Holding on the far side and pass interference are usually not safety issues.

I replied to this thread before noticing who the OP was.