OPI or not

[eagles]

Team A has two receiver out wide to one side. The outside receiver does a crossing route and sets a pick on the linebacker. The inside receiver does an out pattern and catches the ball. There is no contact between the receiver and backer. The linebacker goes around him.

[Kalle]

Legal play. If the linebacker contacts the outside receiver, OPI. In NCAA pass interference always requires contact.

[Curious]

Legal play. If the linebacker contacts the outside receiver, OPI. In NCAA pass interference always requires contact.

If the receiver is stationary and the defender runs into him (even though you know he set up in the path of the defender), does the NCAA still consider it OPI?

[Kalle]

If the receiver is stationary and the defender runs into him (even though you know he set up in the path of the defender), does the NCAA still consider it OPI?

No, if you deem that he has established his stationary rights - probably about the same as in basketball. In that case there would be no foul against either team.

[yteside]

Uh, I kindly disagree with that statement.  If an A eligible player establishes position downfield for no other purpose than to pick a defender, whether he initiates that contact or not, this is still a foul.  In the NCAA rulebook, it is the responsibility of the A player to avoid the contact

7-3-8-b
Offensive pass interference by a Team A player beyond the neutral zone
during a legal forward pass play in which a forward pass crosses the
neutral zone is contact that interferes with a Team B eligible player. It is
the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents.

[Curious]

Uh, I kindly disagree with that statement.  If an A eligible player establishes position downfield for no other purpose than to pick a defender, whether he initiates that contact or not, this is still a foul.  In the NCAA rulebook, it is the responsibility of the A player to avoid the contact

How can you actually judge that "intent"?  If A1 runs a legit pass pattern, sits down, and the the QB chooses to throw elsewhere, are you going to call OPI if B runs into A1?

Wow, that seems to be quite a leap.....

[NVFOA_Ump]

Uh, I kindly disagree with that statement.  If an A eligible player establishes position downfield for no other purpose than to pick a defender, whether he initiates that contact or not, this is still a foul.  In the NCAA rulebook, it is the responsibility of the A player to avoid the contact

7-3-8-b
Offensive pass interference by a Team A player beyond the neutral zone
during a legal forward pass play in which a forward pass crosses the
neutral zone is contact that interferes with a Team B eligible player. It is
the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents.

The closest AR to this seems to say otherwise:

Contact Interference—ARTICLE 9:  Approved Ruling 7-3-9-I:  A80, a tight end, goes downfield eight yards, stops and turns to catch a pass, and does not contact an opponent. A44, a wing back, goes downfield eight yards and cuts to the inside, causing B1, who is pursuing him, to contact A80 after the ball was thrown. RULING: No foul against B1 unless the ball, a catchable forward pass, is thrown to A80.

This seems to say that the only possible foul is against Team B, and even then there is no foul if the ball is not thrown to A80.

[yteside]

First of all, the rule for DPI specifically says 'a team B player whose intent is to impede an eligible receiver'...so, if I have to judge his intent, I have no problem judging a team A's intent.

Second of all, 'territorial rights' only exist for a player who is in position to receive a catchable pass.  If an A player is there to create a barrier for a defender to negotiate in order to get to a pass or receiver, then he has committed OPI (assuming contact was made).  Remember, A's restrictions start AT THE SNAP, so location, or status of the ball are immaterial.

Not sure why this is a discussion, the rules seem pretty clear on this.

AR 7-3-8-VII is a better play because B initiates the contact and the ruling says OPI.

[JasonTX]

First of all, the rule for DPI specifically says 'a team B player whose intent is to impede an eligible receiver'...so, if I have to judge his intent, I have no problem judging a team A's intent.

Second of all, 'territorial rights' only exist for a player who is in position to receive a catchable pass.  If an A player is there to create a barrier for a defender to negotiate in order to get to a pass or receiver, then he has committed OPI (assuming contact was made).  Remember, A's restrictions start AT THE SNAP, so location, or status of the ball are immaterial.

Not sure why this is a discussion, the rules seem pretty clear on this.

AR 7-3-8-VII is a better play because B initiates the contact and the ruling says OPI.

That is because in that AR B1 pushes A88 (no foul by either player at this point)  A88 fouls when he pushes B1 back.  Had A88 not pushed there would not have been a foul.  Team A has to contact the B player.  If a team A player is in a position and then a team B player runs him over, it is not a foul by team A.  Team A is responsible for avoiding contact with team B, but team A is not responsible for ensuring Team A avoids contact by team B.

[NVFOA_Ump]

Not sure why this is a discussion, the rules seem pretty clear on this.

AR 7-3-8-VII is a better play because B initiates the contact and the ruling says OPI.

Which rule(s) make this very clear?  AR 7-3-8-VII is not on point here since it clearly says that after A88 stops and "At this spot, B1 pushes A88, who then uses his hands to contact B1."  To extend this AR to say that if A88 did not respond and  "contact B1" after B1's initial contact it would still be a foul IMO is not what the AR says, and is not supported in the rules.

For either DPI or OPI to be called the offending player needs to initiate the actual contact.  If we start trying to determine intent here, and further add a requirement that a stationary player "get out of the way" to avoid a PI call we are creating rules that don't exist in the book.

[ABoselli]

From our philosophies -

The following acts are NOT to be judged as offensive pass
interference.

1. During a screen pass when the pass lands beyond the expanded
neutral zone (up to 3 yds) and linemen are blocking downfield, unless
such blocking prevents a defensive player from catching the ball.

2. Contact when the passer is legally grounding the ball out of bounds
or where no eligible Team A player has a reasonable opportunity to catch it.

3. During a pick play if the defensive player is blocking the offensive
player when the pick occurs and the offensive player does not initiate
separation from the defender.

[yteside]

For either DPI or OPI to be called the offending player needs to initiate the actual contact.  If we start trying to determine intent here, and further add a requirement that a stationary player "get out of the way" to avoid a PI call we are creating rules that don't exist in the book.

Ok...if you do not like the AR, fine.  But my 2 pts above are "completely" supported by the rules.  Intent NEEDS to be judged because we continually pass on 'incidental' contact ALL the time on these plays.  The rules specifically says we need to judge intent (just like we judge intent in 'intentional' grounding)  Even AR 7-3-8-XII, which is a different type of play, uses the word 'intentionally' to justify no foul.  Now I know the adage of not trying to get into the player's head, but this rule is specifically clear.  Please tell me what 'other' purpose exists for an A player to go downfield and stop as in this play?  Please tell me ONE other purpose he might be serving?!?!?!  (Even, AR 7-3-9-I says he 'turns to catch a pass', but not in this play)I just do not see anything in the rulebook (unless someone can show me) that allows, on a legal forward pass play, for a eligible receiver to commit this action. 
Getting hung up on who initiate's the contact.  Technically, (now I'm being picky, but go with me please) if a B defender runs stride for stride with an A player down the sideline, and the B player has his arm extended out in front of the receiver, would you call a DPI arm bar if the A player 'initiates' the contact by lifting his arms to grab a catchable forward pass?  By your definition, since A initiated the contact by lifting his arms, there would be no foul? 

Further, have this play happen to you with your key and pass on it in a game.  I bet you get a phone call from your supervisor after the opposing coach sends this play in. 

<please excuse the language above...sometimes in posts/emails, I reread it and see if better wording could be used to get a point across without sounding, well, you know...anyway....really appreciate the lively discussion>

[Kalle]

How do you explain the A.R. 7-3-8-V? There a team B player contacts a (stationary) team A player before the ball is thrown and there is no foul. By your interpretation this should be OPI.

[Kalle]

Just for the hell of it, I sent this play and the "Late entering player" play to Redding. Will let you know what the official rulings are, if I receive an answer.

[NVFOA_Ump]

Please tell me ONE other purpose he might be serving?!?!?!  (Even, AR 7-3-9-I says he 'turns to catch a pass', but not in this play)I just do not see anything in the rulebook (unless someone can show me) that allows, on a legal forward pass play, for a eligible receiver to commit this action.

Simple - he stops and turns to catch a pass but since he's the number 2 or 3 receiver in the pattern and the QB never got down to him, or when the QB got down to him he had a defender standing in front of him so the ball went somewhere else.  That's 100% legal.  The fact that a B defender might run into him while he's simply standing there does not create a foul on A.

[Curious]

Not sure why this is a discussion, the rules seem pretty clear on this.

All the subsequent comments/opinions are WHY!!!

Topic seems reasonably important enough to get some definitive ruling.....

[yteside]

How do you explain the A.R. 7-3-8-V? There a team B player contacts a (stationary) team A player before the ball is thrown and there is no foul. By your interpretation this should be OPI.

This play does not say that the A player moved to a stationary position, it simply says that a B player legally contacted an A player before the ball is thrown.  It also does not state that the B player was trying to get to a catchable pass or another receiver to defend.

[yteside]

Simple - he stops and turns to catch a pass but since he's the number 2 or 3 receiver in the pattern and the QB never got down to him, or when the QB got down to him he had a defender standing in front of him so the ball went somewhere else.  That's 100% legal.  The fact that a B defender might run into him while he's simply standing there does not create a foul on A.

Well, that's exactly my point.  The play we are discussing says nothing of him turning to receive a pass (like the AR states).  If he is turning looking for a potential pass, then no problems...we sing we dance we all get along.  However, we are trying to defend an A player taking up a position for no other purpose to obstruct a B player.

[yteside]

Here's my point guys, in case I'm being misunderstood.....

If an A player 'sets up' stationary beyond the line of scrimmage and looks back for a potential pass, then I have no problem with this.  If a B player runs by him, it will be easy to detect whether this player moves or not to create the contact making our call easy for us.
If this A player 'sets up' stationary beyond the line of scrimmage and sets a pick (like in basketball as one previous post refers) making no attempt to make him available to receive a potential forward pass, then this is OPI if contact occurs.  His 'territorial rights' as stated in rule 7 only refer to his ability to receive a forward pass; since he is not making himself available for this, then he does not qualify for these 'territorial rights'....i.e. it is different from basketball.

Beyond that, if this was legal, you'd see every passing team (especially Boise) running this type of play....my opinion of course. 

Of course, we can agree to disagree on this interpretation if we'd like.  Seeing it on the field and ruling that is the important part in getting it right. 

[Kalle]

This play does not say that the A player moved to a stationary position, it simply says that a B player legally contacted an A player before the ball is thrown.  It also does not state that the B player was trying to get to a catchable pass or another receiver to defend.

As the AR doesn't say anything about the A player moving, it must apply to both a moving and a stationary player. Compare to the language in the other related AR's, they all state that the A player is either moving or stationary.

[yteside]

Come on...this particular AR serves no other purpose than to illustrate that B may legally contact A before the pass is thrown; that's the sole purpose of that particular AR. 

[NVFOA_Ump]

Come on...this particular AR serves no other purpose than to illustrate that B may legally contact A before the pass is thrown; that's the sole purpose of that particular AR. 

Don't think so.  The rules themselves are clear enough to tell us in that as long as A is in a potential blocking position B can freely contact the A player prior to the ball being in the air.  There's no AR needed for that.

[yteside]

Well, I agree with you, and I think that exactly was that AR says.  Furthermore, there are a lot of AR's that clarify otherwise more simple rules than this one.