RefStripes.com

Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: ChicagoZebra on October 06, 2016, 06:18:13 PM

Title: OPI?
Post by: ChicagoZebra on October 06, 2016, 06:18:13 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RM-ywN5MzE

What says you on this play? Any grounds for OPI or nay?
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: InsideTheStripes on October 06, 2016, 06:56:43 PM
Nope.
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: DallasLJ on October 06, 2016, 09:01:21 PM
No.  No push -- just maintaining his personal space.
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: #92 on October 07, 2016, 10:01:07 AM
No.  No push -- just maintaining his personal space.
Personal space? Rule 7-3-8-b states "It
is the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents." And since the contact is beyond 3 yards, it seems to me it doesn't qualify for exception 7-3-8-b-1.

So I vote yes on proposition OPI.
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: DallasLJ on October 07, 2016, 10:35:23 AM
Personal space? Rule 7-3-8-b states "It
is the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents." And since the contact is beyond 3 yards, it seems to me it doesn't qualify for exception 7-3-8-b-1.

So I vote yes on proposition OPI.
  Yes, responsibility falls on offensive player, but hand checking happens all the time -- and you can listen to RR narrate the biweekly CFO video talking about it all the time.  Contact here is not enough, IMO, in my opinion to warrant an OPI flag.
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: The Roamin' Umpire on October 07, 2016, 11:00:39 AM
Judging from the college guys who come in to present to our group on occasion - nope. There needs to be a clear push-off, and we have been shown examples that look a lot like that and been told "this is not OPI."
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: ChicagoZebra on October 07, 2016, 11:44:11 AM
FWIW, I agree with no flag, although I think it is close.

My main point was if the receiver's action could be construed as blocking downfield? He makes two-armed contact and drives the defender back a few yards - you can see it in the defender's legs.
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: NVFOA_Ump on October 07, 2016, 01:26:54 PM
Close judgment call here IMO.  Almost immediately after A disengages he turns around and catches pass.  OPI based on our guidance is in part based on the advantage gained by A's intentional contact, not the magnitude of the contact.  In this case it's a close judgment call.
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: BrendanP on October 07, 2016, 05:32:07 PM
Most definitely. He's blocking downfield on a pass play.  ^flag
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: JasonTX on October 08, 2016, 12:59:23 AM
Does this qualify as a train wreck or fender bender?  The answer to that question will answer the question on whether or not it is OPI.
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: NVFOA_Ump on October 08, 2016, 04:53:28 AM
Does this qualify as a train wreck or fender bender?  The answer to that question will answer the question on whether or not it is OPI.

IMHO poor analogy - the question is did the contact initiated by A result in an advantage in completing the pass?  OPI can be very subtle and does not require any specific level of contact, just enough to create the space that enables the completion.  Does A create the space here?  Very close call.
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: JasonTX on October 08, 2016, 03:05:57 PM
IMHO poor analogy - the question is did the contact initiated by A result in an advantage in completing the pass?  OPI can be very subtle and does not require any specific level of contact, just enough to create the space that enables the completion.  Does A create the space here?  Very close call.

IMO All fouls need to be so big that there isn't any debate over whether or not it is or isn't a foul.  That's why I call them trainwrecks. 
Title: Re: OPI?
Post by: Etref on October 08, 2016, 04:52:23 PM
 :thumbup

Make where even the mascot knows it was a foul!