Disagree. They had the choice to do the logical thing and tell Winnipeg the DL was only trying to get to the QB and since he was behind the LoS and the RB was in his way in a blocking position his actions were reasonable in that situation and did not appear to be done to interfere with a pass receiver who he wasn't when he started to move around him.
Common sense has to prevail and officials are allowed to use it. The on field guys have done a very good job this season. There was another questionable PI earlier but I can see how an official in a bad position could misinterpret the minimal contact. This however wasn't about contact but about the official giving a RB the ability to block without the DL being allowed to fight him off or get a penalty.
This sounds like a case in which the current rule is bad for the game:
Article 9 — Interference By Both Teams After A Forward Pass Is Thrown
Should the attempt to catch the pass take place in the offensive backfield, the following shall apply:
i) Interference by Team A is legal.
ii) Interference by Team B against an eligible Team A receiver who is attempting to catch the ball is a foul.
In my opinion, I think pass interference should not apply at all for any forward passes to the receiver catching the ball at or behind the line of scrimmage. The position of the ball, not the player, should be the determinant. The rule on roughing the passer of course should still be the same.
Such is already the case with no pass interference of course when the pass is otherwise a lateral, and of course it can be very difficult for any defensive player to tell on many such an occasion when the ball is passed to a receiver behind the line of scrimmage who is standing more than perhaps 3 yards away.
Perhaps some of you can see that the current rule does need work. Again, my view is that all such interference at or behind the line of scrimmage should be legal with of course other fouls by the defense such as for unnecessary roughness still applicable (i.e. you can't take a players' head off at any time or chop down a receiver/cut block him just like in current rules)
Horrible stupid call; and until the CFL gets some credible referees it will always be a joke. What I love is as soon as you see a big play you know there will be a flag on the other side of the field for something that has no impact at all on the play. Not a fan of the NFL but at least they let stuff away from the play go.
In the NFL that's usually the case.
I'll give you an example otherwise, and this is from before the Eagles were my favourite team.
I remember in January 2007 in a playoff game of the Eagles against the Saints when the Eagles' Jeff Garcia converted on 4th and 10 near the end of the game in order to keep their prospective winning drive alive, and THEN all of a sudden there was a late flag for an otherwise non-existent penalty away from the play for which the network did not even show the replay.
And I can find all kinds of footage of match-ups in the playoffs of the Saints and the Eagles, but no I can't find that one on YouTube or otherwise.
I'm not one to jump to the officials defense blindly as some here do, however, in past years this would have been just another in a series of ridiculous calls made during the season, but this season it is the exception. For the most part the on field guys have done a great job this year and infinitely better than last season. The issue this year is the video review official stepping in and screwing the pooch.
This call is mindbogglingly inept, but it is the exception to the rule this year for the on field guys.
Couldn't agree more. The problem hasn't been with the on-field calls - always a few missed or questionable calls, but generally good (IMO). The problem hasn't been with the number of challenges - the few that haven't been IC fishing trips have been to correct those few missed or questionable calls. The problems have been the quality of the reviews, which have often been extremely baffling over the year, and the fishing calls, which could easily have been stopped early by the Command Centre ruling on them correctly by calling the penalty on the player who initiated the contact - almost always the receiver.
I totally agree tabbyfan. I've seen great plays call back because a flag was thrown over something yards away from the actual action which would have not change one iota the result. Where's the logic? Even if the foul wouldn't have happened, there was no way the result would have been different. I suppose it's again the "by the book" credo that refrains anyone from using their brain. Another of our "progressive" times fact that makes me cringe.
The problem with this is that it's usually hard to tell while a play is going on whether the infraction has or will affect the play. Illegal contact - can the official guarantee that the QB wasn't going to throw the ball to that receiver? No yards - can the official guarantee that the returner wouldn't have run the other way had there not been a player too close to him on the other side?
But there are other times when it's pretty obvious. Perfect example was the illegal block on a punt return in the Bombers-Ticats game. The returner had already turned to his left well before the block from behind by his teammate on the other side of the field. No way that Ticat player was going to be a factor in the play, so why even throw the flag? On the other hand, a pretty dumb move by the Bomber player, knowing that the Ticat player wasn't going to be a factor in the play. So why not throw the flag?
Yes, I'm on the fence here. Yes, it's pretty stupid to penalize something that has no bearing on the play (UC/UR excepted). But it's also pretty stupid to do something illegal that has no bearing on the play. But I'm leaning towards the "Want to avoid taking penalties? Stop doing illegal things" camp.
In the case of the PI call on the d-lineman, it was a bad call due to it being uncatchable. Fortunately, the CC got it right (for once).