What I Learned In School Today

From Dave Naylor`s TSN column:

There was some concern raised over the weekend about plays where defensive backs appeared to be defending receivers without ever turning to look at the ball, including on the play where Montreal's Chip Cox broke up a two-point convert attempt throw to receiver Aaron Kelly that would have tied the game for Hamilton. In the past, defenders who do not turn to look at the ball before it arrives have been flagged for faceguarding. However, CFL director of officiating Tom Higgins said the interpretation of that foul has evolved in recent years so that defenders are no longer required to turn and look at the ball before making a play on a receiver as the ball arrives.

"The rule has changed over the course of a decade," said Higgins. "Defensive backs need not be turning back to play the football to cover a receiver. Defensive backs are now taught and coached to read the eyes of the receiver and that's a good defensive play. You don't have to look at the ball. You're playing the ball by looking at the receiver and trying to time when the ball is going to come. The defensive back has only one shot to shoot his hands because if he does it too early they are going to lose speed. You can stay on the receiver with your body and your hands and read his eyes and his body without turning your head."

"Faceguarding is a deliberate attempt to put your hands in the eyesight of the receiver for an extended period of time."

I always thought the defender had to turn his head back, but I much prefer this new? interpretation.

Me too. How can a defender properly cover a receiver if he's running with his head looking backwards :slight_smile: At which point the receiver will intentionaly slow down to cause contact and draw a penalty. In my books as long as he does not touch the receiver before the ball arrives, it is clean.

I think that as long as they don’t touch the receiver before the ball gets there AND as long as they don’t obstruct the view of the ball with there hands while there back is turned, example, while receiver is jumping for the ball you shouldn’t be able to put your hands in the air over the receivers face.

I think that as long as they don't touch the receiver before the ball gets there AND as long as they don't obstruct the view of the ball with there hands while there back is turned, example, while receiver is jumping for the ball you shouldn't be able to put your hands in the air over the receivers face.

I too like the new interpretation of this rule.

especially when it favors us. :wink:

I'd say it favors everyone
Last year a huge amount of unnecessary PI calls were made and just about everyone was demanding changes, especially to what exactly constitutes "pass interference".
While I haven't seen any stats on the matter...I've watched every CFL game this year (as in the past) and am fairly certain pass interference calls are down...a lot.

I don't really think it's hurt the game
But it has harmed certain offenses that lived by stretching the ball downfield
Take away the threat of getting a call and you get more aggressive coverage
I think this goes a long way to explaining the Riders' fall from grace.

Overall I think it's been good for the flow of the game
And to a certain extent legitimizes CFL officiating
Which needed to seriously rethink it's role in determining the outcomes of games
It never should.

I agree, Especialy in the CFL where you have pre-snap motion and size of the field, if the DB is close enough at the point of reception, he should be able to defend and have as much right to the ball as the receiver. We don't tell receivers they are not allowed to make over shoulder catches if they are not looking back either.

Now i finally understand why I kept seeing no PI calls this year in spite of the defender never looking at the ball. That Was confusing. Thanx. :?