I remember I heard somewhere that now receiver(s) can't throw their hands up to the refs and ask for PI (prime example is Edwards), otherwise they will be penalized (objectional conduct?).

Even though it has benefited us immensely so far, I honestly have to say this PI challenge stuff is ridiculous. Doug Brown is right, you can find what you're looking for on every single throw if you really want to.

I've long felt that the penalty for PI was too severe.  Most other penalties are 5-10 yards, with "major infractions" at 15, where in theory the risk of injury is greater.  PI, which we all know can be subjective, can be 40+ yards, which seems disproportionately high.  Compare this to holding at 10 yds, and I have trouble justifing the difference.  People claim that if wasn't for the PI, they could have scored a TD, but my answer is that without the hold, there could have been a 15 yd sack, which also would have been a loss of down, so the penalty doesn't necessarily make up for the play/foul.  

 

At the professional level, it is one of the very few "unrestricted" penalties, meaning that instead of going "half the distance" to the goal line, it goes all the way down to the one yard line for a foul in the endzone.   Again, this seem disproportionately high.

 

I'd suggest that PI be made 10 yards and an automatic first down (restricted to half the distance when close to goal line) for most of the calls, but perhaps allow the officials to call a "flagerant PI" with the current penalties for the worst occurances.  The officials already have the same discretion when it comes to "roughing" calls, there is the garden variety "unnecessary roughness" which is 15 yds (officials refer to this as "UR") but they can also call "rough play" (aka "RP") which is 25 yds and often an ejection.  ("RP" in amateur ball is an automatic ejection, and as of 2009, all roughing calls became unrestricted, meaning that the ball can go down to the 1 yd line, rather than 1/2 the distance)

 

Even though it has benefited us immensely so far, I honestly have to say this PI challenge stuff is ridiculous. Doug Brown is right, you can find what you're looking for on every single throw if you really want to.

I've long felt that the penalty for PI was too severe.  Most other penalties are 5-10 yards, with "major infractions" at 15, where in theory the risk of injury is greater.  PI, which we all know can be subjective, can be 40+ yards, which seems disproportionately high.  Compare this to holding at 10 yds, and I have trouble justifing the difference.  People claim that if wasn't for the PI, they could have scored a TD, but my answer is that without the hold, there could have been a 15 yd sack, which also would have been a loss of down, so the penalty doesn't necessarily make up for the play/foul.  

 

At the professional level, it is one of the very few "unrestricted" penalties, meaning that instead of going "half the distance" to the goal line, it goes all the way down to the one yard line for a foul in the endzone.   Again, this seem disproportionately high.

 

I'd suggest that PI be made 10 yards and an automatic first down (restricted to half the distance when close to goal line) for most of the calls, but perhaps allow the officials to call a "flagerant PI" with the current penalties for the worst occurances.  The officials already have the same discretion when it comes to "roughing" calls, there is the garden variety "unnecessary roughness" which is 15 yds (officials refer to this as "UR") but they can also call "rough play" (aka "RP") which is 25 yds and often an ejection.  ("RP" in amateur ball is an automatic ejection, and as of 2009, all roughing calls became unrestricted, meaning that the ball can go down to the 1 yd line, rather than 1/2 the distance)

 

I'd worry that dbs would simply take the penalty on every pass over 10 yards if they were getting beaten if you made that change. I think adding the judgement call opens up too much of a gray area where there's is a difference between what is flagrant and what isn't. To me the key is still to get some consistency from the refs. We don't even see that now with the review but if they can ever get that it will be a nice change. I'd also like to see holding get called more often, so many times it's let go for no reason.

Just to stay on topic: I expect a close, smash-mouth game as these two teams are very similar in the ways they won the past 3 games and their strengths and weaknesses. I would rate Reilly a tad higher than Willy, on the basis of game experience, but if we can run on the Esks, we can beat them.

If PI was only 10 yards, there would be no reason for DB's who were beat to let the receiver catch the ball after 10 yards.  Just pull him down, take the penalty and go back to the game.

 

I hate reviewing judgement calls.  Even the review process doesn't seem to work as both of the PI reviews were PI and only one was actually called PI.

 

I agree with Brown.  You can find PI if you look at most plays.  Down in the 4th?  Throw deep until you get a challengeable PI then throw the flag. 

I remember I heard somewhere that now receiver(s) can't throw their hands up to the refs and ask for PI (prime example is Edwards), otherwise they will be penalized (objectional conduct?).

 

The "throwing of the flag" motion is what I believe is not allowed and is now considered Objectionable Conduct.  

If PI was only 10 yards, there would be no reason for DB's who were beat to let the receiver catch the ball after 10 yards.  Just pull him down, take the penalty and go back to the game.

 

I hate reviewing judgement calls.  Even the review process doesn't seem to work as both of the PI reviews were PI and only one was actually called PI.

 

I agree with Brown.  You can find PI if you look at most plays.  Down in the 4th?  Throw deep until you get a challengeable PI then throw the flag. 

 

It really does open up a can of worms.  I predict Hail Mary throws will become a regular occurrence this season, flood a small area with receivers and there is bound to be a P.I. call almost every time.

Darren Cameron ‏@Darren_Cameron 19s

Ticket count for tomorrow vs Edmonton is 29,100 and climbing. Get them!

 

If PI was only 10 yards, there would be no reason for DB's who were beat to let the receiver catch the ball after 10 yards.  Just pull him down, take the penalty and go back to the game.

 

I hate reviewing judgement calls.  Even the review process doesn't seem to work as both of the PI reviews were PI and only one was actually called PI.

 

I agree with Brown.  You can find PI if you look at most plays.  Down in the 4th?  Throw deep until you get a challengeable PI then throw the flag. 

 

It really does open up a can of worms.  I predict Hail Mary throws will become a regular occurrence this season, flood a small area with receivers and there is bound to be a P.I. call almost every time.

 

 

 

how many hail mary's have we seen through week three? more than usual?

 

If PI was only 10 yards, there would be no reason for DB's who were beat to let the receiver catch the ball after 10 yards.  Just pull him down, take the penalty and go back to the game.

 

I hate reviewing judgement calls.  Even the review process doesn't seem to work as both of the PI reviews were PI and only one was actually called PI.

 

I agree with Brown.  You can find PI if you look at most plays.  Down in the 4th?  Throw deep until you get a challengeable PI then throw the flag. 

 

It really does open up a can of worms.  I predict Hail Mary throws will become a regular occurrence this season, flood a small area with receivers and there is bound to be a P.I. call almost every time.

 

 

They showed in our game last week that they aren't calling it by the book though on the replays.  Montreal's challenge would have been pass interference quite easily by any interpretation.  I think the huge problem (what else is new?) will be the consistency of what is and isn't pass interference when reviewed, and the timing.  Will the standard be higher on a hail mary with 0:00 on the clock vs a 20 yard pass halfway through the second quarter?

 

The PI reviews just leave them in such a position to impact the outcome even more than the on-field officials do.