Why wasn't faceguarding called? (1 Viewer)

[Bill Young]

If you watched the game, you'd know what I was talking about.

On this play...

1-15-PIT 24 (1:59) (Shotgun) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass deep right intended for 85-N.Washington INTERCEPTED by 22-A.Samuel at PHI 23. 22-A.Samuel to PHI 23 for no gain (85-N.Washington).

...why wasn't Brian Dawkins called for faceguarding on Nate Washington? He was running at the wide receiver, made no attempt to turn around and look for the ball, and had his arms up in the air. Isn't this the classic case of faceguarding?

I'm just curious.

 

[Bill Young]

Here is the video of the game highlights. The play in question is shown from 1:03 to 1:13 in the video.

Steelers vs. Eagles highlights

 

[brady2moss]

I thought there was no such thing as facegaurding in the nfl?

 

[dirtywaters20]

Maybe the refs felt badly about the "interception" they credited to Polomanu.

Seriously, I think faceguarding is legal as long as contact isn't initiated. I believe the play you are referring to was Samuel in the endzone. Can't view the link here.

 

[sho nuff]

Because there is no such thing...because it was not interference either as he did not make contact. When the WRs arm went up...so did Samuel's and he knocked the ball away. Good defense there.

 

[Road Warriors]

Discussed several times over the years, (here is one example), but the basics are this.

There is no penalty in the NFL rule book for faceguarding. It was removed quite a while back, although I don't recall the particulars. The rule now only covers PI, and must involve contact with the receiver while the ball is in the air.

 

[Steeler]

I can't look at the video right now, but during the game face guarding never crossed my mind on the play. However, I immediately wondered why Ben threw into double coverage to Samuel's side of the field. I know, I know, give your guy a change to make a play... but Samuel >>>>>>>> Nate in those situations.

 

[Bill Young]

Maybe the refs felt badly about the "interception" they credited to Polomanu.Seriously, I think faceguarding is legal as long as contact isn't initiated. I believe the play you are referring to was Samuel in the endzone. Can't view the link here.

dirtywaters20olamalu's interception occurred after this. So I don't believe one had to do with the other.I'll check the NFL Rule Book on pass interference before answering the other. The link is to the NFL.com website. I guess maybe you're employer is blocking that site.

 

[fred_1_15301]

Maybe the refs felt badly about the "interception" they credited to Polomanu.

Seriously, I think faceguarding is legal as long as contact isn't initiated. I believe the play you are referring to was Samuel in the endzone. Can't view the link here.

It was an interception......

 

[Bill Young]

OK. From what I've been able to find, it looks like faceguarding is legal, as long as the player does not touch the opposing player. So be it.

I'll be interested to see if any play similar to this is called the rest of the NFL season.

 

[Chunky Soup]

Maybe the refs felt badly about the "interception" they credited to Polomanu.

Seriously, I think faceguarding is legal as long as contact isn't initiated. I believe the play you are referring to was Samuel in the endzone. Can't view the link here.

It was an interception......

The ball can bounce first?

 

[Bill Young]

[The ball can bounce first?

The play was called on the field as an interception.The replay did not overturn the call on the field.It is my belief that had the call on the field been incomplete, the replay would not overturn that call either.

 

[fred_1_15301]

Maybe the refs felt badly about the "interception" they credited to Polomanu.

Seriously, I think faceguarding is legal as long as contact isn't initiated. I believe the play you are referring to was Samuel in the endzone. Can't view the link here.

It was an interception......

The ball can bounce first?

I didn't see it bounce until after he had established possession. Looked like a great play to me.

 

[ceisenhower66]

I didn't see it bounce until after he had established possession. Looked like a great play to me.

Don't listen to them. There was no doubt about it...that was clearly an interception. One of the best I have seen in a while.

 

[Pygmy Marmoset]

I'm guessing for the same reason that excessive pine tar wasn't called.

 

[Flash]

I thought there was no such thing as facegaurding in the nfl?

There's not.

 

[renesauz]

I didn't see it bounce until after he had established possession. Looked like a great play to me.

Don't listen to them. There was no doubt about it...that was clearly an interception. One of the best I have seen in a while.

I thought it was a pick too, except I was screaming for PI....which is what made the ball pop up in the air like that to start with!

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

I can't look at the video right now, but during the game face guarding never crossed my mind on the play. However, I immediately wondered why Ben threw into double coverage to Samuel's side of the field. I know, I know, give your guy a change to make a play... but Samuel >>>>>>>> Nate in those situations.

I don't mind if Ben throws it a couple of time but I would prefer those passes go to Holmes. I also thought it was good defense.