forums

Defensive Holding penalty (the play where D'Eriq got hurt)

canes_aaron said:
It was also Jakai Clark’s holding that took back Kings TD and then the play where he got injured would have never happened.
Click to expand...
Have not stopped thinking back to that play. He flat out hugged the guy. No one is coaching that. He's just an *******. Plain and simple.
 
Advertisement
I guess this is the part that kills us:

"During a legal forward pass play in which the pass crosses the neutral zone"

So if D'Eriq had thrown the ball, we would have had an automatic first down.

NCAA needs to change that rule ASAP. Taken to its logical extreme, every defense should just hold every WR and let the DLs get to the QB.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I guess this is the part that kills us:

"During a legal forward pass play in which the pass crosses the neutral zone"

So if D'Eriq had thrown the ball, we would have had an automatic first down.

NCAA needs to change that rule ASAP. Taken to its logical extreme, every defense should just hold every WR and let the DLs get to the QB.
Click to expand...
Which doesn’t totally make sense either. Once the ball is in the air doesn’t it become PI at that point?
 
Dlachowski said:
Which doesn’t totally make sense either. Once the ball is in the air doesn’t it become PI at that point?
Click to expand...


The WR can be held prior to the pass being thrown. Yes, it's ridiculous.

WR is held. DB stops holding. QB throws ball. Defensive holding, not PI.

WR is held, DB keeps holding, QB throws ball, PI.

Both penalties get automatic first downs. So the difference is just yardage? Seems like a ridiculous distinction.
 
Advertisement
Holding was against an "eligible receiver" and you cannot define that play as a "rushing play". Complete trash.
 
Last edited:
Pretty interesting conversation; not trying to make it like it matters - but these obvious issues not clarified in the rule book have not been thought through , amended , clarified? It’s ridiculous when ur talking about a billion dollar ‘ industry.’
 
SrfGtr said:
Pretty interesting conversation; not trying to make it like it matters - but these obvious issues not clarified in the rule book have not been thought through , amended , clarified? It’s ridiculous when ur talking about a billion dollar ‘ industry.’
Click to expand...


Agreed.

As I mentioned, I can't ever remember seeing a defensive holding called on an actual run play, so it is weird to see this kind of hair-splitting on an obvious pass play where the QB was forced to run.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Agreed.

As I mentioned, I can't ever remember seeing a defensive holding called on an actual run play, so it is weird to see this kind of hair-splitting on an obvious pass play where the QB was forced to run.
Click to expand...
And if anyone did remember one it would be on a defensive player holding a player from making a block, not on a DB holding an eligible receiver.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
Here's another question, in case we have any rules experts...

QB drops back to pass. The center runs 15 yards downfield. However, the QB cannot find an open receiver and eventually scrambles for positive yardage. Should there be a penalty for illegal man downfield, or is it negated by the "run"? It would seem strange to have a situation where you could send 10 players out on routes, and then just let the QB run and your "defense" is "hey, it can't be a penalty, I ran".

Might be an interesting "end-of-half/game" play. Defense only rushes 3. Offense sends 10 guys out on pass patterns. Defense gets confused as ****. QB easily avoids three 300 pound DLs who are dog-tired, and now starts running with 10 downfield blockers against 8 remaining defenders.

Interesting.
Click to expand...
It would have to be a designed run play, otherwise it’s ineligible man downfield. And yes, they differentiate between scrambles and designed runs. If a QB gets tackled behind the line of scrimmage on a designed keeper, it’s not a sack. Just a TFL.
 
MISTER OWL said:
And if anyone did remember one it would be on a defensive player holding a player from making a block, not on a DB holding an eligible receiver.
Click to expand...


Right. In every possible way, this seems like it should have been easy to call, right? I mean, just out of habit, you say "defensive holding, automatic first down". Someone has to actively speak out in that ref huddle to say "but guys, this one is NOT an automatic first down, 'cause the QB never threw the ball".

I'm not saying that N'Kosi would have thrown a TD pass the third time, but we deserved to have one more shot there.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Right. In every possible way, this seems like it should have been easy to call, right? I mean, just out of habit, you say "defensive holding, automatic first down". Someone has to actively speak out in that ref huddle to say "but guys, this one is NOT an automatic first down, 'cause the QB never threw the ball".

I'm not saying that N'Kosi would have thrown a TD pass the third time, but we deserved to have one more shot there.
Click to expand...
The same exact scenario (inside the 20) happened a few years ago in the PAC-12 and I believe they addressed it as the officials just need to use common sense and judge the intent of the hold - holding an eligible receiver would result in auto first down. Holding a player from making a block on a definitive run play would be a spot foul and no automatic first down.
 
Last edited:
TheOriginalCane said:
The WR can be held prior to the pass being thrown. Yes, it's ridiculous.

WR is held. DB stops holding. QB throws ball. Defensive holding, not P
WR is held, DB keeps holding, QB throws ball, PI.

Both penalties get automatic first downs. So the difference is just yardage? Seems like a ridiculous distinction.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I am missing some context.

PI would only be called on a defender covering a targeted receiver, preventing a pass completion (unless thrown to Pope or Wiggins). Defensive holding can be called on any defender covering any receiver, disrupting the receiver’s route.
 
Advertisement
TemplarCane said:
Perhaps I am missing some context.

PI would only be called on a defender covering a targeted receiver, preventing a pass completion (unless thrown to Pope or Wiggins). Defensive holding can be called on any defender covering any receiver, disrupting the receiver’s route.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you are missing the context, but you may be missing the point of what I said.

I was not trying to define the two penalties in totality. I was trying to give two specific examples of when a receiver has been impeded, and then to point out that their wasn't much of a distinction. Again, it's two narrow examples.

Strip away the wording for a moment. If a receiver is held while running the route, the penalty is yardage and a first down. If the receiver is interfered with while the ball is in the air (and the pass might be completed or go incomplete, thus PI does not require the element of "preventing a pass completion"), the penalty is yardage and a first down.

Once you eliminate the NFL implications of PI (i.e., a 50 yard incomplete pass would result in a 50 yard spot penalty), then on the collegiate level, the only meaningful difference in the impact of the two different penalties would be yardage. The point of the comparison was not some huge factual debate on why you call one penalty nd not the other, but to point out that the IMPACT of the penalty is largely the same (i.e., why award an automatic first down for defensive holding, if not to create some sort of rough parity between DH on pass plays and PI on pass plays).

HOWEVER, there is a more significant differential IF IF IF the ref calls "defensive holding", but then because of the bizarre wording of the rule, you do NOT get an automatic first down, merely because the QB was forced to run instead of pass. THAT is the bad outcome here.

I can understand why defensive holding (in the eyes of the rulemakers) is "less bad" on a running play than a passing play. I just think that the play where King got hurt was a passing play before he was forced to scramble, and if the wording of the rule led the refs to view it as a running play, I do not believe the rule is operating properly.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I don't know if you are missing the context, but you may be missing the point of what I said.

I was not trying to define the two penalties in totality. I was trying to give two specific examples of when a receiver has been impeded, and then to point out that their wasn't much of a distinction. Again, it's two narrow examples.

Strip away the wording for a moment. If a receiver is held while running the route, the penalty is yardage and a first down. If the receiver is interfered with while the ball is in the air (and the pass might be completed or go incomplete, thus PI does not require the element of "preventing a pass completion"), the penalty is yardage and a first down.

Once you eliminate the NFL implications of PI (i.e., a 50 yard incomplete pass would result in a 50 yard spot penalty), then on the collegiate level, the only meaningful difference in the impact of the two different penalties would be yardage. The point of the comparison was not some huge factual debate on why you call one penalty nd not the other, but to point out that the IMPACT of the penalty is largely the same (i.e., why award an automatic first down for defensive holding, if not to create some sort of rough parity between DH on pass plays and PI on pass plays).

HOWEVER, there is a more significant differential IF IF IF the ref calls "defensive holding", but then because of the bizarre wording of the rule, you do NOT get an automatic first down, merely because the QB was forced to run instead of pass. THAT is the bad outcome here.

I can understand why defensive holding (in the eyes of the rulemakers) is "less bad" on a running play than a passing play. I just think that the play where King got hurt was a passing play before he was forced to scramble, and if the wording of the rule led the refs to view it as a running play, I do not believe the rule is operating properly.
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

To your point, I would argue a defensive holding infraction could disrupt a receivers route and influenced a passer’s decision to run. Therefore, the play should remain defined as a passing play and the penalty include an automatic first down.
 
Last edited:
Why don’t coaches teach it? Seems to me that you could tell your corners to hold like **** on certain blitzes. Also think you could really ***** with a teams last possession by holding guys if you’re facing a good running QB like King who would automatically think scramble or an overly safe one like Jarrid who would take the sack 9 outta 10 times.

But yes it’s an awful rule and it needs to be changed ASAP. I really believe outside of clock stopping for 1st downs and 1 foot in, college rules should mirror pro rules. They should start with this one and follow with putting the ball at the spot of the foul for PI
 
Advertisement
TemplarCane said:
Fair enough.

To your point, I would argue a defensive holding infraction could disrupt a receivers route and influenced a passer’s decision to run.
Click to expand...


Yes. I think we are saying the same thing here.

Just on the reading of the NCAA rule, it looks like a mechanical/technical rule (did the QB throw the ball?) rather than an intent rule (did the QB intend to throw the ball, but for the defensive holding?).

The outcome was ridiculous. As D'Eriq scrambled, the announcer mentioned the flag (which you could not see on the screen as the camera followed King). Thus, the ref observed the penalty and threw the flag at a point when Miami intended to throw the ball.

It seems perverse to allow illegal activity (defensive holding) to force a situation (QB cannot find an open receiver, so he scrambles) that ends up bailing out and nullifying the illegal activity (yay, our defensive holding forced the QB to run, therefore there is no penalty!).
 
NC_Canes_11 said:
Why don’t coaches teach it? Seems to me that you could tell your corners to hold like **** on certain blitzes. Also think you could really ***** with a teams last possession by holding guys if you’re facing a good running QB like King who would automatically think scramble or an overly safe one like Jarrid who would take the sack 9 outta 10 times.
Click to expand...


Agreed.

Though, if you have trouble teaching kids to turn their head when defending passes...
 
Note to the True Canes, whenever the security & exchange commission send there refs to ref either US, Fsu or us, they will certainly do all they can to aid and abet us to a lost, the hate runs deep the s.e.c. agents and others have college and the pro's on semi lock with a certain style of play, most of the rule changes in college and the pro's have directly targeted the real Miami football style of play. Case in point on this play when they tried to make this man look bad like he did something wrong, as it is with boxing, the #1 rule is to "protect yourself at all times", so it is with football, this is where alot of the soft crybabies went to work after this beautiful football play:

 
Advertisement
Back
Top