Pass Interference on a Tipped Pass?

There was a confusing play in the recent Monday Night Football clash between the Chicago Bears and Dallas Cowboys.

With the Bears leading 24-10 in the 4th quarter and facing a 3rd down in the Dallas red zone, Offensive Coordinator Mike Tice called for a roll out to the left side of the field. Bears QB Jay Cutler didn't find an open man, so he flicked a ball toward WR Brandon Marshall in the corner of the end zone. Marshall wasn't particularly close to the ball, and it fell incomplete.

However, the side judge threw a flag, calling Cowboys CB Brandon Carr for pass interference, giving the Bears a 1st-and-goal at the 1. Furious, Cowboys Defensive Coordinator Rob Ryan and Head Coach Jason Garrett pleaded with the officials to pick up the flag, arguing that Dallas DB Danny McCray had tipped the pass. The officials reviewed the play, and upon seeing that McCray clearly tipped the ball approximately five yards before the ball reached Marshall, waived off the penalty.

But did they get it right?

For starters, it's undeniable that defensive holding could have been called on Carr, leading to a 1st down regardless of whether McCray tipped the pass. But because the officials called pass interference instead of holding, that point is moot.

Since we're dealing with pass interference, let's check the rule book. Rule 8, Section 5 governs the pass interference penalty, and in Article 1 states that "it is pass interference by either team when any act by a player more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage significantly hinders the progress of an eligible receiver's opportunity to catch the ball." Importantly, Article 1 goes on to clarify that, "Defensive pass interference rules apply from the time the ball is thrown until the ball is touched" whereas offensive pass interference applies "from the time the ball is snapped until the ball is touched."

Anyone who has ever watched a football game thinks that this all makes sense so far. Basically, a defensive player cannot interfere with an offensive player trying to catch a pass. Fine. What makes this so tricky?

It's the clause about the timing of the applicability of the defensive pass interference foul. The window for the violation opens the moment the quarterback releases the ball and closes the instant any player contacts the ball. Because of this, football spectators are used to commentators saying something along the lines of "you cannot have pass interference on a tipped ball."

According to the rule, that's not quite right.

The typical tipped ball situation is clear. The quarterback releases the ball. It is subsequently tipped by a lineman, causing the ball to lose velocity on its way to the target. Because of this change in timing, the defensive player makes contact with the receiver before the ball arrives. What would be a pass interference penalty on an untipped pass is negated by the deflection as the pass interference window closes before the contact occurs. This makes perfect sense: the NFL does not want to punish the defense for making a good play.

Unfortunately, this is not what happened on Monday night in Dallas. Carr engaged Marshall well before Cutler threw the ball. Carr never disengaged, so the interference was really a continuous act from the moment they engaged - prior to the pass - until the ball touched the ground. Unfortunately for Carr, his actions undoubtedly occurred during the window in which the ball left Cutler's hand before McCray tipped it. As such, the defensive pass interference penalty should have been upheld after review, regardless of the tip.

A counter argument to this outcome would be as follows: McCray tipped the pass, so the defense made a good play and as a result the unit should not be punished even if Carr may have committed an infraction. This argument does not hold water in my book. Had Carr not interfered with Marshall, it's possible that the Bears receiver still could have caught the pass, even after the deflection. In that circumstance, waiving off the penalty is a reward for the defensive player clearly violating the rule in a way that still determined the outcome of the play. That cannot be the NFL's goal.

It's possible that the officiating crew was a bit rusty after recently hammering out a new collective bargaining agreement. But I think it's more likely that the referee misconstrued the rule. While it hardly determined the outcome on Monday, the NFL should make sure that its referees know how this rule is to be applied or change the rules to comply with Monday's final ruling.