4 ms·

A good example of this is in American Football where a team can waive a flag (heh) that penalizes the other team and replays the down if they prefer the outcome

A good example of this is in American Football where a team can waive a flag (heh) that penalizes the other team and replays the down if they prefer the outcome of the play above the potential penalty. A common example, team A passes but the pass is intercepted by team B player, then a player on A does a "holding" foul on the player that did the interception. The punishment for holding usually means you redo the play, but that would give the ball back to team A, clearly team B prefers to keep possession due to interception over slightly punishing and redoing the play with the ball back in A's possession.

bena 5y ago
Point of order, that would likely be offensive pass interference. A more common scenario is the defensive team commits an offsides penalty. This is essentially a free play for the offense since they can take the penalty if anything goes wrong, but if they're able to advance the ball a significant amount, they can decline the penalty.
- infogulch 5y ago
  Thank you that is a better example.
somethingwitty1 5y ago
I understand what you are trying to get at, but the holding you described occurred after the interception (the turnover). So Team B can accept the penalty and would still have the ball. A slight change of ordering makes your point. Team A drops back to pass and holds a Team B player going towards Team A QB. The QB then throws an interception. In that scenario, Team B would decline the holding penalty, upholding the interception.
- bena 5y ago
  You can't commit holding on the ball carrier. It would have to occur before the catch, and in that case, it's offensive pass interference. Regardless, your second example, of the offense committing holding and the defense declining due to an interception is legit. That happens occasionally.
  - somethingwitty1 5y ago
    The actual infraction isn't that important (I just interpreted they meant some infraction), but what is important is that they stated the foul happened after the interception, so it could not be OPI, as that must occur after the QB throws and before the player intercepts. Edit: I think we just took what was more important for the OPs point differently. I took the point as a penalty occurred, not a specific one. And you see it as "how could holding have happened". Which, if we are being pedantic, also wouldn't happen in the scenario you described. If it was called holding, it would have had to occur before the pass, making it not OPI. =).

bena 5y ago

Point of order, that would likely be offensive pass interference. A more common scenario is the defensive team commits an offsides penalty. This is essentially a free play for the offense since they can take the penalty if anything goes wrong, but if they're able to advance the ball a significant amount, they can decline the penalty.

infogulch 5y ago
Thank you that is a better example.

somethingwitty1 5y ago

I understand what you are trying to get at, but the holding you described occurred after the interception (the turnover). So Team B can accept the penalty and would still have the ball. A slight change of ordering makes your point. Team A drops back to pass and holds a Team B player going towards Team A QB. The QB then throws an interception. In that scenario, Team B would decline the holding penalty, upholding the interception.

bena 5y ago
You can't commit holding on the ball carrier. It would have to occur before the catch, and in that case, it's offensive pass interference. Regardless, your second example, of the offense committing holding and the defense declining due to an interception is legit. That happens occasionally.
- somethingwitty1 5y ago
  The actual infraction isn't that important (I just interpreted they meant some infraction), but what is important is that they stated the foul happened after the interception, so it could not be OPI, as that must occur after the QB throws and before the player intercepts. Edit: I think we just took what was more important for the OPs point differently. I took the point as a penalty occurred, not a specific one. And you see it as "how could holding have happened". Which, if we are being pedantic, also wouldn't happen in the scenario you described. If it was called holding, it would have had to occur before the pass, making it not OPI. =).