The “Holding” Penalty

[Sasquatch]

Is there a more inequitable penalty in the game today than the stupid “offensive holding penalty”?  A holding penalty for most offenses is almost always a drive killer and usually results in a change of possession within a play or three.  Ten yards is a steep price to pay for something that is so damn arbitrarily called.  Phantom hold?  Too bad - we’re marching your a$$ back ten yards!  Blatant holds often don’t get called, whereas ticky-tack questionable ones do, because refs are blind and can’t seem to make the call equitably or fairly throughout the game.

Some might say, “tough, that’s just part of the game and it’s always been this way!”  Well, that’s a stupid reason to keep enforcing this lame penalty.  I don’t disagree that it should be called, I just think ten yards is just too damn much.  How about they just make it a loss of down only, that way regardless if you made any positive yardage as a result of the alleged “hold”, you only lose the down but go back to the original line of scrimmage?  Or, make it just a five yard penalty?  Ten yards for something that the refs screw up all too often is taking away from the game and should be changed immediately.  Get on the horn and call your Senators folks - this sh!t has to stop.

End rant.

[Chiefer]

You wanna take away the one thing left that defenses have going for them?

[Sasquatch]

16 minutes ago, Chiefer said:

You wanna take away the one thing left that defenses have going for them?

No.  I just want it less punitive so the penalty matches the crime - like a false start.  If a holding penalty allows a hole that someone can scamper 20 yards - call it - bring the ball back and either make them lose a down or walk em back five yards. It’s painful enough that you lose the 20 yards from the play.

If your crappy asz defensive strategy is to hope you’ll get some offensive holding penalties, then you have bigger problems.

[footbull3196]

39 minutes ago, Chiefer said:

You wanna take away the one thing left that defenses have going for them?

Seriously, I’d be ok with them bringing back full bump and run coverage at this point 

[Xmad]

Holding penalties are like the one negative offensive penalty left aside from OPI which is rarely called anymore, leave it.

[Sasquatch]

1 minute ago, SwoleXmad said:

Holding penalties are like the one negative offensive penalty left aside from OPI which is rarely called anymore, leave it.

Huh?  There’s false start, illegal motion, illegal shift, hands to the face, etc etc.  All I’m arguing for is it to be more in alignment - yardage wise - as these other offensive penalties, especially considering how arbitrarily it’s called by the refs.

[Malfatron]

i will say this

people say that holding happens on every play.

THEN CHANGE THE DAMN RULE

[pnies20]

How about penalties are objectively called instead of makeup calls, homefield advantage etc.

[Thomas5737]

How about some sort of compromise. Make offensive holding a 5 yard penalty and defensive holding no longer is an automatic first down.

[Xmad]

2 hours ago, Sasquatch said:

Huh?  There’s false start, illegal motion, illegal shift, hands to the face, etc etc.  All I’m arguing for is it to be more in alignment - yardage wise - as these other offensive penalties, especially considering how arbitrarily it’s called by the refs.

Sarcasm mate. Holding is never going to be a penalty that's called correctly given it technically happens on every play.

[Sasquatch]

32 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

How about some sort of compromise. Make offensive holding a 5 yard penalty and defensive holding no longer is an automatic first down.

I thought about this also.  Automatic five yard penalty on defensive holding, and the offense can decline the penalty if it results in a catch past five yards of gain.  The major problem I see with this, is it would cause defenders to automatically hold a receiver who’s flying by them, which if not held, could result in a huge gain.  In this case the offense gets screwed and the defense avoids a potential TD and only has to pay five yards.  Defenders would be trained to hold, because it’s better to give up the five yard penalty than to give up a TD.  Probably not a good rule change.

Why I’m bent on the offensive holding calls being 10 yards, is you not only have to give up the distance gained on the play, you also get moved back ten yards, which in many cases, leads to quick three and outs and a change of possession - many times because of ticky-tack calls by the refs.

[Sasquatch]

1 minute ago, SwoleXmad said:

Sarcasm mate. Holding is never going to be a penalty that's called correctly given it technically happens on every play.

Which is even more reason to make it less punitive.  

[Sasquatch]

Here’s what I’d like to hear officials say on a holding call:  “Holding, offense, #72, ball will be spotted at the previous line of scrimmage and will result in loss of the down!”

A fair compromise in my opinion.  Any yardage gained is wiped away and instead of moving the ball back 10 yards further, the loss of down is the added penalty to the lost yardage gained.  If the average play on offense was anywhere to close to ten yards, I could maybe see justification for a ten yard penalty, because you can get that yardage back on the next play.  But that’s not the case - the average yardage per play is probably south of five yards per play, meaning it’ll take possibly two plays just to recover from the penalty - damn near ensuring death of that drive.

[Thomas5737]

9 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

I thought about this also.  Automatic five yard penalty on defensive holding, and the offense can decline the penalty if it results in a catch past five yards of gain.  The major problem I see with this, is it would cause defenders to automatically hold a receiver who’s flying by them, which if not held, could result in a huge gain.  In this case the offense gets screwed and the defense avoids a potential TD and only has to pay five yards.  Defenders would be trained to hold, because it’s better to give up the five yard penalty than to give up a TD.  Probably not a good rule change.

Why I’m bent on the offensive holding calls being 10 yards, is you not only have to give up the distance gained on the play, you also get moved back ten yards, which in many cases, leads to quick three and outs and a change of possession - many times because of ticky-tack calls by the refs.

Players are going to hold now if the likely result is going to be a TD. Still just a 5 yard penalty either way. I just don't like seeing a team get an automatic 1st down because of a holding penalty when it was 3rd and 13. If a CB just keeps contact going for 7 yards instead of 5 doesn't really seem like the offense should get credit with a 1st down.

[Thomas5737]

Just now, Sasquatch said:

Here’s what I’d like to hear officials say on a holding call:  “Holding, offense, #72, ball will be spotted at the previous line of scrimmage and will result in loss of the down!”

A fair compromise in my opinion.  Any yardage gained is wiped away and instead of moving the ball back 10 yards further, the loss of down is the added penalty to the lost yardage gained.  If the average play on offense was anywhere to close to ten yards, I could maybe see justification for a ten yard penalty, because you can get that yardage back on the next play.  But that’s not the case - the average yardage per play is probably south of five yards per play, meaning it’ll take possibly two plays just to recover from the penalty - damn near ensuring death of that drive.

So on 4th and goal down 5 points late in the 4th quarter your RB runs in for a TD and there was holding called and now it's a turnover on downs. I wouldn't like that, I wouldn't like that at all.