Viktor
Well-known member
- Mar 19, 2019
- 2,552
- 0
Zimmer remains ‘baffled’ by Week 2 pass interference call
The rule change surrounding review of pass interference calls has been an interesting one, to say the least.
Rarely has a pass interference call (or non-call) by NFL officials been overturned. But one of the very few instances of an overturn occurred after a replay review in Week 2, and Vikings Head Coach Mike Zimmer is still stumped at the instance that took a touchdown off the board for Minnesota.
Chris Tomasson of the Pioneer Press wrote about the play:
In Week 2 on Sept. 15, the Vikings thought Kirk Cousins had thrown a 3-yard touchdown pass to Stefon Diggs with 1:08 left in the first half to potentially cut a 21-7 deficit to 21-14. However, a replay review, which is done after every scoring play, resulted in a controversial pass interference penalty on running back Dalvin Cook. The Vikings had to settle for a Dan Bailey field goal to make it 21-10.
The Vikings (9-4) eventually lost 21-16. That defeat could end up keeping them from winning the NFC North over the Packers (10-3).
Zimmer spoke with Twin Cities beat reporters via conference call on Thursday and was asked about the rule.
“The pass interference in Green Bay that we got called on that kept us from scoring a touchdown … that one, of the ones that I’ve seen, that one has me baffled,” Zimmer said.
The rule change was implemented on a one-year trial basis after an obvious pass interference penalty late in regulation was not called on the Los Angeles Rams in the NFC Championship Game last January at New Orleans. The Saints lost 26-23 in overtime, and the non-call likely cost them the game.
Pass interference challenges are allowed by coaches, and they also can be reviewed by the booth in the final two minutes of each half and after scoring plays. Initially, few coaches won challenges, but more have been won recently.
“It’s really hard to tell,” Zimmer said. “There’s a bunch of them they didn’t overturn, then they’re starting to overturn some. It’s very ambiguous to the players and the coaches. It was voted in for one year, so hopefully they either fix it or get rid of it because it is not the way it was intended to be from my understanding from being in the meetings.”