The NFL says this pass interference call was wrong. Here is what the rule actually says.

Written by

alison b

Three days after the flag flew, the NFL told the Los Angeles Rams it should never have been thrown.

I woke up to my X feed already arguing about it. One clip of the play, thousands of replies, and the usual split: half calling it the worst call of the season, half insisting there was nothing to see. The loudest ones had gone straight to “the fix was in”, one widely shared post framed the call as proof the league is steering games for the betting market (reaction via NFL on ESPN, X). I am a Raiders fan with no dog in a Rams game, so my first instinct was the boring one: what does the rule actually say?

That turned out to be the right question, because by Wednesday the league had answered it. Rams coach Sean McVay said the NFL had told him defensive pass interference should not have been called on cornerback Josh Wallace in Sunday night’s loss to the Denver Broncos (Sean McVay, via ESPN). That is roughly as close to an apology as the league gets. The flag had wiped out an interception, handed Denver a fresh set of downs, and the Broncos scored the winning touchdown a few plays later.

So here is the thing almost nobody in those replies had done: open the actual rulebook and read what pass interference is. Because the whole argument, the TV analysts, the angry feed, the league’s own admission, turns on two words.

What happened, in one line

The Rams were leading 26-23 and the Broncos were driving. On third-and-6, with the game inside the final minute and change, Broncos quarterback Bo Nix threw toward receiver Pat Bryant down the sideline, Rams cornerback Josh Wallace came down with the ball, and the officials flagged Wallace for pass interference instead of signalling an interception (ESPN; drive detail at NFL.com game center).

The penalty gave Denver a first-and-goal at the 7. Nix ran it in from the 1 to make it 30-26 with 47 seconds on the clock, and a last Rams pass from Matthew Stafford was intercepted in the opposite end zone as time expired (Front Office Sports). The Rams fell to 1-2.

A flag turned a game-sealing interception into a Denver first down, and the league later said the flag was wrong.

The part that stings: the Rams had already won

This is the bit worth slowing down on if you are new to the sport, because it is the whole reason the call matters so much. An interception means the defence catches a pass meant for the other team, which hands them the ball. Wallace catching that pass does not just stop Denver’s drive, it ends Denver’s chance to score, because possession flips to the Rams.

And the Rams, leading by three, would not have needed to do anything with it. Denver had no timeouts left, so Los Angeles could have run the “kneel down”, where the quarterback takes the snap and immediately drops to one knee to end the play and burn clock. Two of those and the clock hits zero. Game over, Rams win.

That is not my spin on it. Sports Illustrated’s Rams site put it flatly: “Had Wallace not been called for pass interference, the game would have been over”, noting the Rams could have taken two knees to drain the clock with Denver out of timeouts. Athlon Sports was a touch more cautious, saying the pick would have “likely sealed Los Angeles’ second win of the season”. Either way, the flag did not just extend a drive. It took a win off the board.

The claim everyone was making

Scroll the replies under any clip of the play and you get the same two camps, stated as certainty. “That was clearly PI.” “There was no interference.” Both sides are sure. Almost nobody is quoting the rule.

Pass interference is not a vibe, though. It is a defined act with a written test, and the test is more specific than the shouting suggests.

What the rulebook actually says

Here is the definition, straight from the 2026 NFL rulebook, Rule 8, Section 5, Article 1:

“It is pass interference by either team when any act by a player more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage significantly hinders an eligible player’s opportunity to catch the ball.”

Read that again and notice what it does not say. It does not say “any contact”. It does not say “whoever touches first”. The load-bearing word is significantly, and the thing that has to be hindered is the opportunity to catch the ball. Incidental contact, hand-fighting, two players bumping as they track a pass, none of that clears the bar on its own. The contact has to meaningfully take away the other player’s shot at the catch.

The rule is also even-handed by design. The same article notes that once the ball is in the air, “eligible offensive and defensive receivers have the same right to the path of the ball and are subject to the same restrictions” (2026 NFL rulebook, Rule 8-5). A defender is allowed to play the ball. A receiver does not get special protection just for being the receiver.

So interference is not “contact”. It is contact that significantly hinders the catch, and both players have an equal right to the ball.

The part of the rule that decides this play

The rulebook then does something genuinely useful: it lists what is allowed, not just what is banned. Rule 8, Section 5, Article 3, “Permissible Acts by Both Teams While the Ball Is in the Air”, includes these:

“Incidental contact by an opponent’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball… If there is any question whether contact is incidental, the ruling shall be no interference.”

“Laying a hand on an opponent that does not restrict him in an attempt to make a play on the ball.”

That is the exact language the Wallace play lives or dies on. Did he restrict Bryant, or did he lay hands on him while making a play on the ball? The rule says if it is a genuine question, the call is supposed to be no interference.

And there is a separate clause that points the other way entirely. Article 2 lists interference by the offence too, including when a receiver is “initiating contact with an opponent by shoving or pushing off” or grabbing an opponent’s arm to restrict him. Which is what makes the next part so awkward for the officials.

The rule has a tie-breaker built in: if the contact is a genuine question, it is no interference.

Where the gap is

The people whose job is to read this rule on television did not think it was close.

On the NBC broadcast, rules analyst Terry McAulay, a former NFL referee, watched the replay and said: “As we get toward the end, we actually see the receiver grab the defender and pulling [at] him” (via Front Office Sports). On Wallace he was blunt: “I don’t see the defender do anything that significantly hinders the receiver on this play.” He added that Wallace had his “hands on him” but “doesn’t do anything with them”.

Put the quote next to the rule and they line up word for word. McAulay is not freelancing an opinion. He is applying the written test, “significantly hinders”, and the permissible-acts list, “laying a hand on an opponent that does not restrict him”, and concluding it was a no-call. If anything, with Bryant reaching back to grab Wallace, the flag that fits the footage is offensive pass interference, the opposite team.

Three days later the league reached the same place. McVay said the Rams submitted the play to the NFL for clarity, and the league “agreed” the penalty should not have been called (ESPN). The NFL itself declined to comment publicly (Front Office Sports).

So the gap is not between two readings of the rule. It is between the rule and the flag.

Why nothing changes, and why that is the actual rule

Here is the part that frustrates people most, and it is also just the rule working as written. The result stands. The Broncos keep the win, the Rams keep the loss, and nobody replays the down.

That is because defensive pass interference is a judgement call, and judgement calls are not reviewable by instant replay. The NFL tried the other way. After an infamous no-call on Rams cornerback Nickell Robey-Coleman in the January 2019 NFC Championship game (the 2018 season), which sent the Rams past the Saints to the Super Bowl, the league made pass interference calls and non-calls reviewable for the 2019 season (ESPN). It went badly. Coaches, players and fans found it confusing and uneven, and when 21 of the 29 teams that answered the competition committee’s survey said they did not want it kept, the rule was dropped for 2020 and has not come back (Front Office Sports).

If you want the full picture of what referees can and cannot review, that is its own topic, and we cover it in the guide to NFL replay and challenges. The short of it: a call like this one lives outside the replay system entirely, so an admission three days later changes nothing on the field.

The twist nobody could script

The referee on Sunday night was Bill Vinovich. He was also the referee for that January 2019 NFC Championship game, the Robey-Coleman no-call that triggered the whole replay experiment (Front Office Sports). And the Broncos coach who benefited on Sunday, Sean Payton, was the Saints coach who was robbed in 2019. McVay, the coach robbed on Sunday, was the one who benefited in 2019.

Same referee. Same two coaches. The pass interference call that went one way then went the other way now. You could not plan the symmetry if you tried.

Betting note: a settled market, an unsettled result

Because this is where a lot of the online anger pointed, it is worth being clear about how a late call like this moves money, and about what the evidence does and does not show.

A game-swinging penalty in the final minute lands on a betting market that has already moved. When Wallace’s interception came down, a live bet on the Rams would have been priced as a near-certain win; the flag flipped that in one play, and the Broncos’ cover and the game total shifted with it. Sportsbooks pay out on the official result, so a call the league later admits was wrong does not reopen a single settled bet Bookies.com. The money moved on the flag and it stays moved.

That reality feeds a louder claim, that games are being steered for gambling reasons. Here it is worth stating plainly what is actually established. There is no evidence that this call, or the NFL’s games generally, are fixed; the league attributes blown calls to human error, and officials are monitored for exactly this risk, with their finances and associations checked and betting lines watched for patterns (Boyd’s Bets). A single bad judgement call, admitted as a mistake, is what the record supports. The leap from “wrong” to “rigged” is not.

What it means for the Rams now

A loss is a loss in the standings, however it arrived. The Rams dropped to 1-2 and sit third in the NFC West, two games behind the 3-0 San Francisco 49ers, with the Seattle Seahawks (2-1) in between and the Arizona Cardinals (1-2) just below them (Yahoo Sports). The NFL does not replay the game or wipe the result, so the admission that the call was wrong changes the mood, not the table.

Here is the reassuring part for a new fan, though. The NFL season runs 17 games, so three weeks in, one game back is a dent, not a disaster. A division (the four-team group the Rams compete in for an automatic playoff place) is usually decided over months, and the Rams do not even play a division rival again until Christmas night against Seattle (Yahoo Sports). If you want the full picture of how a team actually reaches the playoffs from here, that is explained in our guide to how the NFL playoffs and seeding work.

What to take away

Next time you see a pass interference flag and the replies split into two certain camps, you now have the one thing most of them don’t: the test. Not “was there contact”, but “did it significantly hinder the catch”, and if that is a genuine question, the rule itself says no interference.

That is the standard the officials are supposed to meet, the standard McAulay applied on air, and the standard the league quietly admitted its own referee missed. The rule was clear. The call was the problem.

If you want to go deeper on how flags are classified and enforced in the first place, start with our explainer on how NFL penalties work, and the wider NFL rules hub that it sits in.

Liked it, or think I've got it wrong? Share it.

Share on Reddit

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts