The article was good, but there was some goofy lookin' picture in the lower right hand corner of the second page... It distracts from the rest of the article...
Here's a question for you about illegal use of the hands by the defense... Let's use your example of the QB looking at the receiver until he tucks and gets sacked... I've been taught that in this case, there would be no foul until the ball is thrown... So if the QB is sacked, there is no foul...
However, the article and your posts mention nothing about this concept... In fact, it implies the opposite... The case book makes no mention of this scenario either...
I understand the logic that says the illegal use of the hands can prevent the receiver from getting open, which would in turn (possibly) prevent the pass... In fact, it appeals to me...
The counter argument is that since there was no pass, there are no receivers... (Weak, I know...)
1) Has anyone else been instructed this way..?
2) Is this incorrect..?
Thanks...