View Single Post
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 03, 2005, 02:35pm
Bob M. Bob M. is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Clinton Township, NJ
Posts: 2,065
REPLY: Ed…It seems like we agree on a pretty good number of things here. In fact, I believe that any disagreement we might have is based upon how each of us interprets what ‘no longer a potential blocker’ means. For this discussion, I’m talking only about contact initiated by the defense and (b) the contact is prior to the pass being in flight. Let’s review:

Quote:
Originally posted by Ed Hickland
Downfield contact by the offense is prohibited if a forward pass is thrown beyond the line of scrimmage (NF Table 7-5 2.b, 7-5-8a). Remember, the offense knows or should know if a pass is imminent. An offensive receiver can block if a pass is thrown that does not cross the LOS or the play is a run. A defender does not know whether a pass is imminent
Agree with everything you say here. That’s basic PI stuff. We were talking about defensive contact before the pass is in flight. So PI is immaterial for the purposes of this discussion

Quote:
Originally posted by Ed Hickland
A defender cannot perform pass interference until the ball is in the air (NF 7-5-8b); however, that does not allow a defender to block an opponent. Illegal use of the hands or holding is prohibited on an eligible receiver, in fact, the exact wording is to "...hook, clamp, grasp, encircle or hold in an effort to restrain an opponent other than the runner" (NF 9-2-3c). The word "bump" is not used nor should it be.
I agree here as well. However, a block by the defender in the front, within the frame of the body, above the waist is neither illegal use of the hands nor holding. The only way a ‘block’ by the defense can be interpreted as illegal use of the hands is if it is contact against an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker. I think that our only point of disagreement is in how conservative or liberal we choose to be in determining when an eligible receiver is no longer a potential blocker. Personally, I will consider an eligible a potential blocker until he is on the same yardline or past the defender or has clearly turned to move away from the defender. In such cases, contact by the defender can almost never be according to the techniques described in NF 2-3-2 and therefore will probably deserve a flag.

Quote:
Originally posted by Ed Hickland
I will agree with an earlier statement that calling holding on a receiver away from the ball while it is in the air should not be done because it violates the principle of advantage...no advantage will be gained.
…Agreed. However, if the hold occurred before the pass is in flight the hold might have caused the QB to turn to an alternate receiver. It very well could have affected the play even though the ball is eventually thrown to the other side of the field. You gotta see it…

Quote:
Originally posted by Ed Hickland
It is impossible to illustrate the difference between holding and bumping in this forum. But let me attempt to describe where this might apply. A potential receiver and a defender running stride for stride jostling for position. Their bodies constantly making momentary contact until the defender uses his elbow by pushing it away from his body such that it disrupts the movement of his opponent. Is it a bump? Yes, it is. Is it illegal?
I don’t think so, but that’s me. As long as they’re running stride for stride, I’m going to give the defender some leeway. From my experiences in HS and some college ball, calling this too conservatively will result in a flag-fest that neither team wants.

Quote:
Originally posted by Ed Hickland
According to NF 9-2-3d this would be contact on an eligible receiver who is no longer a blocker. The preliminary contact is incidental. The rules makers and interpreters recognize there will be contact. It is only the contact that gains an advantage that should be penalized.

As for Case Book 9.2.3a it requires a careful read as it only offers limited proof of 2-3-5a and 7-5-7 and through a back door substantiates that a defender cannot block downfield.
7-5-7 shouldn’t be an issue, since we’re not talking about any contact that might be considered PI.

Quote:
Originally posted by Ed Hickland
Lastly, here is a real play where I did call holding. Team A is down by 5 points with less than 30 seconds remaining on the clock. A1 comes to my side and makes a cut inside. B1 grabs his jersey to keep him from getting away. Meanwhile, further downfield A2 makes a leaping catch that sets up the eventual winning TD. I flagged B1 for holding.

I had no idea whether A1 was the primary or secondary receiver. The restraint by B1 kept A1 from running his pattern and no doubt the QB looking downfield seeing that action had to go to another receiver. B1's hold gained an advantage. Of course, the penalty was declined since B2 made the catch.
Bravo…I would have called it too for exactly the same reasons you mentioned. And I’m sure you meant that A2 made the catch.

Quote:
Originally posted by Ed Hickland
My point here is a downfield hold can determine what action a QB takes when looking for receivers. To not penalize a downfield hold by a defender gives an advantage to the defense.
Ed…did you read the article I wrote for last Fall’s edition of the NF Officials’ Quarterly? It deals with exactly this subject matter.
__________________
Bob M.
Reply With Quote