View Single Post
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 15, 2015, 11:45am
Robert Goodman Robert Goodman is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjohn View Post
Then we need an editorial change in the CASE BOOK and the Rule 9-2-3d already says "Contact an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker." It does not say contact with only hands, it says CONTACT!!!

. . A defensive player shall not:
a. Use a technique that is not permissible by rule. (See 2-3-2, 4)
b. Use his hands to add momentum to the charge of a teammate who is on
the line of scrimmage.
c. Use his hands or arms to hook, lock, clamp, grasp, encircle or hold in an
effort to restrain an opponent other than the runner.
d. Contact an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker.

However, if the receiver is not attempting to
block
or has gone past or is moving away, it is illegal for the defender to use
hands or body in the manner described. In this situation, it is clear that A1 is no longer a
potential blocker on B1. (2-3-5a; 7-5-7)
Either a change in the Case Book, or the rule book needs to move that provision from 9-2-3 (ILLEGAL USE OF HANDS AND HOLDING) to 9-3-3 (ILLEGAL BLOCKING).

It may be a long time yet, however, until this contradiction is resolved, because an action that would produce a violation under that understanding by the Case Book would practically always be a violation anyway because it would be illegal use of hands on an opponent's back, or DPI. How often do you think you'd see a potential receiver who's gone past a defender then get a body block in the back from that defender? The defender is unlikely to catch up to the receiver until the ball is thrown, or unless the defender pushes or pulls him. The receiver might turn around & come back on a hook pattern, but then he's no longer in that situation described by the Case Book.

Last edited by Robert Goodman; Fri May 15, 2015 at 11:51am.
Reply With Quote