The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack (5) Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  5 links from elsewhere to this Post. Click to view. #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 29, 2009, 11:00am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 622
9.2.3 Sit A: ...A defender may legally contact an eligible receiver beyond the neutral zone before the pass is in flight. The contact may be a block or warding off the opponent who is attempting to block by pushing or pulling him. 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 in the manner described.....
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 29, 2009, 05:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdf5 View Post
...has gone past or is moving away, it is illegal for the defender to use hands
We have always used this as our guideline.
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 29, 2009, 05:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonofanump View Post
Originally Posted by kdf5
...has gone past or is moving away, it is illegal for the defender to use hands

We have always used this as our guideline.
Would it be illegal use of hands if A does a button hook in front of B and B contacts him before the ball is thrown?
__________________
Ed Hickland, MBA, CCP
[email protected]
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 29, 2009, 05:38pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 622
Ed: You're saying the receiver runs towards the defender then buttonhooks back towards the line of scrimmage? I guess I can't see a way it would be IUH since the defender's either going to have to hit him in the back or hit him from the side in which case he's not moving away.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 29, 2009, 05:47pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 1,936
Send a message via Yahoo to waltjp
AJ, there's really no sense arguing with you. With your philosophy you wouldn't last very long on my crew.

End of discussion.
__________________
I got a fever! And the only prescription.. is more cowbell!
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 29, 2009, 09:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdf5 View Post
Ed: You're saying the receiver runs towards the defender then buttonhooks back towards the line of scrimmage? I guess I can't see a way it would be IUH since the defender's either going to have to hit him in the back or hit him from the side in which case he's not moving away.
Have to admit he is no longer a potential blocker as he is turned toward the LOS.

B might commit a BIB but if B executes a side block would you call it an IUH?

If you read the rule as written A is no longer a potential blocker and he is moving away.
__________________
Ed Hickland, MBA, CCP
[email protected]
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 29, 2009, 09:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Hickland View Post
Have to admit he is no longer a potential blocker as he is turned toward the LOS.

B might commit a BIB but if B executes a side block would you call it an IUH?

If you read the rule as written A is no longer a potential blocker and he is moving away.
My original vision of your play had B running up from behind a stationary A. I think your twist is you have contact initiated by B as A is still moving toward the LOS and B's catching up to him but I still say either B's going to BIB/IUH or he's going to catch up and be on the same yard line as A in which case you'd have to be there. Nice twist.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 30, 2009, 08:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,915
Funny, but I still read illegal use of hands as just that -- allowing the defense to block in any direction as long as they don't use their hands to do so -- and that they can use their hands only to ward off a blocker. I think we already had that discussion; we just parse that passage differently.

Robert in the Bronx
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 29, 2012, 07:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,153
Bringing this back up. Why would the guideline be even or moving away? As long as the receiver is not trying to block the defender he is not a potential blocker according to this official NFHS situation interpretation, no?




9.2.3 Sit A: ...A defender may legally contact an eligible receiver beyond the neutral zone before the pass is in flight. The contact may be a block or warding off the opponent who is attempting to block by pushing or pulling him. 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 in the manner described.....
__________________
When my time on earth is gone, and my activities here are passed, I want they bury me upside down, and my critics can kiss my azz!
Bobby Knight

Last edited by bigjohn; Tue May 29, 2012 at 08:31pm.
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 29, 2012, 09:27pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,557
Not only is this an old thread, but I am kind of confused. Did the rule change?

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 30, 2012, 06:28am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,153
Jeff, it came up on the coaches' site and I did a search and found this thread. I still think the NFHS says you can't play bump unless the offense is trying to collision you first. Keeping an eligible receiver from getting off is the way many defensive coordinators teach their coverage and it is illegal in NFHS rules. It is IUH and is seldom called that way.
__________________
When my time on earth is gone, and my activities here are passed, I want they bury me upside down, and my critics can kiss my azz!
Bobby Knight
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 30, 2012, 09:42am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjohn View Post
Jeff, it came up on the coaches' site and I did a search and found this thread. I still think the NFHS says you can't play bump unless the offense is trying to collision you first. Keeping an eligible receiver from getting off is the way many defensive coordinators teach their coverage and it is illegal in NFHS rules. It is IUH and is seldom called that way.
Says who? Just because you say it is illegal, does not make it so. I have never been given an interpretation that playing bump coverage is illegal by anyone. Not from the NF and not from my state. If a defender is face up with receiver off the line, then they are a potential blocker. And if that coverage is played most of a game, at the HS level for sure there are going to be a lot of running plays even in a spread offense. The reality is that I do not see this coverage very often because it is very risky. If the receiver gets around them, they probably are going to run free. But to say it is never called is also silly. My crew called this when it happens often and we warned when it was borderline and we worked more than one state final together.

What you want is us to get in the minds of everyone and make calls based on that premise. It is also illegal for the offense to push off or to use contact to get free as well when they know their route or where they are going. Why would you not suggest that OPI is taking place during these situations too?

This comes back to why we really have to be careful to listen to coaches about what rules to apply. Coaches think everything they see is illegal when they do not understand why a rule was created and probably has no idea of all the interpretations that have been given over the years as well. Because if there is contact between a defender and a receiver, you have to determine who caused it and if there was any advantage of any kind or affected the play. If you call simple contact, you will be ripped for not using common sense or being too technical.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 30, 2012, 10:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,153
can't be opi until the ball is in the air can it?

Don't you have a case book JR?


NFHS Case Book
BLOCKING – USE OF HANDS
9.2.3 SITUATION A: End A1 sprints from the line and then cuts sharply toward
the middle of the field. A1 makes no attempt to block defensive back B1. B1 pursues
A1 and pushes him from the side using his open hands. Contact is made on
A1’s upper arm before the pass is thrown. A1 was moving away from B1 when
the contact occurred. RULING: Illegal use of hands by B1. A defender may legally
contact an eligible receiver beyond the neutral zone before the pass is in flight.
The contact may be a block or warding off the opponent who is attempting to
block by pushing or pulling him. 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 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)

Read more: http://www.coachhuey.com/index.cgi?b...#ixzz1wMoGnFv7
__________________
When my time on earth is gone, and my activities here are passed, I want they bury me upside down, and my critics can kiss my azz!
Bobby Knight

Last edited by bigjohn; Wed May 30, 2012 at 10:24am.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: https://forum.officiating.com/football/51281-no-longer-potential-blocker.html
Posted By For Type Date
CoachHuey.com - Coaches' Ignorance This thread Refback Mon Jan 14, 2013 10:20pm
• View topic - Rules question This thread Refback Fri Sep 14, 2012 10:14am
• View topic - Rules question This thread Refback Sat Sep 08, 2012 01:02pm
CoachHuey.com - Better Know This Rule... This thread Refback Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:50am
CoachHuey.com - Better Know This Rule... This thread Refback Tue May 29, 2012 01:43pm

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Until what point can you no longer call...? referee99 Basketball 4 Tue Jan 06, 2009 08:50pm
When is a swing no longer a strike? DaveASA/FED Softball 5 Thu May 01, 2008 05:37pm
Longer Referee Shorts? imaref Soccer 4 Fri Aug 18, 2006 06:27pm
Hat Blocker BuggBob Softball 21 Thu May 26, 2005 05:54am
Back Row Blocker Spaman_29 Volleyball 6 Sun Oct 13, 2002 03:27am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:15am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1