No Longer a Potential Blocker

[Sonofanump]

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.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by Sonofanump

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?

[kdf5]

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.

[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.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by kdf5

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.

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

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.

[Robert Goodman]

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

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

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.
Robert in the Bronx

Under the NF code, NF:2.3.1-3 (legal blocking techniques) apply equally to both offensive and defensive players. 2.3.4 expands what an offensive player may "ALSO" do, while 2.3.5 covers those actions a defensive player may "ALSO" engage in.

NF: 2.3.5.a, advises, "A defensive player may ALSO; (a) Use unlocked hands, hand or arm to ward of an opponent who is blocking him or attempting to block him.". Those actions are in addition to his authority to use either blocking technique defined in 2.3.2.a or b.

A generally acceptable assessment of "attempting to block" includes movement of an opponent towards a defensive player in advance of a runner, that ends when that opponent occupies the same yard line (without threatening the defensive player) or advances past, or away from him.

In the example of a "button hook" type movement, that motion can either be an effort to move away from the defender, presumably to receive a possible pass, or simply could be an effort to block the defender's path to another position on the field, which reasonably fits the definition of "attempting to block".

As is usually the case, the ultimate deciding factor in whether the contact is legal, or not, rests in the judgment of the covering official based on what he has observed.

(Excuse me Robert, where in the Bronx?)

[bigjohn]

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.....

[JRutledge]

Not only is this an old thread, but I am kind of confused. Did the rule change?

Peace

[bigjohn]

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.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

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

[bigjohn]

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

[NDRef]

[QUOTE=bigjohn;844011]can't be opi until the ball is in the air can it?

Don't you have a case book JR?


Seriously?---you make THAT staement about OPI; and then ask JR if HE has a case book.

The rule book is pretty clear on OPI---how in the world do you get your interp?


At times (actually most of the time) the pettiness between the two of you is tough to take (however, kind of like a car accident---you just can't look away). The two of you have so much to add, based on your experiences, to the experience of high school football. Coaches and officials will ALWAYS interpret differently issues that aren't black and white. The game of football is filled with gray areas and situations that warrant judgement. Nature of the beast, nature of the game, nature of life.

[JRutledge]

Yes I have a rulebook, casebook, Simplified and Illustrated book, Handbook and teach football officiating to the largest class in the entire area for new football officials.

You obviously do not understand what that wording in read means. It does not mean any contact is illegal. It means that a player running at you is a potential blocker (this is in the S&I book BTW) and based on technique or lack of proper technique players tend to run at defenders and not try to get free or make it clear they are trying to get free. And most coaches do not understand the rule anyway and think a receiver can be hit in any way if they are in front of the defender (like on a drag route). I cannot wait for the first time someone calls a foul for this in the 7 on 7 leagues this summer (we run camps with these leagues). This is where common sense comes into play; we cannot assume the defender knows why someone is running at them. If the offense wants us to give them the benefit of the doubt, they better either look away from defender or run in a manner that is clear they are not blocking. If they cannot do that, then I am not going to assume they are running a route. I am going to call what is likely and what easily shows up on tape. I am not going to assume I know what the coach is trying to do or what the play actually was called in the huddle or on the sideline. As I said, it is rare that defenses are that close on receivers, they usually are several yards off the line and this is clear when a receiver is running a route and not blocking. But if it is close, I am not calling a penalty just like in other parts of the game, it has to be obvious.

Peace