No Longer a Potential Blocker

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Then why was the quoted material so specific invoking use of the hands, rather than contact?

I deleted my post when I saw I'd written about the same 3 yrs. earlier, but now by quoting & replying I guess you've put the issue in play again.

So you are saying that a receiver is running a drag route across the middle and a LB can come and jump block into the receiver with his shoulder and knock them down and all is OK because they did not use their hands but used their shoulder?

Man, where are you guys getting these interpretations from?

Peace

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So you are saying that a receiver is running a drag route across the middle and a LB can come and jump block into the receiver with his shoulder and knock them down and all is OK because they did not use their hands but used their shoulder?

Man, where are you guys getting these interpretations from? :rolleyes

Where's the rule saying they can't?

This rule was traditionally understood as a limitation on use of the hands & arms, not a limitation on body blocking. This goes back to a time when the defense was allowed much more use of the hands than the offense, but that use of the hands was limited to warding off body blocks. The rules makers wanted to make clear that the privilege allowing use of the hands did not extend to cases where there was no block being warded off.

Where was the language inserted to make this apply to blocking or contact per se rather than use of the hands? If Fed didn't want the rule still to be understood as a limitation on use of the hands and arms alone, why is it still in 9-2, rather than part of 9-3? They've got this whole section right there concerning when you can't block, but no, this is in the section about when or how you can't use hands or arms.

[JRutledge]

Robert,

I think you need to look at your definitions and then get back to me one what the rules allow in this situation.

Peace

[bigjohn]

ART. 3 . . . A defensive player shall not:

d. Contact an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker.

I mean it says contact.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

ART. 3 . . . A defensive player shall not:

d. Contact an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker.

I mean it says contact.

I don't have all the intervening years' rule books, but I'm pretty sure research will show that to have been an editing error when a previous phrase or clause saying "use hands or arms to" was deleted in favor of the current introductory language of that section. Why else would it be in the section on use of the hands instead of that on contact in general?

[bigjohn]

So pregame, I need to ask the R if his crew has read all the history of this rule so they know it is legal to contact an eligible downfield with shoulder or chest block as long as hands aren't involved, right? Contact in this case only means contact with hands. Ok.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

So pregame, I need to ask the R if his crew has read all the history of this rule so they know it is legal to contact an eligible downfield with shoulder or chest block as long as hands aren't involved, right? Contact in this case only means contact with hands. Ok.

Yawn.....

The R and his crew will walk right past you as you are spouting your assistant coach drivel.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

So pregame, I need to ask the R if his crew has read all the history of this rule so they know it is legal to contact an eligible downfield with shoulder or chest block as long as hands aren't involved, right? Contact in this case only means contact with hands. Ok.

Reading TOO much into a rule can be as dangerous as not reading enough. Fortunately, NFHS has provided us with the Case Book, which is designed and intended to help clarify rules.

2011 Case Book reference 9-2-3-A addresses this issue, in detail, advising, "RULING"...A defender may legally contact an eligible receiver beyond the NZ before the pass is in flight. The contact may be a block (see NF: 2-3-1) or warding off the opponent who is attempting to block by pushing or pulling him. However, if the receiver is not attampting 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.

The type of contact is not specified, nor limited to any specific manner of contact, or body part initiating the contact

As is so often the case, the deciding factor is the exclusive judgment of the covering official as to whether the eligible receiver was, or was not, a "blocking threat" as to whether actions by the defender were legal or illegal.

Many situations are incredibly similar, but no two situations are exactly alike and rule makers have, long ago decided, to grant exclusive authority to render such judgments to field officials ONLY.