Potential blocker or not?
 

I have been having this argument.

A1 throws a legal forward pass to A2 who is behind the LOS. A2 is not attempting to block and has turned toward the QB to receive a pass. B1 takes out A1 (no tackle).

Should B1 be flagged for Illegal Use of Hands?

I say yes, he says no. He maintains that A1 is a potential blocker. I say that once he is obviously attempting to catch a pass, he is no longer a blocker.

I know there is a case play and I have read it. I just wonder when a person ceases being a potential blocker.

If B1 hits A2 downfield before the ball is released then it is agreed it is a foul for IUoH. Why is this different?

I'm confused--are you getting A1 and A2 mixed up.

If the defender hit the receiver and did not tackle him, it appears to be a legal play. He can't tackle him but he can block him behind the LOS

I'm sorry, I mean A2 is the one who gets contacted.

I cannot find a rule that says it is OK to contact an eligible receiver behind the LOS. A receiver cannot be contacted if he is NO LONGER A POTENTIAL BLOCKER.

When does someone cease being a potential blocker? I say that if A2 is turned and in the act of catching a pass, he is not a potential blocker. His position on the field does not matter.

If A2 is downfield is he a potential blocker? There is no rule that says he is only a potential blocker when he is behind the LOS.

Forget about where A2 is. WHEN DOES AN OFFENSIVE PLAYER STOP BEING A POTENTIAL BLOCKER?

Like I said in the previous discussion, it does not matter either way. Nothing in the rule says it is OK to contact a offensive player that is no longer a potential blocker.

Peace

I believe that it is legal to block the receiver behind the LOS even if he is not attempting to block a defender. The attempting to block issue by the offensive receiver going downfield comes into play when he is not trying to block the defender. It is not pass interference, as it was behind the LOS. As long as it is a clean block I think you are OK. If the guy is on the opposite side of the play and then is blocked, I think that you have another story. Just my opinion.

Illini, Don'r get caught up with using pass interference rules behind the LOS. They don't apply. The prohibition of contacting a pass receiver who is no longer a blocker applies only to pass interfertence and must be beyond the LOS.
There is no prohibition on contacting a potential receiver behind the LOS as long as it is not an illegal block (a block that does not meet the same requirements as any other block) or is not a personal foul.
Other than that a defender may block a potential receiver behind the LOS. Even with the ball in the air. The reason you can't find a rule permitting this is that there is not one to find. But remember, the rules don't list what is legal to do (in most cases) but rather what is illegal to do. If there is not a rule prohibiting an action, that action is legal.

That is not true. It says under 9-2-3c "A defensive player shall not....Contact an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker." This is under the heading "Illegal Use of Hands and Holding." This has nothing to do with passing restrictions. Passing restrictions do not apply to the defense anyway until the ball is in the air and crosses the LOS.


That is also not true. The rule does not say anything about when or where the contact can take place. It says potential blocker. Nothing gives a player the right behind the LOS to contact a receiver that is no longer a potential blocker.

Rules reference please?

Peace

+1

Well put.

I believe it is a judgement call.

My question remains this. WHEN DOES AN ELIGIBLE RECEIVER STOP BEING A POTENTIAL BLOCKER?

I agree that the rules list what is not allowed. They certainly disallow contact on an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker. A back, behind the LOS is definitely an eligible receiver, so when is he not a potential blocker?

To me if the rules intended what some say then they would simply state that you cannot contact an eligible receiver beyond the LOS who is not an eligible receiver.

Well then there is no need to look for further opinion nor have an argument about it:confused:

9.2.3 SITUATION C: Quarterback A1 drops back 15 yards and throws a legal
forward pass intended for A2, who is 5 yards behind the neutral zone. Before the pass reaches A2: (a) B1 tackles A2; or (b) B1 blocks A2. RULING: In (a), tackling A2 is a foul, as it is a form of holding. Defensive players are prohibited from grasping an opponent other than the runner. The foul in (a) occurs during a looseball play, and the 10-yard penalty will be administered from the previous spot. In (b), the contact by B1 is not pass interference and, if the block itself is legal, there is no infraction. (7-5-10)

Not sure how this gets any clearer. We can safely assume that if he is the intended receiver, then he obviously NOT a potential blocker.

Read 9-2-3(d) and tell me where in that rule that it only applies downfield.

The case play references a block. That infers that the offensive player is still a potential blocker. No argument here.

I maintain that a back (eligible receiver) who is turned and about to catch a pass is NOT a potential blocker any longer. Say the defender gets around him and wipes him out. First of all, that is a tackle of someone without the ball which is holding (a tackle does NOT have to be a wrap up). Second, contact with an eligible receiver that is no longer a blocker is illegal.

If a receiver is downfield but the QB still has the ball when the receiver is hit from the side and knocked down, is that a foul? Can't be PI but of course it is a foul. Why? Because the receiver was no longer a potential blocker.

The foul is illegal use of hands, specifically holding. There's no foul for tackling. An attempt to knock someone down isn't illegal use of hands per se.

OK, but the ball is in the air and this has to do with the ball being actually thrown. This is really not the debate that is being had (at least by me or IR that I am aware of). If the ball is not thrown you can have a penalty that has nothing to do with DPI.

Peace

B may push, pull, or ward off an opponent to get to a loose ball. What is a pass? B may also block A if it is a legal block.

As long as the A player and the ball aren't beyond the LOS and there is no IUH and there is a legal block the play is legal. The Federation's own casebook says it is. All this other stuff has to do with downfield and PI.

Good luck explaining it when you call it there in Illinois.

DPI is possible only for passes beyond the NZ (7-5-7). Therefore, by rule, contact with an eligible receiver is permitted when the pass does not cross the NZ. This is NOT a judgment call (whether the ball crosses the NZ is, of course, but that is a different call).

Regarding your question: an eligible receiver beyond the NZ is no longer a potential blocker when he runs away from a defender, or past him, or stops, or otherwise demonstrates that he is not going to block that defender (9.2.3A). THAT is indeed a judgment call. But it's not relevant to your original question.

As you point out: the rules disallow contact with an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker. But everyone behind the NZ is a potential blocker: that's why it's legal to contact them there, regardless of eligibility.