The Official Forum  

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 02:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2
OPI - Illegal Touch

Anyone else have someone try to convince them that an ineligible receiver down field catching a pass is not OPI?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 02:22pm
Archaic Power Monger
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Guy View Post
Anyone else have someone try to convince them that an ineligible receiver down field catching a pass is not OPI?
It's not, it's illegal touching.
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 02:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,230
from the 2011 NFHS Football Case Book Clarifications

Page 59, *7.5.13 SITUATION A: Ineligible receiver A2 is behind, in or beyond his neutral zone when a forward pass by A1: (a) accidentally strikes him in the back; or (b) is muffed by him; or (c) is caught by him. RULING: In (a), there is no illegal touching, however, if beyond the line of scrimmage, it would be offensive pass interference if the game officials judge that the offensive player interfered with B’s chance to move toward, catch or bat the pass. In (b) and (c), it is illegal touching and if beyond the line of scrimmage, would also be offensive pass interference. The acts in both (b) and (c) are intentional and not accidental as in (a) as it relates to illegal touching. Although ineligible downfield could also be called, the offended team will likely choose the most severe penalty to be applied.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 02:39pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Upper West Chester
Posts: 164
If they are, they are using a 4-5 year old (?) rule book as it was changed.
Someone out there have the correct year, let me know.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 02:40pm
Archaic Power Monger
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,983
jdmara, all I can say is that the case book play is wrong and completely contradicts the rule. Once upon a time, this used to be OPI but it is no longer.
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 03:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: West Bend, WI
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Welpe View Post
jdmara, all I can say is that the case book play is wrong and completely contradicts the rule. Once upon a time, this used to be OPI but it is no longer.
Yes...it is wrong.


ART. 13 . . . An ineligible A player has illegally touched a forward pass if he bats, muffs or catches a legal forward pass, unless the pass has first been touched by B.

PENALTY: Illegal touching (Art. 13) – (S16) – 5 yards plus loss
of down.

(Courtesy of 2011 NFHS Football Rules Book - Page 62)
__________________
"Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups...."
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 03:25pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdmara View Post
from the 2011 NFHS Football Case Book Clarifications

Page 59, *7.5.13 SITUATION A: Ineligible receiver A2 is behind, in or beyond his neutral zone when a forward pass by A1: (a) accidentally strikes him in the back; or (b) is muffed by him; or (c) is caught by him. RULING: In (a), there is no illegal touching, however, if beyond the line of scrimmage, it would be offensive pass interference if the game officials judge that the offensive player interfered with B’s chance to move toward, catch or bat the pass. In (b) and (c), it is illegal touching and if beyond the line of scrimmage, would also be offensive pass interference. The acts in both (b) and (c) are intentional and not accidental as in (a) as it relates to illegal touching. Although ineligible downfield could also be called, the offended team will likely choose the most severe penalty to be applied.
That's wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 03:31pm
Chain of Fools
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,648
This came up on another board. Speculation is the Fed resurrected an old case play without realizing it. Nothing official has come down but its probalby incorrect.

Wouldn't be the first time.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 15, 2011, 05:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2
2011 NFHS Case Book Clarification

The NFHS clarified case-book play 7.5.13 and clearly state that this can be OPI. It doesn't make sense that if the Right Guard goes down field and touches the arm of a potential receiver then it is OPI but if he catches the ball in front of a potential receiver is is only an illegal touch.

Google 2011 NFHS Football Case Book Clarifications.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
last to touch - first to touch rsl Basketball 29 Fri Jul 03, 2009 07:01am
1st to touch Ch1town Basketball 9 Tue May 26, 2009 07:36pm
Ref60 : 60s of Officiating : Last to Touch ... First to Touch JugglingReferee Basketball 8 Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:13pm
First to touch ripcord51 Basketball 6 Sat Dec 16, 2006 06:25pm
Can't be the first one to touch it? dub3 Basketball 18 Wed Apr 21, 2004 10:14am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:23pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1