Question about potential blocker or hitting receivers

[Welpe]

Rocky, I think that is reasonable.

In the OP, if it's clear that the receiver is on his route and not a potential blocker, then I'll drop a flag for illegal use of the hands.

IBB should be judged using advantage and defensive IBB is rarely going to gain them an advantage. That doesn't mean a PF can't be a consideration.

[Robert Goodman]

And I still say that in Fed it's not illegal use of hands unless the hands or arms are actually used.

[Welpe]

It's pretty rare that a block doesn't involve the hands or arms at all. That's not a hair that I'd even attempt to split.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

And I still say that in Fed it's not illegal use of hands unless the hands or arms are actually used.

Read 9-2-3d. It only says "contact an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker."

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Rich

Read 9-2-3d. It only says "contact an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker."

But it says that in the context of a general rule about the use of the hands, and the case book example everyone quotes makes clear it's one of use of the hands. It's like the one someone mentioned elsewhere about contact that from the context is supposed to apply to free kicks only, although read in isolation would appear to apply to all kicks.