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 Tue Oct 07, 2014, 11:24am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Welpe View Post
It does. Blocking down field on a forward pass play is not legal, period. Reference the case play I already posted.
Sorry, no case book here, so someone'll have to quote it.
Quote:
Remember, pass interference restrictions for the offense starts at the snap.
Everyone here knows the conditions under which the restrictions apply. But that doesn't say what the restrictions are. If the opponent has not had the opp'ty to move toward or play the ball interfered with, it's not pass (or kick) interference. We don't know whether the blocked player was trying to, was in position to, or even aware it was possible for him to play the pass, so we don't know whether interference took place. For all we know, he may have had his back to the whole thing.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 07, 2014, 11:33am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
But that doesn't say what the restrictions are.
Not to be too snarky... but seriously - try the rulebook. It's right freaking there.

Quote:
We don't know whether the blocked player was trying to
Irrelevant
Quote:
was in position to
irrelevant
Quote:
, or even aware
irrelevant
Quote:
it was possible for him to play the pass, so we don't know whether interference took place. For all we know, he may have had his back to the whole thing.
Irrelevant.

Seriously. Rule book... clinic... on field training in that order. Please.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 07, 2014, 11:59am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 70
7.5.10 SITUATION A:

During a forward-pass play in which the ball crosses the *neutral zone, A1, an ineligible receiver, is illegally downfield and:

(a) B1 illegally contacts him with an elbow; or
(b) A1 blocks B1.

RULING: In (a), the personal foul by B1 and A1's foul for being downfield combine to make a double foul and the down will be replayed. The contact by B1 is not defensive pass interference because A1 was an ineligible receiver. Defensive pass interference may occur only against eligible receivers. Had there been no contact and had ineligible A1 touched such a pass, the result would have been illegal touching. In (b), it is a multiple foul for an ineligible illegally downfield and also offensive pass interference. (7-5-6a; 7-5-13; 10-2-1,10-2-3)
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 07, 2014, 01:57pm
Archaic Power Monger
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
Sorry, no case book here, so someone'll have to quote it.
Well, OK then. Thanks for sharing.
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 07, 2014, 06:15pm
APG APG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
Everyone here knows the conditions under which the restrictions apply. But that doesn't say what the restrictions are. If the opponent has not had the opp'ty to move toward or play the ball interfered with, it's not pass (or kick) interference. We don't know whether the blocked player was trying to, was in position to, or even aware it was possible for him to play the pass, so we don't know whether interference took place. For all we know, he may have had his back to the whole thing.
It's not a matter of if the defender has had a chance to move toward the ball or not. Blocking downfield signals to the defender and his teammates that the play isn't a pass but it's a run.
__________________
Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, given a chance to climb, they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions.

Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is.

Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 07, 2014, 08:42pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,794
Wow. Someone on this thread has no understanding of OPI. I'll let the people on the thread figure out who that is.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 08, 2014, 10:15pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by APG View Post
It's not a matter of if the defender has had a chance to move toward the ball or not. Blocking downfield signals to the defender and his teammates that the play isn't a pass but it's a run.
But you already have a rule for that re ineligible receiver downfield, whether the player blocks anyone there or not. But it's not interference unless it actually interferes. It may not be a big deal since loss of down was eliminated for the OPI in the various codes, but it's still technically a different foul.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 08, 2014, 10:26pm
Archaic Power Monger
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
But you already have a rule for that re ineligible receiver downfield,
Which is a much lighter penalty than offensive pass interference. As you can see from the case play, an ineligible blocking down field is guilty of multiple fouls. Restrictions against blocking down field apply to all A players, not just ineligible players. An eligible receiver blocking down field on a forward pass play is also guilty of OPI.
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 08, 2014, 10:52pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Welpe View Post
Which is a much lighter penalty than offensive pass interference. As you can see from the case play, an ineligible blocking down field is guilty of multiple fouls. Restrictions against blocking down field apply to all A players, not just ineligible players. An eligible receiver blocking down field on a forward pass play is also guilty of OPI.
Then you've been citing the wrong rules section. The blocking per se is covered under 9-3, "illegal blocking", specifically 9-3-1(b).
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 09, 2014, 12:44pm
Archaic Power Monger
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,983
Actually we haven't but I'm glad you've found more evidence disproving your intereptation on your own. Notice that 9-3-1-b penalty references 7-5-10 and that the case play is numbered 7.5.10.

Consider 9-3-1 as examples of illegal blocks because all of those are defined as particular fouls in other rules (Rule 6, Rule 7 and further in Rule 9).
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 10, 2014, 01:00am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Welpe View Post
Actually we haven't but I'm glad you've found more evidence disproving your intereptation on your own. Notice that 9-3-1-b penalty references 7-5-10 and that the case play is numbered 7.5.10.
I know, I forgot that it's still called "pass interference" even with the reference under "illegal blocking". That's been true for a very long time, but somehow I'd hallucinated that it'd been reclassified a few years ago to cover separately pre-pass and intra-pass interference by A.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 09, 2014, 02:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 29
Opi --

It was my understanding that any lineman such as "Lineman A77 is blocking lineman B56 5 yards beyond the neutral zone on a pass that crosses the NZ." Is an illegal receiver down field --- but its NOT OPI unless he actually interferes with .....
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 09, 2014, 02:38pm
Chain of Fools
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,648
Quote:
but its NOT OPI unless he actually interferes with
And just what would blocking him be
Remember, all of B is eligible.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Fri Oct 10, 2014, 01:05am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by HLin NC View Post
And just what would blocking him be
Remember, all of B is eligible.
But they way they wrote it (and they wrote it a long time ago) is misleading. it would be clearer if they simply said that blocking an opponent downfield was illegal under the circumstances.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 19, 2014, 02:28pm
Archaic Power Monger
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,983
The OPI call in the FSU - Notre Dame game last night was the perfect example of blocking down field being illegal.
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers
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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:45am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1