« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Expanded neutral zone?  (Read 7407 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline golfingref

  • *
  • Posts: 288
  • FAN REACTION: +10/-6
Expanded neutral zone?
« on: November 08, 2015, 05:30:39 PM »
Is the neutral zone expanded to allow blocking downfield by A on a forward pass? On 2 occasions in the Ole Miss / Ark game, there were passes thrown about 2 yards downfield, with receivers blocking beyond the spot of the catch. I know the neutral zone can be expanded to account for linemen blocking, but do not know about for passes. One play in particular was the final 4th quarter TD by Ole Miss, for those that may find the video. Thanks.
Logged

Offline Kalle

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3437
  • FAN REACTION: +114/-35
Re: Expanded neutral zone?
« Reply #1 on: November 09, 2015, 12:12:37 AM »
The neutral zone is "expanded" only for ineligible players, thus an eligible receiver blocking beyond the neutral zone before the pass that crosses the neutral zone is caught should be a foul.
Logged

Offline BlindZebra

  • *
  • Posts: 153
  • FAN REACTION: +4/-1
Re: Expanded neutral zone?
« Reply #2 on: November 09, 2015, 11:42:29 AM »
It is expanded 1 yard per philosophy.
Logged

Offline Kalle

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3437
  • FAN REACTION: +114/-35
Re: Expanded neutral zone?
« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2015, 02:31:26 PM »
Quote from: BlindZebra on November 09, 2015, 11:42:29 AM
It is expanded 1 yard per philosophy.

Even though there was a very intentional rule change a while back making blocking by eligible receivers within one yard a foul? Should the rule be changed back?
Logged

Offline BlindZebra

  • *
  • Posts: 153
  • FAN REACTION: +4/-1
Re: Expanded neutral zone?
« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2015, 03:37:45 PM »
Quote from: Kalle on November 09, 2015, 02:31:26 PM
Even though there was a very intentional rule change a while back making blocking by eligible receivers within one yard a foul? Should the rule be changed back?

Umm...no and no.  I think the rule is correct the way it is written.  But that is not what is being discussed.  The question was 'does the neutral zone get extended for passes relative to offensive players blocking downfield' and by philosophy the neutral zone is extended 1 yard.  If A snaps the ball at the A25, throws a pass that is completed at the A26 and Team A receivers are blocking downfield, do we have a foul?  No we don't because the neutral zone is extended to the A26 and the pass is considered to have occurred behind the neutral zone.
Logged

Offline Kalle

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3437
  • FAN REACTION: +114/-35
Re: Expanded neutral zone?
« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2015, 12:56:34 AM »
Ah, we are talking about different things. You are saying that (by philosophy) a pass is not considered to have crossed the NZ if it is caught one yard beyond the NZ for pass interference purposes - and I agree with that. I was talking about a situation where a pass is caught 10 yards beyond the NZ with an eligible receiver blocking one yard beyond, which was made illegal somewhere in the 2000's.
Logged

Offline bkdow

  • *
  • Posts: 239
  • FAN REACTION: +9/-3
  • Striving for the impossible level of perfection
Re: Expanded neutral zone?
« Reply #6 on: November 10, 2015, 09:59:17 AM »
If is 1 yard down field, can you put something of the offensive player in the neutral zone?  His foot, arm, etc?  I'm looking for a way to make that legal. 
Logged
"Don't let perfection get in the way of really good." John Lucivansky

Offline BlindZebra

  • *
  • Posts: 153
  • FAN REACTION: +4/-1
Re: Expanded neutral zone?
« Reply #7 on: November 10, 2015, 10:23:38 AM »
Quote from: Kalle on November 10, 2015, 12:56:34 AM
Ah, we are talking about different things. You are saying that (by philosophy) a pass is not considered to have crossed the NZ if it is caught one yard beyond the NZ for pass interference purposes - and I agree with that. I was talking about a situation where a pass is caught 10 yards beyond the NZ with an eligible receiver blocking one yard beyond, which was made illegal somewhere in the 2000's.

Indeed!

As for you bkdow, in my opinion, I see this treated the same as lineman downfield when they are threatening going past that 3 yards they are given. 
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »