Author Topic: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d  (Read 15425 times)

Offline Rulesman

  • The Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +324/-243
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #25 on: May 18, 2015, 02:49:03 PM »
So, here is that play that I've been advised not to throw a flag on but I still think is a foul.  Receiver is on the LOS with DB at press coverage.  Receiver immediately breaks to run an inside slant and he gets jammed by the DB. Is this a foul?
My interpretation, based on what's in red and exactly how your wrote it, is no. Why do you think it's a foul?
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline bkdow

  • *
  • Posts: 239
  • FAN REACTION: +9/-3
  • Striving for the impossible level of perfection
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #26 on: May 18, 2015, 03:17:18 PM »
My interpretation, based on what's in red and exactly how your wrote it, is no. Why do you think it's a foul?
  The reason that I have felt it is a foul is because the Receiver is clearly not attempting to block and is going to run a route. 
"Don't let perfection get in the way of really good." John Lucivansky

Offline Rulesman

  • The Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +324/-243
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #27 on: May 18, 2015, 04:28:46 PM »
  The reason that I have felt it is a foul is because the Receiver is clearly not attempting to block and is going to run a route.
How do you know that? How do you know he's not headed to block the MLB? How do you know all of this that happens "immediately" is even going to be a pass play?
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline stevegarbs

  • *
  • Posts: 82
  • FAN REACTION: +3/-2
"Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #28 on: May 18, 2015, 06:50:39 PM »

What might help is to consider that NFHS rules are designed for Interscholastic football games, which are at times somewhat different than rules governing older, more talented players in NCAA and/or NFL games.  Ralph's description above summarizes the NFHS rule well, when a receiver is even with (and passing) a defender, or moving away from a defender, he ceases bein a blocking threat. 

If the defender is able to keep the receiver between himself and the ball, prior to the ball actually being thrown, the receiver remains a "potential" blocker from which the defender can legally protect himself.

This is how I was taught to call it and it has worked for me for 20+ years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline bigjohn

  • *
  • Posts: 342
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-31
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #29 on: May 18, 2015, 06:55:18 PM »
Press and bump are both attack techniques.

The contact may be a block or warding off the opponent who is attempting to
block by pushing or pulling him.

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 523
  • FAN REACTION: +107/-4
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #30 on: May 18, 2015, 11:07:44 PM »
I have said it for a long time Bump or press coverage is illegal according to NFHS rules.
Just because you say it, doesn't make it true.

Think of it in this context. In the NFL bump or press coverage is legal until the receiver gets to 5 yards or the pass is thrown. The NFHS (and NCAA) rules don't have that 5-yard rule. They are given a lot more leeway. This is definitely a black/white situation for most officials.

The situation where the receiver is running his route freely when contact is made is a little more gray, but a great way to make the gray smaller is to use the guidelines shared here and widely understood by most officials. The receiver is considered a potential blocker until he beyond the defender or running away from him. A variation of that would be a hook route where the receiver is still in front of the defender and he turns to face the passer.

Teeing off on the guy on a crossing route isn't illegal use of hands or holding, but it could be a personal foul.

Offline bigjohn

  • *
  • Posts: 342
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-31
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #31 on: May 19, 2015, 05:56:14 AM »
However, if the receiver is not attempting to
block or has gone past or is moving away,

I see 3 things there, everyone sees 2, grey area or brainwashed??


I agree that all ineligible receivers may be potential blockers until the whistle blows but it appears the rules makers mean for eligible receivers to have a chance to get into their pass routes.

Redding says not a potential blocker once the Receiver and DB are at the same yardline, not beyond.

https://books.google.com/books?id=rztBwOYv6cMC&pg=PA16&lpg=PA16&dq=no+longer+potential+blocker&source=bl&ots=dghjB4Tmnd&sig=_D7u7I04V-cZg_7FAOjOU3E1ORk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=xChbVbGPEcPYoATh3YP4Cg&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=no%20longer%20potential%20blocker&f=false
« Last Edit: May 19, 2015, 07:24:10 AM by bigjohn »

Offline bigjohn

  • *
  • Posts: 342
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-31
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #32 on: May 19, 2015, 09:29:01 AM »
PI restrictions begin for A at the snap, correct. How can they be a potential blocker if a pass is thrown?

So if A blocks someone beyond the ENZ it is OPI but B can block A until the  ball is in the air?

No B is supposed to stop blocking or grabbing or pushing A when A no longer is attempting to block them.


Offline Rulesman

  • The Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +324/-243
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #33 on: May 19, 2015, 09:55:21 AM »
PI restrictions begin for A at the snap, correct. How can they be a potential blocker if a pass is thrown?
Big unknown with those 2 letters. You are making this too complicated. If my aunt was endowed differently she'd be my uncle. You can't assume anything until it happens. In the words of one supervisor who is fond of saying, "We are paid to know. We are not paid to think." Or assume.
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline bigjohn

  • *
  • Posts: 342
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-31
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #34 on: May 19, 2015, 10:33:16 AM »
if A is making contact it is a run play if he is trying to get open it is probably a pass play. I don't really think that is rocket science!

Offline Rulesman

  • The Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +324/-243
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #35 on: May 19, 2015, 11:08:34 AM »
if A is making contact it is a run play if he is trying to get open it is probably a pass play. I don't really think that is rocket science!
Again, you are making assumptions. No, it isn't rocket science but you're trying to make it into that. Every play is different and must be treated as such, which is why we say (1) See, (2) Read, (3) then React.
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3360
  • FAN REACTION: +257/-489
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #36 on: May 19, 2015, 12:16:19 PM »
PI restrictions begin for A at the snap, correct. How can they be a potential blocker if a pass is thrown?

So if A blocks someone beyond the ENZ it is OPI but B can block A until the  ball is in the air?

No B is supposed to stop blocking or grabbing or pushing A when A no longer is attempting to block them.

For a brief moment, John, I thought you FINALLY got it, when you summarized with "So if A blocks someone beyond the ENZ it is OPI but B can block A until the  ball is in the air?", because, as most understand, B doesn't KNOW it's actually a pass until someone throws the ball (forward, legally). 

What you really don't seem able to (or perhaps want to) grasp is that (before someone throws the ball) B really can't be sure if the A player, between him and the ball (in a teammate's possession) is REALLY a receiver or a "POTENTIAL" blocker, so B has an absolute right to protect himself. 

As you've been told (repeatedly) when the A player is past (or if you want to split hairs, "even with") the B player or moving away from him, the threat of A blocking is reduced, and the responsibility of B refraining from contacting, what he should recognize as an eligible receiver downfield, is dramatically increased. 

All of which is factored into the judgment and decision made, exclusively, by the covering game official.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2015, 12:18:21 PM by AlUpstateNY »

Offline bigjohn

  • *
  • Posts: 342
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-31
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #37 on: May 19, 2015, 01:18:36 PM »
So in your world, this is legal contact even though the receiver is not attempting to block B and is at the same yard line as B

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nb7B6ybdtn4
« Last Edit: May 19, 2015, 01:20:08 PM by bigjohn »

Offline bigjohn

  • *
  • Posts: 342
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-31
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #38 on: May 19, 2015, 01:22:44 PM »

Offline HLinNC

  • *
  • Posts: 2221
  • FAN REACTION: +63/-12
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #39 on: May 19, 2015, 01:38:48 PM »
Holy Cow, none of these receivers were remotely knocked off their route.  I call any of that my #&% is sitting at the house, no matter how shorthanded our association is.

Jeez bigjohn, I expect better from you.  Keep Googling.  You're off your A game.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3360
  • FAN REACTION: +257/-489
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #40 on: May 19, 2015, 01:47:39 PM »
So in your world, this is legal contact even though the receiver is not attempting to block B and is at the same yard line as B. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nb7B6ybdtn4

John, sit down and listen; any play you can see on film, u-tube or video has already happened, is totally unique to any similar play that has, is or will happen and the decision regarding these plays is OVER, and nothing you, or I, think about these particular plays matters, or is going to change anything.

Me, and many others, have suggested how these plays are considered from an officiating perspective, and those suggestions are pretty much UNIVERSAL.  Lucky enough to be living in this wonderful country, you have every right to ignore any and all advice, as only you choose, but what you are being told is the reality of what you will deal with.  You don't have to agree with it, but you WILL live with it.

Offline bigjohn

  • *
  • Posts: 342
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-31
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #41 on: May 20, 2015, 06:01:52 AM »
They are hands all over receivers that are already even or past them. How is that legal contact??

Might as well not have the rule.

Offline Rulesman

  • The Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +324/-243
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #42 on: May 20, 2015, 07:58:28 AM »
Basketball has a rule governing hand checking. Football does not.  :sTiR:
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1233
  • FAN REACTION: +63/-22
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #43 on: May 20, 2015, 08:47:42 AM »
They are hands all over receivers that are already even or past them. How is that legal contact??

Might as well not have the rule.

John, I'm debating whether or not you're actually trying to understand the rule or if you're trying to troll us and be argumentative.  I'll be gullible, I'll bite.

Here is an example that was sent to a few officials in my area.  This is what the rule is trying to prevent.  Watch the LB.  The examples you gave are not even close.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzA-T4I9Rwu4Z3ctaGtDUWZsakk/edit?usp=sharing

Offline bigjohn

  • *
  • Posts: 342
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-31
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #44 on: May 20, 2015, 09:20:44 AM »
bossman72 in my opinion what you posted should be unnecessary roughness, Flagrant, PF and ejection. That falls under 9-2-3 but is excessive as in the new POE and what I am really getting at. I am not trying to troll I am saying it is not called as written and the case you showed is not getting the attention it should in far too many games.


Game officials need to be aware of situations that are likely to produce unnecessary or excessive
contact. Blindside blocks, peel-back blocks, and airborne receivers attempting to secure the ball oftentimes
provide windows of opportunity for these potentially dangerous contact situations to occur. Players leaving their
feet (launching) and initiating contact with opponents should be penalized immediately as unnecessary or
excessive contact.



IUH is hand checking and  hindering the receiver and illegal. It is also one of those rules that is not called very often
« Last Edit: May 20, 2015, 10:14:27 AM by bigjohn »

Offline bkdow

  • *
  • Posts: 239
  • FAN REACTION: +9/-3
  • Striving for the impossible level of perfection
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #45 on: May 20, 2015, 09:55:56 AM »
OK, I am not in agreement with Big John on these either.  My situation that I have seen is when a receiver is clearing attempting to run a route and the DB jams him successfully so that he cannot even advance down field.  There is no pass thrown because the QB looks at him and he is not open.  The hand checking that is being shown on the youtube videos is not a foul.
"Don't let perfection get in the way of really good." John Lucivansky

Offline bkdow

  • *
  • Posts: 239
  • FAN REACTION: +9/-3
  • Striving for the impossible level of perfection
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #46 on: May 20, 2015, 09:59:26 AM »
Is the contact at :03 & :45 considered a foul in NFHS?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b77T2TaJNEE
"Don't let perfection get in the way of really good." John Lucivansky

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3360
  • FAN REACTION: +257/-489
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #47 on: May 20, 2015, 12:41:42 PM »
Is the contact at :03 & :45 considered a foul in NFHS?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b77T2TaJNEE

In this particular example, I would not have a foul in EITHER situation under NFHS rules.  At :03, the receiver is charging directly at the defender, and is clearly a "potential" blocker.  At :45, initially, the offensive player is EITHER trying to evade the defender or just as likely looking for a better blocking angle in response to the defender's ability to hold him off. 

However at a point where the defender recognized the receiver was moving away from him (no longer a blocking threat) he ended his contact.  Whether that happened EXACTLY where the receiver was even with, or moving past, the defender is a judgment call (FOR the covering official ALONE). 

A major rule difference between NFL and NFHS is the area where such contact is allowed is limited to 5 yards under  the NFL code, whereas under the NFHS code there is NO YARDAGE DESIGNATION. Our role is to detect CLEAR violations of specific rules, NOT search for, or seek, what might be construed as technical violations.

As has been suggested in other posts, " I am saying it is not called as written and the case you showed is not getting the attention it should in far too many games", the correct response to which may simply be, "Thankfully, and for good reason.".

Offline bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 2244
  • FAN REACTION: +70/-25
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #48 on: May 21, 2015, 07:52:03 AM »
bossman72 in my opinion what you posted should be unnecessary roughness, Flagrant, PF and ejection.

Really? No intent to injure, not above the shoulders.  Foul, yes.  Flagrant, no.

Any of my guys who wanted to EJ a player for that would be looking for a new crew on Monday.

Offline bigjohn

  • *
  • Posts: 342
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-31
Re: "Rerouting" and 9-2-3-d
« Reply #49 on: May 21, 2015, 08:47:55 AM »
The LB launched, or at least left his feet to hit a defenseless player in the back. Although it wasn't violent it was unnecessary and pure CRAP and when I was in college I know that would have ended in a fight in practice!