Defensive holding vs Illegal Use of Hands

[Ref4bills]

Does NFHS have defensive holding for a DB? I see in the rule book it is illegal use of hands if “a defensive player contacts an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker”. Wouldn’t this be the same as a defensive holding penalty?

[CalhounLJ]

Not really. Illegal use of hands would be a push, whereas a hold is a grab and restrict. And yes, holding does apply to the defense under certain situations.

[AlUpstateNY]

Does NFHS have defensive holding for a DB? I see in the rule book it is illegal use of hands if “a defensive player contacts an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker”. Wouldn’t this be the same as a defensive holding penalty?

Both "Holding" and "Illegal use of the hands" are covered by the same rule, NFHS:9-2, and use the same signal (S42) to identify violations.  Articles 1 and 2 relate to "Offensive" players, whereas Article 3 refers to Defensive" players.

 As suggested above, the term "Holding" suggests acts of "grabbing" and/or "restricting", whereas " "Illegal use of the hands" expands the violation to include behaviors designed to interfere with, or prevent, an eligible received from continuing/completing a pass route AFTER he has ceased being a potential blocker, whether, or not, a forward pass is actually thrown.

[animalspooker]

So WHEN does a receiver cease to be a blocker? 

I've always explained it to coaches/players that it a receiver leaves his set position and is obviously attempting to run a pattern, then he may not be blocked, grabbed...any of the above.  However if he runs at a defender like he's going to block and gets knocked on his arse, then its ok.  It's all about the impression they give the defender....and the side official.  It helps tremendously to have good side judges!

[CalhounLJ]

Basically you are correct. I'm going to pull an Al here and say it depends on the judgment of the official. If the official believes A is running a route with no intention of blocking, then B cannot block, grab, restrict, or interfere with his route.

[HLinNC]

The key word is "potential" blocker in 9-2-3d.  Case play 9-2-3 A lays it out for you pretty clearly.

There was a pretty in-depth discussion on the NFHS facebook page of a video clip of a receiver breaking off a route at the edge of the ENZ and cutting towrds the middle of the field.  A LB moves up 3 yards and blasts him.

I thought it was pretty clear example of IUH at least, probably more of a BSB.  The argument against IUH was that the receiver was a potential blocker.  Given the distance the LB had to move up to make contact and the WR made no attempt to run at him, I disagreed.  Some argued against BSB because the LB extended his hands but to me he extended out after contact was made.

[AlUpstateNY]

So WHEN does a receiver cease to be a blocker? 

Simple way to remember,  If the Offensive player is between the Defensive player and a runner (a/k/a a potential passer), poses a threat to the Defensive player (not moving away from the Defensive player), he is a potential blocker, and the Defensive player can legally block him.  NFHS: 2-3-5b.

[CalhounLJ]

Well to be honest, if there is a runner, DPI and/or illegal use of hands against an eligible receiver are more than likely off the table.  The question is how to determine his potential to block while in the process running a pass route.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KDJBBBJ]

I have always been taught that once the reciever reaches the same yardline as or is running away from the devensive player or is running "parralel" to he line of scrimmage not facing a defender he is no longer a potential blocker.

[AlUpstateNY]

Well to be honest, if there is a runner, DPI and/or illegal use of hands against an eligible receiver are more than likely off the table.  The question is how to determine his potential to block while in the process running a pass route. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Until a player, in possession of the ball, actually passes it, he is by definition a "Runner" (NFHS 2-32-13).  He becomes a "passer" when he actually throws a legal forward pass. (NFHS 2-32-11).  Any A player between a Defensive player and a runner is an "offensive blocker" .(NFHS 2-32-4).

A defensive player, shall not: (NFHS 9-2-3d) "Contact an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker".

(NFHS 7-5-6)  defines "eligible receivers".

[animalspooker]

We need a LIKE button.  Good responses everyone....thank you!

[refjeff]

Does NFHS have defensive holding for a DB? I see in the rule book it is illegal use of hands if “a defensive player contacts an eligible receiver who is no longer a potential blocker”. Wouldn’t this be the same as a defensive holding penalty?

  The fouls are not exactly the same, but the penalty is.  10 yards.

2.16.1

[blandis]

   The NFHS' version of the NFL's Illegal Contact rule is in the Defensive Illegal Use of Hands foul. As stated earlier, once it is apparent that a potential receiver is, in fact, attempting to run a passing route then Team B can not impede/hinder him in any way beyond the Line of Scrimmage. As a former BJ, I would key on if the receiver's stride was altered by the defender. If it is not obvious that a potential receiver is attempting to run a passing route then a Team B player at, or beyond the LOS, may legally block the Team A player in question but they only get one-yard of continuous contact. There is no 5-yard belt like the NFL as this contact can be any where on the field as long as the proper conditions are met.     
   Behind the Line of Scrimmage a potential receiver may be legally blocked at any time for any length of yardage or time, even if the ball is in the air coming towards him, because you can't have PI behind the Line of Scrimmage and the Defense may legally engage any Team A player behind the Line of Scrimmage.
    The big headache in this is that often a floating in zone Line Backer will often decleat a Team A receiver in a crossing pattern before the ball is thrown. Not only would this be Defensive Illegal Use of Hands, you also have a Personal Foul for Unnecessary Roughness for an Illegal Blindside Hit, you might also have a Targeting foul to consider. Always keep an eye out on crossing patterns for this big illegal hit as well as a potential OPI for blocking on a pass downfield.