Illegal Use of Hands

[sj_31]

Looking for descriptions of actions that would be considered an illegal use of hands foul under 9-3-4-c.

Here's the rule excerpt: 9-3-4-c--Defensive players may user hands and arms to push, pull, ward off or lift offensive players obviously attempting to block them. Defensive players may ward off or legally block an eligible pass receiver until that player occupies the same yard line as the defender or until the opponent could not possibly block him. Continuous contact is illegal.


Assume you are a deep and/or wing official. You are observing your key as he progresses downfield. You throw the flag on the Team B defender because he __(describe illegal use of hands action here that warranted a flag*)__ and the Team A player  __(describe position/action of Team A player that put him in a potential situation to be fouled by way of illegal use of hands**)_.

* Things to consider for the purposes of this exercise (Team B player):

1. Assume the ball is not in the air so you cannot have DPI
2. Assume that the action you observe cannot be considered holding or IBB.
3. Assume that the action you observe cannot be considered any type of personal foul.

** Things to consider for the purposes of this exercise (Team A player):

1. Note that the wording of the rule states "...same yard line... OR until the opponent could no longer block him."
2. What would Team A player be doing/positioned where he wouldn't be occupying the same yard line but is not considered a potential blocker.
3. Does the type of Team B player (LB vs. DB) have any relevance to your thought process?

[ljudge]

Interesting post.  Suppose team A runs a post and as he cuts in and moving away from the defender.  Next, the defender immediately reaches out and gives the receiver a shove from the side clearly disrupting the timing of the receiver's route.  This clearly violates this rule but I have never seen this called in NCAA football.  I am a deep wing at this level and haven't had this but if I did call this infraction I'm guessing I'd be questioned as being over officious.

[MJT]

Interesting post.  Suppose team A runs a post and as he cuts in and moving away from the defender.  Next, the defender immediately reaches out and gives the receiver a shove from the side clearly disrupting the timing of the receiver's route.  This clearly violates this rule but I have never seen this called in NCAA football. 

The problem with what you are asking SJ_31, is that you are only looking at 9-3-4-c, but not 9-3-4-b.  Under 9-3-4-b, what you are describing ljudge is "illegal obstruction" and has been called numerous times in college games. If not, when the receiver made his cut, and you were trailing on his side, you would just shove him or hit him and take him off his route. This fits into the category of "cut off" for DPI, and "illegal obstruction" for illegal use of hands by the defense if the ball is not yet in the air. It is the type of contact that is a 10 yard foul and automatic first down if the ball crossed the NZ, and I called it once, if not twice this year.

[sj_31]

@MJT--I agree with you. I think that this is a foul in many cases. It is one of many classic examples of "rerouting" a receiver. Defensive coaches teach this all the time. However, the debate rages among officials as to what action is and is not legal with regards to this rule. Holding and DPI (when the ball is in the air) is easy. But talk about this rule in a group and I promise there will be no shortage of conflicting opinions and philosophies. And unfortunately there is very little supervisor-type training tape clips to settle the matter. (Please point me in the right direction if you know where I can get some.)

What do you have when a TE or a slot releases and runs a 5-yard drag route across the middle and an LB who has dropped back into pass coverage comes up and chucks him on the side (not a PF or in the back) as he's looking back to the QB? Some officials will say that because he was not at the same yard line that this is not a foul. They state that he is still a potential blocker even though the receiver is looking back toward the ball. They say this is "just football." Other officials say this is a foul. They cite that the "same yard line" clause is only part of the equation because 1) the rule states "...OR could not possibly block [the defender]" and 2) if you allow this contact, you essentially take away the passing game.
Again, assume contact that is not a PF, IBB or holding, you could literally knock receivers down as they make their cut all day long and without this rule, this is not a foul. Yet it has been my experience that officials are clearly divided as to whether that action is even a foul in the first place for the reasons I just stated.
What if you have a WR that runs a quick slant and gets chucked hard in the side on the shoulder pad by the corner as he's (the WR) looking back for the ball? Even though they're not on the same yard line, how can the WR be considered a potential blocker if he's running at an angle away from the DB? Yet we allow this all the time with no flag.
Is it reasonable to state that an LB gets a little more leeway on a chuck across the middle because he's keying the QB and a different colored jersey is running at/near him from the side as opposed to a CB that knows exactly what's happening when the WR breaks to the inside?
I have been told by defensive coaches that they coach their LBs to "go up and hit any receiver that crosses in front of you."
The NFL has solved a lot of this interpretation with their Illegal Contact rule. That's fine as that's what they want in their code. The question is what the NCAA (and even the Fed) wants in their code.
I'm certainly not trying to be over-technical, just trying to understand and hopefully work toward some sort of consensus.
Either way, I believe this is not called more often because we don't have a clear understanding of the rule than based on our judgment of the action that we observe.
Thoughts?

[MJT]

My responses are in red.

@MJT--I agree with you. I think that this is a foul in many cases. It is one of many classic examples of "rerouting" a receiver.  And unfortunately there is very little supervisor-type training tape clips to settle the matter. (Please point me in the right direction if you know where I can get some.) I think I have one from a clinic I was at. I will try to look tomorrow.  I don't think there would be a lot of debate amongst  officials who have been a many clinics or have had much good training from upper level deep or wing officials.

What do you have when a TE or a slot releases and runs a 5-yard drag route across the middle and an LB who has dropped back into pass coverage comes up and chucks him on the side (not a PF or in the back) as he's looking back to the QB? If the receiver is looking back at the QB, easy call  Some officials will say that because he was not at the same yard line that this is not a foul. They state that he is still a potential blocker even though the receiver is looking back toward the ball. Not any I work with would say that. They say this is "just football." Other officials say this is a foul. They cite that the "same yard line" clause is only part of the equation because 1) the rule states "...OR could not possibly block [the defender]" and 2) if you allow this contact, you essentially take away the passing game. These 2 reasons are exactly why it is a flag!! 
Again, assume contact that is not a PF, IBB or holding, you could literally knock receivers down as they make their cut all day long and without this rule, this is not a foul. Yet it has been my experience that officials are clearly divided as to whether that action is even a foul in the first place for the reasons I just stated.
What if you have a WR that runs a quick slant and gets chucked hard in the side on the shoulder pad by the corner as he's (the WR) looking back for the ball? Even though they're not on the same yard line, how can the WR be considered a potential blocker if he's running at an angle away from the DB? Yet we allow this all the time with no flag. Not in our conference. We have discussed this type of play, and agree it is a foul. If he has made the break in his route, he is no longer a potential blocker.
Is it reasonable to state that an LB gets a little more leeway on a chuck across the middle because he's keying the QB and a different colored jersey is running at/near him from the side as opposed to a CB that knows exactly what's happening when the WR breaks to the inside?
I have been told by defensive coaches that they coach their LBs to "go up and hit any receiver that crosses in front of you." This would be called. If the coach asks, I'll explain that if he is running a crossing route, or has made his break in his route, he cannot be hit. In fact, I have had this discussion and they understand, but don't necessarily like it.
The NFL has solved a lot of this interpretation with their Illegal Contact rule. That's fine as that's what they want in their code. The question is what the NCAA (and even the Fed) wants in their code.
I'm certainly not trying to be over-technical, just trying to understand and hopefully work toward some sort of consensus.
Either way, I believe this is not called more often because we don't have a clear understanding of the rule than based on our judgment of the action that we observe.
Thoughts?

[ljudge]

The problem with what you are asking SJ_31, is that you are only looking at 9-3-4-c, but not 9-3-4-b.  Under 9-3-4-b, what you are describing ljudge is "illegal obstruction" and has been called numerous times in college games. If not, when the receiver made his cut, and you were trailing on his side, you would just shove him or hit him and take him off his route. This fits into the category of "cut off" for DPI, and "illegal obstruction" for illegal use of hands by the defense if the ball is not yet in the air. It is the type of contact that is a 10 yard foul and automatic first down if the ball crossed the NZ, and I called it once, if not twice this year.

I would love to see a youtube video of this obstruction foul where I could see the action, flag, and verbiage used by the referee on enforcement. 

[MJT]

I would love to see a youtube video of this obstruction foul where I could see the action, flag, and verbiage used by the referee on enforcement.

Some youtubes I found. No referee verbiage, and not NCAA necessarily, but put what you think, and then I will come back and do the same.

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klfKiSNJJa4   Snap is at 32 seconds and contact is on third receiver in from the bottom of the screen.

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xw_TVLRmZNs&feature=related   Best angle starts 10 seconds in, with the contact at 14.  This is why the "same yard line" rule does not always apply.

3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qijVs8-pOMU   52 to 55 seconds has the best view. Let's discuss this as if the ball was not thrown yet.

[Kalle]

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klfKiSNJJa4   Snap is at 32 seconds and contact is on third receiver in from the bottom of the screen.

Is there anything to even discuss here? North-south contact, definitely a potential blocker, legal.

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xw_TVLRmZNs&feature=related   Best angle starts 10 seconds in, with the contact at 14.  This is why the "same yard line" rule does not always apply.

Contact is initiated by team A so this can only be DPI if the ball is thrown by the time of the contact. Otherwise, the team B player has territorial rights and you could even consider an OPI call here.

3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qijVs8-pOMU   52 to 55 seconds has the best view. Let's discuss this as if the ball was not thrown yet.

The views are bad but here you could have illegal use of hands, the defender is beat.

(Ex-EFAF referee, occasional deep, nowadays occasional low level semi-pro)

[MJT]

Let's do this also for those who comment on the 3 plays. Put which of the 7 positions you work and at what level, HS, or college NAIA, DIII, DII, FCS, FBS. I think there is value to the position worked, level, training received in this area of discussion.