Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

What are the rules around a receiver initiating contact?

GladstoneGladstone Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 16,417
First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Combo Breaker
Founders Club
edited January 2016 in NFL Talk
It seemed like Rudolph ran right into Chancellor and Chancellor's contact after the hit was an effort to shed Rudolph and stay in the play.

What are the rules? If a receiver runs directly into the defender and initiates contact, can the defender do nothing at all?

Comments

  • Options
    section_332section_332 Member Posts: 2,403
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Name Dropper
    That should have been a illegal contact 5 yard penalty, not pass interference. White boy wasent making a play on the ball
  • Options
    sarktasticsarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    5 Awesomes Photogenic First Anniversary Name Dropper
    Gladstone said:

    It seemed like Rudolph ran right into Chancellor and Chancellor's contact after the hit was an effort to shed Rudolph and stay in the play.

    What are the rules? If a receiver runs directly into the defender and initiates contact, can the defender do nothing at all?

    Depends on the player, the teams playing and whether or not the right team has momentum in the game when the play happens.
  • Options
    Bob_CBob_C Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 9,077
    5 Up Votes Photogenic First Anniversary 5 Awesomes
    Founders Club

    That should have been a illegal contact 5 yard penalty, not pass interference. White boy wasent making a play on the ball

    Actually that's not correct. Provided the ball is in the air is all that determines pass interference vs illegal contact or holding. Who intiates the contact hardly matters either, it's basically a block vs charge judgement call. Personally I feel the refs got it right, Chancellor was beat to the inside because he was cheating to the outside and out of position.


  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Bob_C said:

    That should have been a illegal contact 5 yard penalty, not pass interference. White boy wasent making a play on the ball

    Actually that's not correct. Provided the ball is in the air is all that determines pass interference vs illegal contact or holding. Who intiates the contact hardly matters either, it's basically a block vs charge judgement call. Personally I feel the refs got it right, Chancellor was beat to the inside because he was cheating to the outside and out of position.


    I agree, I thought it was a good call.

    Cam may be the player who's legacy changed the most thanks to Walsh's miss (well, besides Walsh). He was going to be the goat if Seattle lost that. Complete opposite from their first playoff game last year. Now his forced fumble will last longer in the memory banks.
  • Options
    section_332section_332 Member Posts: 2,403
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Name Dropper
    Bob_C said:

    That should have been a illegal contact 5 yard penalty, not pass interference. White boy wasent making a play on the ball

    Actually that's not correct. Provided the ball is in the air is all that determines pass interference vs illegal contact or holding. Who intiates the contact hardly matters either, it's basically a block vs charge judgement call. Personally I feel the refs got it right, Chancellor was beat to the inside because he was cheating to the outside and out of position.


    I can see that. But Rudolph engaged with him also. And when that happens, the 5 yard rule comes into play.

    In the end it was only a 6 yard difference I think.
  • Options
    Bob_CBob_C Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 9,077
    5 Up Votes Photogenic First Anniversary 5 Awesomes
    Founders Club

    Bob_C said:

    That should have been a illegal contact 5 yard penalty, not pass interference. White boy wasent making a play on the ball

    Actually that's not correct. Provided the ball is in the air is all that determines pass interference vs illegal contact or holding. Who intiates the contact hardly matters either, it's basically a block vs charge judgement call. Personally I feel the refs got it right, Chancellor was beat to the inside because he was cheating to the outside and out of position.


    I can see that. But Rudolph engaged with him also. And when that happens, the 5 yard rule comes into play.

    In the end it was only a 6 yard difference I think.
    If you think it should have been illegal contact, then you are admitting it was pass interference. Ball was in the air, there is no illegal contact with ball in the air. Engaging is irrelevant also Ref saw Chancellors reaction and will always make the call he did when the defender is beaten or in a slightly disadvantaged position.
  • Options
    section_332section_332 Member Posts: 2,403
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Name Dropper
    Bob_C said:

    Bob_C said:

    That should have been a illegal contact 5 yard penalty, not pass interference. White boy wasent making a play on the ball

    Actually that's not correct. Provided the ball is in the air is all that determines pass interference vs illegal contact or holding. Who intiates the contact hardly matters either, it's basically a block vs charge judgement call. Personally I feel the refs got it right, Chancellor was beat to the inside because he was cheating to the outside and out of position.


    I can see that. But Rudolph engaged with him also. And when that happens, the 5 yard rule comes into play.

    In the end it was only a 6 yard difference I think.
    If you think it should have been illegal contact, then you are admitting it was pass interference. Ball was in the air, there is no illegal contact with ball in the air. Engaging is irrelevant also Ref saw Chancellors reaction and will always make the call he did when the defender is beaten or in a slightly disadvantaged position.
    Ok. I'm convinced. Didn't think about ball already in the air.
  • Options
    KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,751
    5 Up Votes First Anniversary 5 Awesomes First Comment
    edited January 2016

    That should have been a illegal contact 5 yard penalty, not pass interference. White boy wasent making a play on the ball


    The very next play after that should have answered your question.
Sign In or Register to comment.