I would assume that if the blocker making a crackback block lead with open hands and extended arms that the block would be legal while not having them open and extended would make the block illegal as long as there was forcible contact and the individual being blocked goes to the ground? Your opinions, please. Thanks.
I would hope, and believe, the new emphasis on "Blindside Blocks" was intended to reduce, and eliminate an opportunity to apply
excessive force, where unnecessary and dangerous, rather than invent new penalty opportunities. Often trying to combine different rules, and emphasis, to apply to different situations serves only to create confusion.
Correctly stated, "Crackback blocks are usually initiated by players who are outside the zone. Accordingly, a crackback block below the waist is an illegal block. Likewise, any crackback from behind is also illegal.", and although may at times meet the intended definition of a "blindside block", were NOT the intended target of the rule correction (as other than normally being directed towards the front of an opponent, would already as stated, be illegal).
The "Blindside" POE strongly suggested the remedy to
EXCESSIVE "Blindside" blocks will be found through coaching (use of extended arms) to reduce the force of contact. However that does not excuse the use of
EXCESSIVE force delivered through extended arm contact, or automatically prohibit other legal forms of blocking that are
NOT judged to be excessive, or unnecessary.
A basic principle of officiating, related to observing contact, is to see the entire process; from lead-up, to contact, through follow-up, which should still apply to both "Blindside as well as "Crack-back" blocks. Since no two blocks have EVER been exactly the same, it's unlikely a cookie-cutter approach will ALWAYS apply.
Practical, no-rule sanctioned definitions often (but not ALWAYS) paint clearer pictures, and what seems to be a general objective is the removal of "Cheap-Shots" from the game, a practical term under which both illegal Blindside and Crack-back blocks might reside.
Hopefully, as legal experts have suggested "pornography" is "difficult to define, but easy to recognize", the same applies to officials assessing "Cheap-Shots".