Lesson Learned

[NVFOA_Ump]

One more post and I'm done with this topic. Magician referenced Redding as a source for philosophy. I looked at the block in the back section and found this:
Page 107, Additional example 6: In the free-blocking zone before the ball leaves the zone, defensive end B81 was on the line and in the zone at the snap blocks A52 (a) below the waist and from behind, (b) below the waist and from in front, or (c) in the back above the waist. RULING: An illegal block in (a) and (c), but a legal block in (b). In (c), only offensive linemen may legally block from behind in the zone. In (b), defensive linemen may legally block opponents low if the opponent was in the zone and on the line at the snap.

As discussed in another thread is it considered a legitimate 3rd source to use the Redding NFHS guide as a rules document?  I can't find any specific guidance from NFHS that says so, and several areas of the guide seem to use virtually identical examples as the NCAA guide uses despite the rules differences in those areas.

[Magician]

I actually had my umpire call a Block in the back on the defense 2 weeks ago. When he told me he had a flag for this, I guess that I looked at him funny because he started to explain what he saw. According to him, the LB hit the lead blocker in the back and knocked him down. This allow another B player to not have to engage the lead blocker and that player made the tackle on the runner. Seems like the block in the back created a clear disadvantage for the offense and since it was an attempt to get at the ball or the runner, it fits the definition of an illegal block in the back. Of course, the coach wasn't happy.

That sounds like a reasonable explanation. My question though would be if the defender was between the lead blocker and the runner (assuming this was the case since he was in position to block the back of the lead blocker), why didn't he turn around and tackle the runner?

[NorCalMike]

That sounds like a reasonable explanation. My question though would be if the defender was between the lead blocker and the runner (assuming this was the case since he was in position to block the back of the lead blocker), why didn't he turn around and tackle the runner?

Good question. Not sure.

[CalhounLJ]

Think option with the runner outside the numbers trying to get the edge. Entirely possible for the LB to block a blocker in the back from the inside while in lateral pursuit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[refjeff]

Think option with the runner outside the numbers trying to get the edge. Entirely possible for the LB to block a blocker in the back from the inside while in lateral pursuit.

  If the LB is in lateral pursuit by rule he can push B in the back.

And where is the blocker going that he is running away from a pursuing LB?  But I guess not for us to judge.

[CalhounLJ]

He can push the LB but sometimes he doesn’t. Sometimes he hits him in the back. The blocker is not running FROM the LB, he’s running TOWARD another defensive player who is in front of the runner. To keep the blocker from blocking that player, the LB, unable to make the tackle himself, takes out the blocker so his teammate can attempt to make the tackle. It’s not that hard to envision a play like this. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk