Author Topic: Blindside Block?  (Read 176 times)

Online TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8536
  • FAN REACTION: +225/-244
  • When you quit learning you quit living

Online Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 689
  • FAN REACTION: +136/-4
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #1 on: Yesterday at 05:53:36 PM »
I assume you are referring to the block by the wideout at the 25? That meets all the criteria except possibly forcible contact. I wouldn't consider this contact to be forcible because the blocker stops before he initiates the contact. He could make it even more obvious if he puts his hands in front. This isn't a violent hit, but it still takes the defender out of the play.

Online bctgp

  • *
  • Posts: 112
  • FAN REACTION: +3/-8
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #2 on: Yesterday at 08:10:28 PM »
Forcible is always a judgment but is there any cushioning by the blocker here? It does appear he may be cushioning by leading with his arms but the angle is not the best to 100% confirm. When in doubt it is a BSB correct?

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 373
  • FAN REACTION: +145/-39
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #3 on: Today at 01:39:39 AM »

It appears you two are digging for reasons not to call this a foul.

I guess I am not as nice of guy as you two.

The isolation shot shows he leads with his shoulder, so I would go with Blindside Block in both NCAA and NFHS

Perhaps I am just a bigger prick than you too.

However, In Texas, new rule and all, I would assume they would pas on this???

Online Kalle

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2846
  • FAN REACTION: +102/-34
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #4 on: Today at 03:56:55 AM »
I think there are three questions we need to answer.

1. Is this a block? Yes, it is.

2. Is it from outside the opponent's field of vision? Yes, it is.

3. Is it an open field block? I don't think so, but this is something we will be needing guidance on.

Online ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 962
  • FAN REACTION: +67/-67
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #5 on: Today at 08:12:29 AM »
I think there are three questions we need to answer.

1. Is this a block? Yes, it is.

2. Is it from outside the opponent's field of vision? Yes, it is.

3. Is it an open field block? I don't think so, but this is something we will be needing guidance on.

Kalle has hit the biggest nail head for this play, i.e., is it "open field?"  No one has received a lot of guidance on this, yet.  The "open field" component of the rule is clearly intended, for example, to allow an offensive tackle to take a couple of steps and blind-side an opponent in the general vicinity of the neutral zone.  We get that.  But this play is the quintessential example of the real gray area in this rule. The block isn't well behind or well beyond the NZ; rather, is it in the general area of the neutral zone extended to the sideline.  But, the blocker is able to draw a bead on the unsuspecting opponent from a significant distance, and, with that distance, is able to attain enough speed to give him a huge advantage in momentum as he contacts the opponent.   Put this action anywhere else on the field, and it would clearly qualify as "open field" (IMHO).  Combine that with element of surprise and the inability of the opponent to prepare himself for the contact, or take evasive action, you have the resulting "big hit" that has the potential to cause direct injury.  Not just momentary discomfort - but actual physical injury.  And that is what the rules makers at all levels are attempting to mitigate. 
We may get direction from NCAA folks that differs - or confirms - this conclusion (with rationale).  But, we just don't have that, yet.

In today's political and legal environment, governing organizations are having to take pro-active steps to reduce their exposure to legal challenges related to what some folks may see as preventable injuries, whether immediately serious (or catastrophic), or long-term pathological conditions.  That is what is driving these rule changes.  Rightly or wrongly, we, as officials are being asked to play a part in changing the culture of football, to move away from the highlight reel "big hit" made on players that can't defend themselves.  This is a huge, and very emotionally charged, change that everyone are being asked to embrace.  Obviously, players and coaches are resistant to such a major behavioral change, and are struggling to accept it.  I suppose it shouldn't be a surprise, but many officials are, likewise, struggling to adjust to this change, as well.  Personally, I don't see this "going back to the way it was."  We need to get on board and help make this a positive change.  We shouldn't be afraid to make these calls (BSB and TGT, in particular), as unpopular as they may be with players, coaches, and fans.  As I see it, it is already working.  We already see players making wrap-up tackles in many cases that, in the past, they would have just blasted the ball carrier or receiver.
Let's work together for the good of the game.  If we don't, we could see something happen that no one should ever want, and that is governmental intervention.  That will be the death of the game as we know it.

Robert   

Offline centexsports

  • *
  • Posts: 159
  • FAN REACTION: +5/-6
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #6 on: Today at 08:55:10 AM »
When I was in high school during the off-season, we played military football.   The backs against the linemen.   The favorite activity was catching someone not looking while following a ball carrier and laying one in his chest (de-cleating him).   That is a blind side hit.   I would like to see them change the name of BSB to BSH which would then automatically be a penalty.   In the video at the beginning of this is a great block by the wide receiver. 

Online Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 689
  • FAN REACTION: +136/-4
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #7 on: Today at 10:20:17 AM »
It appears you two are digging for reasons not to call this a foul.

I guess I am not as nice of guy as you two.

The isolation shot shows he leads with his shoulder, so I would go with Blindside Block in both NCAA and NFHS

Perhaps I am just a bigger prick than you too.

However, In Texas, new rule and all, I would assume they would pas on this???

That's why I think the NFHS got it right by adding the component of leading with the hands. He puts his hands in front of him the same block happens and there is no doubt it's a foul. I agree he leads with his shoulder but I wouldn't consider this forcible contact so I wouldn't have a foul. A defender can still go to the ground on a non-forcible contact.

Online TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8536
  • FAN REACTION: +225/-244
  • When you quit learning you quit living
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #8 on: Today at 11:15:10 AM »
That's why I think the NFHS got it right by adding the component of leading with the hands. He puts his hands in front of him the same block happens and there is no doubt it's a foul. I agree he leads with his shoulder but I wouldn't consider this forcible contact so I wouldn't have a foul. A defender can still go to the ground on a non-forcible contact.
. I am confused.   I thought NFHS said NOT a foul if leads with open hands ?

Offline NVFOA_Ump

  • *
  • Posts: 2964
  • FAN REACTION: +76/-105
  • High School (MA & RI)
    • Massachusetts Independent Football Officials Association
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #9 on: Today at 11:19:53 AM »
That's why I think the NFHS got it right by adding the component of leading with the hands. He puts his hands in front of him the same block happens and there is no doubt it's a foul. I agree he leads with his shoulder but I wouldn't consider this forcible contact so I wouldn't have a foul. A defender can still go to the ground on a non-forcible contact.

I agree.  In NFHS this is without question a flag.  Under current NCAA rules with the lack of a clearer definition or case play,  50/50.
It's easy to get the players, getting 'em to play together, that's the hard part. - Casey Stengel

Offline NVFOA_Ump

  • *
  • Posts: 2964
  • FAN REACTION: +76/-105
  • High School (MA & RI)
    • Massachusetts Independent Football Officials Association
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #10 on: Today at 11:22:47 AM »
. I am confused.   I thought NFHS said NOT a foul if leads with open hands ?

That's correct. For this foul to be legal in NFHS the blocker MUST make initial contact with open hands, palms out, and arms extended.  Initial contact with body/shoulder would 100% of the time be a foul.
It's easy to get the players, getting 'em to play together, that's the hard part. - Casey Stengel

Online TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8536
  • FAN REACTION: +225/-244
  • When you quit learning you quit living

Online Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 689
  • FAN REACTION: +136/-4
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #12 on: Today at 11:24:51 AM »
. I am confused.   I thought NFHS said NOT a foul if leads with open hands ?

That is correct and exactly my point. He eliminates any judgement the official has to make if he leads with his hands in NFHS. It makes it easier to coach and officiate. NCAA doesn't provide that clear option. I'm still a big fan of the rule and think it will generally be fine.

Online bctgp

  • *
  • Posts: 112
  • FAN REACTION: +3/-8
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blindside Block?
« Reply #13 on: Today at 01:02:57 PM »
The video also points out that the BSB doesn't have to occur in the open-field. It could just as well be a crackback type of block.