« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Blocking Below the Waist - defense  (Read 10561 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8773
  • FAN REACTION: +229/-269
  • When you quit learning you quit living
Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« on: December 08, 2014, 04:48:58 AM »
In all the discussions over blocking below the waist rules, one area we have not looked at very much is action by the defense.  In my mind, it has always been legal to block below the waist if trying to get to a ball you can legally possess or to a ball carrier.  But a video on Rom Gilbert's site has me rethinking that generalization:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeHv5qlZ2OA

Seems that if the defense can go low on an eligible receiver to get to a ball or a ball carrier, they should be able to do so against anyone.  But the way 9-1-6-d is worded, perhaps not.
Logged

Offline ttown44

  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • FAN REACTION: +3/-1
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2014, 06:59:16 AM »
The reason for the flag here would be due to the change of possession on the play
Logged

Offline Andrew McCarthy

  • *
  • Posts: 1010
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-6
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #2 on: December 08, 2014, 01:02:39 PM »
Quote from: TXMike on December 08, 2014, 04:48:58 AM
In my mind, it has always been legal to block below the waist if trying to get to a ball you can legally possess or to a ball carrier.
In my mind it has always been illegal to block below the waist after a change of team possession or during any kick down.  Don't these trump all else?
Logged

Offline TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8773
  • FAN REACTION: +229/-269
  • When you quit learning you quit living
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2014, 01:06:50 PM »
I will have to look at the old books.  Just seems getting to ball or runner was always an exception
Logged

Offline clearwall

  • *
  • Posts: 758
  • FAN REACTION: +14/-13
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2014, 02:03:33 PM »
Quote from: TXMike on December 08, 2014, 01:06:50 PM
I will have to look at the old books.  Just seems getting to ball or runner was always an exception

Wouldnt this be the definition of a tackle?
Logged

Offline TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8773
  • FAN REACTION: +229/-269
  • When you quit learning you quit living
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2014, 03:16:18 PM »
Not talking about ON the runner, talking about going through players to get to him
Logged

Offline clearwall

  • *
  • Posts: 758
  • FAN REACTION: +14/-13
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2014, 03:34:44 PM »
Yeah, how would you distinguish between a bona fide attempt at a tackle or whether it was BBW? I think that's the reason for the exception.
Logged

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 1084
  • FAN REACTION: +257/-8
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2014, 03:55:11 PM »
The only player you can block low after a change of possession is the runner. He may have going for the runner but he missed and blocked someone else. This is a safety foul and an easy call.
Logged

Offline ajv

  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-0
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #8 on: December 09, 2014, 06:10:21 PM »
Actually, the rule (after change of team possession) says ball carrier rather than runner. It was runner in '08; ball carrier in '09; back to runner in '11; and since '13 it's ball carrier again.

I still don't know why it keeps changing.
Logged

Offline NVFOA_Ump

  • *
  • Posts: 4191
  • FAN REACTION: +107/-351
  • High School (MA & RI)
    • Massachusetts Independent Football Officials Association
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #9 on: December 10, 2014, 07:30:31 AM »
The rule 2 definitions are:

Runner and Ball Carrier
ARTICLE 7. a. The runner is a player in possession of a live ball or simulating possession of a live ball.
b. A ball carrier is a runner in possession of a live ball.

There has been some discussion of this in the past but apparently the rules committee has settled on the only exception to low blocks will be on the actual ball carrier who has possession of the ball and no longer include a runner.  That leaves out the need for us to make a judgment call of who is a "runner".
Logged
It's easy to get the players, getting 'em to play together, that's the hard part. - Casey Stengel

Offline TXMike

  • *
  • Posts: 8773
  • FAN REACTION: +229/-269
  • When you quit learning you quit living
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #10 on: December 10, 2014, 07:45:29 AM »
Which is total BS.  Who among us will flag  a tackle below the waist against someone who is faking as if they have the ball ?
Logged

Offline Andrew McCarthy

  • *
  • Posts: 1010
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-6
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #11 on: December 10, 2014, 08:15:09 AM »
Further sidetracking the discussion, the rules editor really botched the runner/ball carrier thing throughout the book when they added that term. 

It seems like things the opponent can do against the ball carrier should also be legal against a runner.
Logged

Offline BlindZebra

  • *
  • Posts: 153
  • FAN REACTION: +4/-1
Re: Blocking Below the Waist - defense
« Reply #12 on: December 10, 2014, 10:17:50 AM »
CLP 9-1-5-Exception 3 and IBB 9-3-3-c-Exception 3 are the only instances where the exception comes into play as far as I can tell.
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »