Legal Block, This is a GOOD ONE??????!!!!!!

[bricord]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUw0_1iFivs&feature=player_embedded

Ohio U. Penn State

[SanDiegoStryker]

Looks like he goes past the LOS and then blocks back towards his own goal line. Foul right?

[TXMike]

Very much like the play RR used to demonstrate the rule change.  This is a foul this year

[Rulesman]

Looks like he goes past the LOS and then blocks back towards his own goal line. Foul right?

Not on this play. They waived off the flag.

[JasonTX]

Just looking at the hand signals during the discussion it appears they are discussing the angle of the contact.  Send these guys the memo that ANY angle toward your own goalline, not just one that's exactly South is a foul.

[TXMike]

Seeing as how at least 1 of those fellas is a contributor here...perhaps we will get some clarification.

[DallasLJ]

The angle shouldn't be the issue -- this was a block back towards A's goal line. Maybe they waived it off because they said the block was not beyond the LOS.  Looks like contact of block was within 1 yard of the LOS.

[justaLJ]

I saw this play when it happened, it was a foul, and it was a roller coaster ride.  These are the stages of officiating grief experienced:

1) Didn't see a flag thrown - darn, they missed it   

2) Announcers mention flag on field - all right, they got it!   

3) - uh oh, stay with it, stay with it!   

4) Flag picked up -   

I also wonder if the discussion was about where the block occured, but it was a good 3 yards beyond the LOS.  A learning opportunity for all, and a reminder that it can happen to any of us, including the best in the business.

I'm sure clarification from said contributor would be instructive to all.

[TXMike]

I see LOS at 30 and block at 32.5

[TxSkyBolt]

Trying to read the Rs lips, looks like he started out by saying no contact on the play  but that couldn't be right. Also the camera was keying on #64 at the end as if whatever was called was called on him, but the video didn't show him commiting any kind of violation.  Can't believe someone goes to the trouble of posting a video like that with no audio.

[Welpe]

Good early season example of how they need to simplify this rule.

[centexsports]

As a HS official, we have talked about this but I have seen no film.   At the point that 74 decides to block, he is facing a sideline and the defensive player is facing the other sideline.   

I kind of assumed that the rule was more for stopping wideouts from circling back and cutting a defensive player chasing a runner.   Did I miss the point?

[TXMike]

Reports are there continues to be a struggle between the forces who want all blocking below the waist eliminated and those who want it to stay.  In the past several years we have seen repeated tweaks that appear to be moving the low blocks out of the game.  This change we are referring to here was designed to prevent ALL Team A players, even "unrestricted blockers" from throwing a specific type of low block.  Any Team A low block thrown beyond the line of scrimmage cannot have the force of the block directed back towards his own goal line or at any angle between his goal line and a sideline.

[Rulesman]

Reports are there continues to be a struggle between the forces who want all blocking below the waist eliminated and those who want it to stay. 

As I've heard this straight from the mouth of a member of the committee, you can consider the statement accurate. It was also told to me those who want BBW to stay are in the minority, but so long as that element is involved (i.e. - has a vote), don't expect to see BBW gone. With all due respect to the individual who told me, I'll leave it at that.