Author Topic: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew  (Read 6931 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Patrick E.

  • *
  • Posts: 150
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-3
Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« on: June 12, 2021, 07:45:58 AM »
A question about blocking below the waist mechanics  - NFHS 5 & 4 man crews - who is responsible for knowing which offensive players are lined up on the LOS and in the FBZ at the snap? Is there any set philosophy other than eye-balling it? The R can align himself 4 yards from the ball laterally if the TE is on the same side as him, but what if he isn’t? Also, the R’s key is the opposite tackle. The wings, and the BJ depending on the formation, can see the TE's initial block, but they would not necessarily know if the TE was in the FBZ.

My understanding is NCAA has a “tackle box” - the 2 players on either side of the snapper determine the lateral dimension of the tackle box. Everyone else is not. This sets up a definitive determination as to who can block whom below the waist.

The NFHS GOM addresses the U knowing the B players on the LOS and in the FBZ, but doesn't seem to address A.  The R has the best look at the A player splits and determining who is in the FBZ.

Any further thoughts on this are appreciated.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4727
  • FAN REACTION: +341/-919
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #1 on: June 12, 2021, 04:38:06 PM »
A question about blocking below the waist mechanics  - NFHS 5 & 4 man crews - who is responsible for knowing which offensive players are lined up on the LOS and in the FBZ at the snap? Is there any set philosophy other than eye-balling it? The R can align himself 4 yards from the ball laterally if the TE is on the same side as him, but what if he isn’t? Also, the R’s key is the opposite tackle. The wings, and the BJ depending on the formation, can see the TE's initial block, but they would not necessarily know if the TE was in the FBZ.

The NFHS GOM addresses the U knowing the B players on the LOS and in the FBZ, but doesn't seem to address A.  The R has the best look at the A player splits and determining who is in the FBZ.

NFHS: 2-17-1 defines the FBZ as, "laterally 4yards either side of the spot of the snap & 3 yds behind each LOS".  Everybody (except the BJ) shares some responsibility for for the LOS & FBZ.  R probably has the best view of the depth of the FBZ, which is why they recommend his position 10-15 yds behind the LOS.  Understanding that "all hell breaks loose" with the snap, their are different focuses, the U is facing the O line, so along with a lot of other concerns he's focused on the target area.  Both wing officials start out with observing the line responsibilities, so BBW falls into their field of vision as well, so responsibility for knowing who's in the zone at the snap, where this "imaginary" zone starts and ends (on each play) requires a collective coverage effort.

It's often difficult to remember, BBW & the FBZ prohibitions extends to D-players as well, who seem to be willing to target & eliminate the O-Blockers rather than concentrate on the runners.  You can only see what you see which is why 2, 3, 4 sets of eyes are better than 1.   

Offline HLinNC

  • *
  • Posts: 3491
  • FAN REACTION: +133/-24
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #2 on: June 12, 2021, 10:54:17 PM »
Don't make this harder than it is.  The FBZ doesn't last that long, particularly in today's shotgun and pistol spread formations.  As Al mentioned, everyone but the BJ has some LOS responsibility.   Once the ball has left the zone, the zone is gone and BBW is no longer legal.  Think initial charge and block.  Wings will be keying their OT to read run or block so they can pick up their initial action.
If A is in normal splits, the TE is usually in the zone.  Any part of him that is in the zone puts him in the FBZ.

Don't bring "tackle box" into the equation.  It doesn't exist in NFHS.

Online bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 2936
  • FAN REACTION: +115/-27
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #3 on: June 13, 2021, 09:00:49 AM »
Don't bring "tackle box" into the equation.  It doesn't exist in NFHS.

9 out of 10 coaches think it does......  :sTiR:

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #4 on: June 13, 2021, 09:07:43 AM »
9 out of 10 coaches think it does......  :sTiR:
Playoff game last year, QB rolled out and dumped a pass oob because nobody was open. *flag.*. Coach: “but he was outside the tackle box.”



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Offline HLinNC

  • *
  • Posts: 3491
  • FAN REACTION: +133/-24
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #5 on: June 13, 2021, 01:12:36 PM »
Quote
“but he was outside the tackle box.”

Given the last rule change questionnaire, I fear it is coming sooner than later.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #6 on: June 13, 2021, 01:14:53 PM »
I’ll vote for it just to clear up the confusion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Tom.OH

  • *
  • Posts: 391
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-0
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #7 on: June 13, 2021, 05:57:04 PM »
If a coach yelled to me " he was outside the tackle box" I would tell them I did not fish...
These people get their rule knowledge "as seen on TV"...
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. And inside of a dog, it's to dark to read."
Groucho Marx

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #8 on: June 13, 2021, 06:10:42 PM »
If a coach yelled to me " he was outside the tackle box" I would tell them I did not fish...
These people get their rule knowledge "as seen on TV"...
I’ve learned the hard way a snarky reply to an ignorant statement doesn’t help. I have politely told a coach who tried to apply a college rule to HS that this is Friday night and that’s a Saturday rule. Something along the lines of “Coach, if we were playing tomorrow you would be right but this is Friday night football.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4727
  • FAN REACTION: +341/-919
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #9 on: June 13, 2021, 10:37:00 PM »
Whenever possible, "always be nice, unless and until, it's time to not be nice." (Patrick Swayze, "Roadhouse")

Online bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 2116
  • FAN REACTION: +301/-25
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #10 on: June 14, 2021, 08:25:57 AM »
A question about blocking below the waist mechanics  - NFHS 5 & 4 man crews - who is responsible for knowing which offensive players are lined up on the LOS and in the FBZ at the snap? Is there any set philosophy other than eye-balling it? The R can align himself 4 yards from the ball laterally if the TE is on the same side as him, but what if he isn’t? Also, the R’s key is the opposite tackle. The wings, and the BJ depending on the formation, can see the TE's initial block, but they would not necessarily know if the TE was in the FBZ.

My understanding is NCAA has a “tackle box” - the 2 players on either side of the snapper determine the BACKWARD PASS dimension of the tackle box. Everyone else is not. This sets up a definitive determination as to who can block whom below the waist.

The NFHS GOM addresses the U knowing the B players on the LOS and in the FBZ, but doesn't seem to address A.  The R has the best look at the A player splits and determining who is in the FBZ.

Any further thoughts on this are appreciated.

You can fairly easily eyeball it from anywhere on the field.  It's essentially TE to TE on the LOS.  The R or U can see if the offense is in extra wide splits and alert the crew that the TE may be out of the FBZ, but that's rare.

The zone disintegrates almost immediately in shotgun, so you really don't have to worry about it as long as someone cuts as their first move out of their stance.  Plus with the rule change, the ball being in the FBZ doesn't matter anymore for cutting.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2021, 12:11:37 PM by bossman72 »

Offline Snapper

  • *
  • Posts: 150
  • FAN REACTION: +14/-2
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #11 on: June 14, 2021, 10:31:09 AM »
Ok, as somebody that doesn't know NFHS rules really well anymore, but who still observes, etc., let me try to paraphrase my understanding of the FBZ, BBW, IBB, etc.  This, of course, is with the caveat that we haven't seen the final 2021 rulebook and casebook language yet.  Corrections/refinements to my paraphrasing are welcome.  This is basically for my own use to understand the differences between Fed and NCAA.

The FBZ measures 3 yds vertically and 4 yds wide from the spot of the snap, and any part of their body puts them in the zone.  In practice, given a balanced formation and normal splits, this means TE to TE.

Offensive AND Defensive linemen in the zone at the snap can immediately block each other below the waist.  It doesn't matter in regards to blocking below the waist if the QB is in shotgun or not.  The block can be directed forward or from the side.  Immediate, as a practical matter, means the lineman directly ahead or directly adjacent to them.  They still can't CLP or CHB.

The other rule that uses the FBZ is blocking in the back.  Offensive lineman in the FBZ at the snap can legally block in the back (above the waist) any defensive players that were in the zone at the snap.  The block has to occur in the FBZ and the FBZ disintegrates when the ball leaves the zone.



Offline HLinNC

  • *
  • Posts: 3491
  • FAN REACTION: +133/-24
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #12 on: June 14, 2021, 11:11:32 AM »
Quote
It doesn't matter in regards to blocking below the waist if the QB is in shotgun or not

Some states, NC included, have adopted the interpretation that a lineman in a 2 point stance can not legally block below the waist as opposed to a 3 or 4 point stance in a shotgun snap.  I don't recall how many use that interp.

Otherwise you appear to be spot-on.

Offline Snapper

  • *
  • Posts: 150
  • FAN REACTION: +14/-2
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #13 on: June 14, 2021, 02:34:03 PM »
Some states, NC included, have adopted the interpretation that a lineman in a 2 point stance can not legally block below the waist as opposed to a 3 or 4 point stance in a shotgun snap.  I don't recall how many use that interp.

Otherwise you appear to be spot-on.

Thanks.

I'll be curious to see if given the rule change this year, if those states will change their interpretation or stick with it.  From what I've read, the committee was trying to get everyone on the same page, but of course, states can still interpret as they see best.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4727
  • FAN REACTION: +341/-919
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #14 on: June 14, 2021, 03:22:41 PM »
Thanks.

I'll be curious to see if given the rule change this year, if those states will change their interpretation or stick with it.  From what I've read, the committee was trying to get everyone on the same page, but of course, states can still interpret as they see best.

Apparently, in the NFHS world, individual States are authorized, subject to NFHS consideration and approval to authorize specific interpretation clarifications for games played within their jurisdiction.  Such authorization for these conclusions and/or allowances are limited to the authority reach of these State organizations authorized to implement specified modifications.

Whether, or not, other States choose to accept modifications, applicable to those States approved for modification, seems to be up to the individual State seeking the appropriate compliance approval from NFHS. Should their be either confusion, or guidance, the safest path to approved compliance would be specific clarification and/or approval from YOUR State association.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #15 on: June 14, 2021, 03:34:49 PM »
Apparently, in the NFHS world, individual States are authorized, subject to NFHS consideration and approval to authorize specific interpretation clarifications for games played within their jurisdiction.  Such authorization for these conclusions and/or allowances are limited to the authority reach of these State organizations authorized to implement specified modifications.

Whether, or not, other States choose to accept modifications, applicable to those States approved for modification, seems to be up to the individual State seeking the appropriate compliance approval from NFHS. Should their be either confusion, or guidance, the safest path to approved compliance would be specific clarification and/or approval from YOUR State association.
This is true.  Specifically found in the disclaimer:

NFHS rules are used by education-based and non-education-based organizations serving children of varying skill levels who are of high school age and younger. In order to make NFHS rules skill-level and age-level appropriate, the rules may be modified by any organization that chooses to use them. Except as may be specifically noted in this rules book, the NFHS makes no recommendation about the nature or extent of the modifications that may be appropriate for children who are younger or less skilled than high school varsity athletes.


Each state high school association adopting these rules is the sole and exclusive source of binding rules interpretations for contests involving its member schools. Any person having questions about the interpretation of NFHS rules should contact the rules interpreter designated by his or her state high school association.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Online Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 4655
  • FAN REACTION: +864/-28
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #16 on: June 15, 2021, 04:17:17 AM »
It is my understanding that a state can strengthen a rule without any NFHS approval. A classic example is 2-32-6 : "A disqualified player  is a player barred from further participation in a game." Many states tack on a suspension to said player or coach.

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 721
  • FAN REACTION: +633/-113
  • See it, Think about it, Pass on it if possible!
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #17 on: June 15, 2021, 01:35:40 PM »
It is my understanding that a state can strengthen a rule without any NFHS approval. A classic example is 2-32-6 : "A disqualified player  is a player barred from further participation in a game." Many states tack on a suspension to said player or coach.

Oregon -
Many years ago, because of our high rainfall and sloppy fields, chose to strengthen the cleat rule.
Players were participating wearing 3/4, 7/8 & 1 Inch cleats.
Under todays NFHS rule this is a UNS (9-8-1h) charged to the Head Coach for and violation of 1-5-1f(1).
Nowadays, in the greater Portland area, a large majority of our playing surfaces are artificial turf, so the problem rarely occurs.
I only remember enforcing it once and that was when a defensive player showed me his totally ripped apart hand and ask me (not so politely) if I would check #71's cleats?  (Exact quote was, "Jesus H Christ will you look at #71's cleats?" I responded with, "Well, since he not here, I will!")
Sure enough, Number 71 was wearing long baseball cleats and was he was promptly awarded his walking papers.
The defensive player also left the game but that's only because he had to go get stitches.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2021, 01:39:16 PM by KWH »
SEE everything that you CALL, but; Don't CALL everything you SEE!
Never let the Rules Book get in the way of a great ball game!

Respectfully Submitted;
Some guy on a message forum

Offline theride

  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-12
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #18 on: June 23, 2021, 10:51:46 PM »
There is nothing in the blocking below the waist rule that says you can't block below the waist if you are in a 2 point stance. If the player does it immediately/initial charge, it will be legal.  2 and 3 point stances are not in the rule book.  Going against the rule if a state interprets the rule this way. Just follow the written rule, and states can be consistent. Very simple

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #19 on: June 24, 2021, 05:47:52 AM »
There is nothing in the blocking below the waist rule that says you can't block below the waist if you are in a 2 point stance. If the player does it immediately/initial charge, it will be legal.  2 and 3 point stances are not in the rule book.  Going against the rule if a state interprets the rule this way. Just follow the written rule, and states can be consistent. Very simple
Go back and read the last couple of posts. A state can strength any rule they want. If SC says no cut in a 2, then cutting in a 2 is illegal there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #20 on: June 24, 2021, 06:45:12 AM »
Go back and read the last couple of posts. A state can strength any rule they want. If SC says no cut in a 2, then cutting in a 2 is illegal there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I’m sorry, that should be NC not SC. My apologies to the potentially offended.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline NVFOA_Ump

  • *
  • Posts: 3848
  • FAN REACTION: +99/-283
  • High School (MA & RI)
    • Massachusetts Independent Football Officials Association
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #21 on: June 24, 2021, 08:14:11 AM »
There is nothing in the blocking below the waist rule that says you can't block below the waist if you are in a 2 point stance. If the player does it immediately/initial charge, it will be legal.  2 and 3 point stances are not in the rule book.  Going against the rule if a state interprets the rule this way. Just follow the written rule, and states can be consistent. Very simple

Actually the rule stated that the BBW is only legal while the ball is in the zone.  Preseason we were shown multiple videos from several states that clearly showed that in shotgun formation the ball was no longer in the zone when a lineman in a 2 point stance was just beginning to move low therefore the BBW didn't happen until well after the QB had possession of the ball.  We, here in Massachusetts, were given the "interpretation" that to BBW in shotgun the 1st criteria was that the lineman must start from a 3 point stance.  It was explained to us that this was simply enforcing the rule as written and nothing more.
It's easy to get the players, getting 'em to play together, that's the hard part. - Casey Stengel

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #22 on: June 24, 2021, 08:37:31 AM »
Actually the rule stated that the BBW is only legal while the ball is in the zone.  Preseason we were shown multiple videos from several states that clearly showed that in shotgun formation the ball was no longer in the zone when a lineman in a 2 point stance was just beginning to move low therefore the BBW didn't happen until well after the QB had possession of the ball.  We, here in Massachusetts, were given the "interpretation" that to BBW in shotgun the 1st criteria was that the lineman must start from a 3 point stance.  It was explained to us that this was simply enforcing the rule as written and nothing more.
Not to open up this can of worms again, but the timing of the block is open to interpretation. Some states such as yours determine the time of the block to be contact, while others interpret the time of the block to mean the initial movement of the blocker. If it’s the latter, then the argument can be made that a lineman can initiate a bbw in a 2 while the ball is in the zone. Which is supported by the new rule change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline ncwingman

  • *
  • Posts: 1269
  • FAN REACTION: +72/-13
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #23 on: June 24, 2021, 09:05:25 AM »
Actually the rule stated that the BBW is only legal while the ball is in the zone.  Preseason we were shown multiple videos from several states that clearly showed that in shotgun formation the ball was no longer in the zone when a lineman in a 2 point stance was just beginning to move low therefore the BBW didn't happen until well after the QB had possession of the ball.  We, here in Massachusetts, were given the "interpretation" that to BBW in shotgun the 1st criteria was that the lineman must start from a 3 point stance.  It was explained to us that this was simply enforcing the rule as written and nothing more.

Also not wanting to open that can of worms, but I've heard that argument and work in a state that has that as official policy that I'll enforce (yada, yada). Is that particular presentation available somewhere, or just random clips put together at a state meeting?

I certainly believe that the ball is out of the zone fast enough that the blocker in a two point stance going low doesn't "win" that race, but I've never seen evidence that being in a 3/4 pt stance actually makes it so much faster that it becomes legal just for being in that stance. Meaning, I'd love to see side by side clips of "Here's a two point stance that's too slow, and here's a 3/4 pt stance that's fast enough -- and the sole factor that made it (il)legal was the stance". Of course, you could also cherry pick 10 clips to show the point without establishing what happens most often.

The really small amount of time we're dealing with here means there's probably a lot of plays that become exceptions to the rule -- mostly, players in 3/4 pt stances that *don't* make it in time, but don't look like they're unnecessarily delaying the charge. Their first movement is clearly going low, but they had a slow reaction time at the snap (not egregiously slow, just not ultra fast), for example.

Personally, if a quarter second delay off the snap means that the low block is unacceptably dangerous and should be penalized, I think that means that low blocks as a whole are unacceptably dangerous and should be penalized. If you're willing to say "initial charge at the snap" is okay, then hair splitting about exact timing and stances should be moot.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2940
  • FAN REACTION: +134/-1004
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Blocking Below the Waist Mechanics - 5&4 man crew
« Reply #24 on: June 24, 2021, 09:12:07 AM »
Also not wanting to open that can of worms, but I've heard that argument and work in a state that has that as official policy that I'll enforce (yada, yada). Is that particular presentation available somewhere, or just random clips put together at a state meeting?

I certainly believe that the ball is out of the zone fast enough that the blocker in a two point stance going low doesn't "win" that race, but I've never seen evidence that being in a 3/4 pt stance actually makes it so much faster that it becomes legal just for being in that stance. Meaning, I'd love to see side by side clips of "Here's a two point stance that's too slow, and here's a 3/4 pt stance that's fast enough -- and the sole factor that made it (il)legal was the stance". Of course, you could also cherry pick 10 clips to show the point without establishing what happens most often.

The really small amount of time we're dealing with here means there's probably a lot of plays that become exceptions to the rule -- mostly, players in 3/4 pt stances that *don't* make it in time, but don't look like they're unnecessarily delaying the charge. Their first movement is clearly going low, but they had a slow reaction time at the snap (not egregiously slow, just not ultra fast), for example.

Personally, if a quarter second delay off the snap means that the low block is unacceptably dangerous and should be penalized, I think that means that low blocks as a whole are unacceptably dangerous and should be penalized. If you're willing to say "initial charge at the snap" is okay, then hair splitting about exact timing and stances should be moot.
Agree completely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk