"the original position of the ball at the snap"

[Andrew McCarthy]

Some out there are saying the revised rule only prohibits blocking low toward the original position of the ball at the snap; in other words, some vague time period at the beginning of the play.

Note the rule says "toward the original position of the ball at the snap" rather than just "toward the original position of the ball".

Has anyone heard of this?  Thoughts?

[younggun]

Do you think it means "towards the location of the ball where it was snapped"? Just throwing it out there.

[Kalle]

in other words, some vague time period at the beginning of the play.

Nitpick: it's not vague, snap starts when the snapper starts legally moving the ball and ends when it leaves his hands. Rule 2-23-1-b.

[NVFOA_Ump]

Some out there are saying the revised rule only prohibits blocking low toward the original position of the ball at the snap; in other words, some vague time period at the beginning of the play.

Note the rule says "toward the original position of the ball at the snap" rather than just "toward the original position of the ball".

Has anyone heard of this?  Thoughts?

The snap is a finite instant in time that is being used in this context to identify an exact location on the field of play when the play starts.  I don't believe that the wording is any more complicated than that.  How the final ARs and guidance define the actual implementation of the paragraph is still an open question.

[Magician]

I've heard the primary intent of this is action shortly after the snap and not action after the play has developed, especially downfield. The the standard 10-2 applies. Looking forward to more clarification.

[younggun]

Are there any ARs for this?

[FLBJ]

RUMOR MILL: More than one person has mention 5-3 (5 yards, 3 seconds (or was it 5 seconds and 3 yards?  )).

Looking forward to clarification before Aug 29...

[fencewire]

Here is an A.R.

A.R. 9-1-6-VIII.
Third and seven at the A-30. The ball is at the left hash mark. Back A22 is split completely outside the frame of the tackle on the left side, and B40 moves out to cover him. The handoff goes to back A44 who sweeps around the right end. As the play develops B40 follows the play and A22 chases him. At the A-40 beyond the right hash mark A22 overtakes B40 and blocks him below the waist clearly and directly at the front. The direction of this block is downfield and slightly toward the right sideline. A44 is tackled at the B-45.

RULING: Legal play. The block made directly in front of the opponent is legal no matter which sideline it is toward, since it is not toward Team A’s end line.

If it was illegal to block towards an imaginary line that runs through the ball end line to end line through out the down, then this AR directly contradicts that by saying that the block is legal no matter which sideline it is toward.

Ask 100 players and coaches where the "original position of the ball" was at the snap and they are all going to point back to the general area where the previous play started.  If a block occurred 30 yards down field, they surely wouldn't point to a spot in space on that "line".

After you get downfield more than 10 yards and you BBW back towards the "original position of the ball at the snap", you have BBW back towards your own end line anyway.

What I don't think that you can necessarily do is put a time frame on it.  I think in most cases that it would have to be rather close to "at the snap" to not be blocking back toward your own end line but in this AR we can see an instance where the blocker does just that and it would not be "at the snap"

A.R. 9-1-6-IV
Back A31, a flanker positioned to the left side of a formation, runs a deep reverse to the right side after receiving the ball from a teammate. End A82 at the snap is positioned 10 yards from the snapper on the right side of the formation. As A31 turns the corner A82 blocks B62 toward the left sideline. The block by A82 is below the waist and generally at the front but outside the “10 o’clock to 2 o’clock” width. The block occurs behind or one yard beyond the neutral zone.

RULING: Illegal block below the waist because it is too much to the opponent’s side and because it is directed toward the original position of the ball. 15-yard penalty. Enforce at the previous spot if the foul occurs behind the neutral zone.

That AR is in the BBW clarification document, but the bolded part above did not make it into the rulebook 2.0.  Which is very important in this AR.

In the CFO preseason video in the Illegal Blocks section at about 6:15 into the video there is a block that is fairly close to the snap, I definitely wouldn't say immediate, but the angle that the blocker takes is still back towards the general area where the ball was snapped from and not down the field.

Just my two cents...

[NVFOA_Ump]

I'm thinking that we should just be waiting for some official clarification on what the new "addition" really means since there was not any new AR(s) added clarifying the new language when it was added (in the new Rev. 1 book).  I'm not sure that speculating on the intent of putting the "original position of the ball" language back into the book and it's relationship to some time period or distance away is very productive.  IMO we need something documented so we all understand what the real intent is and how this should be officiated.

[Andrew McCarthy]

...there is a block that is fairly close to the snap, I definitely wouldn't say immediate...

So in other words, it may or may not be occuring during some vague time period at the beginning of the play. 

[cougar729]

Andrew, I've heard this same thing over the last week or so.  The way it was framed to me was this:

If the player blocking low starts his movement back towards the original position of the ball at the snap and blocks low, it is a foul.

If there is any delay/hesitation/etc. in his movement back towards the original position of the ball and blocks low it is NOT a foul.

Will be interesting to see if there will be an AR or Play Situation come out about this.

[fencewire]

I think that is because that was the direction given out of the CFO West clinic.  The other conferences from what I can tell and have been told, aren't looking at the rule the same way, they are looking at it more as that any block from a restricted player anytime during the down that is back towards a line running end line to end line from where the ball originally was snapped.  So it doesn't matter if the block is immediate, or 75 yards downfield, if it is towards that N/S line that the ball created then it is a foul.

At least, that is how it has been conveyed to me.  Is either of those right...     who knows...

[Andrew McCarthy]

I wish there was some kind of national organization that could work to standardize basic things such as this.  Heck, I'd be willing to pay 100 bucks to support the cause if they promised to send me a rule book.

[fencewire]

 

[NEREF]

If you watch the 2013 CFO/NCAA Annual Training Video in the Illegal blocks section, play #11, it shows a wide receiver block low after the ball has left the zone.  Mr. Redding says the block is illegal even though it meets the 10:00 - 2:00 requirement as the block is toward the original position of the ball.

It appears the restriction:  4. Players not covered in paragraph 1 (above) may not block below the waist toward the original position of the ball at the snap.  continues throughout the down.

[NVFOA_Ump]

If you watch the 2013 CFO/NCAA Annual Training Video in the Illegal blocks section, play #11, it shows a wide receiver block low after the ball has left the zone.  Mr. Redding says the block is illegal even though it meets the 10:00 - 2:00 requirement as the block is toward the original position of the ball.

It appears the restriction:  4. Players not covered in paragraph 1 (above) may not block below the waist toward the original position of the ball at the snap.  continues throughout the down.

IMHO this has to be the only valid interpretation to date.   That's the way it's been called in the past, and the "old" language is back in.  Until there is some clear formal guidance otherwise I would agree that the line runs thru the ball and all the way to the goal line and "exists" for the entire down.  Therefore the restricted blockers, if they BBW, must do so straight ahead of "toward their sideline", and comply with the new 10 o'clock to 2 o'clock requirement as well.

[copedaddy]

If I recall, the low block back towards the original position of th ball was OK if more than 10 yards down field. Now not at all? So just flip a coin before the game and decide how to call it.

[fencewire]

where is the original position of the ball at the snap? is it the area in the top example, or the line in the bottom...  I think we all have a good grasp on everything else...   

[attachment deleted by admin]

[dvasques]

the logic of the original spot of the snap being a line would be to forbid BBW towards the inside of the field? I can't see why would it not be a spot or an area close to the spot

[NVFOA_Ump]

where is the original position of the ball at the snap? is it the area in the top example, or the line in the bottom...

Again - Until we are instructed otherwise I'm OK with what we've used in the past.  I don't see any reson to speculate since there is really nothing else out there right now.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[RunRickyRun]

I'm a newbie here so I may be oversimplifying this a bit but here is what i gleaned from my discussion with Tommy Moore yesterday.

There are two types of blocks that would contain the language back toward the [original] position of the ball, but each in a different context.

The Crack Back block, which could only be a foul for a restricted player, is a block resulting from the immediate movement of the blocker back toward the original position of the ball (i.e. - a flanker's immediate low block on a DB inside of him, or a split end's immediate movement toward the center of the field that results in a low block on a linebacker).  Per our discussion, the immediacy of the action refers to the initial movement of the player rather than the block itself which may occur after several yards or steps.

The Peel Back block, which may be a foul for any player, is any block that is back toward the position of the ball (in other words, against the flow) either 1) by a previously unrestricted player after the ball has initially left the blocking zone or 2) by a restricted player.  This block would be a foul on any low, south block (back toward own goal) or any low block against the current flow of the play (position of the ball, even if the ball has passed the spot when/where the block occurs).  Per our discussion, a block that meets the above criteria would be a foul regardless of when/where on the field it occurred.

[TXMike]

In the video CFO posted today which is Dr Redding's presentation to the CAA, he was specifically asked by one of Refstripes' own stars about the crackback.  You really need to listen to Dr Redding's explanation to help you get your hands around this "crackback" part of the rule.  I especially loved his comments about how we officials will flyspeck the crap out of something. :-)   I think I understand the intent of this now and am ready to get this thing going!!  (Great question there Mr LJ  ;-)   )

[PSK]

The crackback question, and Rogers' answer, begins at the 39-minute mark on the video and runs a little over two minutes.

[Kalle]

For those of us without access to the CFO videos, could somebody summarize the answer?

[NVFOA_Ump]

..... You really need to listen to Dr Redding's explanation to help you get your hands around this "crackback" part of the rule.  .......

Is there any additional "clarification memo" that explicitly identifies a cutoff point (i.e. n yards beyond the LOS), where a BBW from the outside back in toward the original position of the ball at the snap would not be a foul?