Crackback or legal BBW ?

[Aussie-Zebra]

http://youtu.be/s4BgOTSJL4I

[Hawkeye]

That block is why 9-1-6-a-4 was added.  The way the rule was initially written this year, that would have been a legal block, but that block has never (I think!) been legal and the committee corrected it.

[Aussie-Zebra]

Thanks Hawkeye

4. Players not covered in paragraph 1 (above) [those in the LBZ] may not block below the waist toward the original position of the ball at the snap.

It looks like this block is forward towards the defender, how is it towards the original position of the ball ?
or is that referring to the North - South line through the point of the snap rather than the LOS ?

[psv]

Well, it isnt a perpendicular 90 degree angle back towards the ball, but the player dives to the ground more towards the original position of the ball than not.  That is how I see it.

[Aussie-Zebra]

I was looking for that (someone else said it was lateral) but he goes down at the 42 and ends up at the 43 - that's a whole yard forward ?

[RunRickyRun]

That block is why 9-1-6-a-4 was added.  The way the rule was initially written this year, that would have been a legal block, but that block has never (I think!) been legal and the committee corrected it.

I will agree that the block fits the definition above, and the flag would likely be supported by every conference coordinator of officials.  I would further offer that the direction of the block is absolutely consistent with what would be termed a crack-back block.  However, I can also see an opportunity to pass on the call if it is deemed that the defender was able to see the block coming and react appropriately.  I understand that 10-2 positioning does not make a low crack-back legal, however few illegal crack-back blocks are as easy for the defender to see develop as the one on this video.

The intent of the rule (as described in Irving by Rogers Redding) is to make illegal a low block that is unlikely to be seen in time to react.  It is not intended to punish every low block unobserved by the defender, but simply the vast majority of them -- hence the 10-2 standard.  In the block on this video, the defender had far more time to react than is often afforded with a perfectly legal BBW.

[Aussie-Zebra]

Ok what does "towards the original position of the ball at the snap" mean exactly !

[RunRickyRun]

Ok what does "towards the original position of the ball at the snap" mean exactly !

That's a difficult thing to pin down and has been the subject of many discussions.

The basic thing to understand is that the block the rule is intended to address is typically one by a wideout against a second-level player - often several yards downfield.  On a sweep play this block may often be by the Flanker against a LB scraping down the line.  Despite the fact that the LB may be 5-7 yards off the LOS, this block would meet the criteria of "towards the original position of the ball."  By the same token, on a bubble screen, the widest receiver coming in low on the DB lined up over the inner receiver would also meet the description.