View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 23, 2007, 10:24am
Robert Goodman Robert Goodman is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,824
Quote:
Originally Posted by BktBallRef
The way you described it above, it didn't sound like it occurs at the snap.
Sorry I was unclear. It's a "backside fill" type of block, which needs to cover a lot of ground quickly or it doesn't work. I'll try to put it in ASCII art:

X---X--X-----X--X---X
-E--T--G--C--G--T--E

Imagine the offense's G & T at the snap pulling across the formation for a run between the position of the opposite T & E. The Xs opposite the pulling G & T are momentarily blocked by the E on that side who, at the snap, launches hirself sideways to wind up with hir hands approximately at the C's feet, like a fallen tree.

There's no question that this is legal in the major USAn & Canadian codes. However, it's not clear that it would be legal in the Independent Women's Football League, the Women's Professional Football League, or any of various children's circuits. They use the major codes, or the wording of the major codes, as their basis, but alter the provisions regarding BBW to either outlaw it completely or (in the case of the WPFL) restrict it more than do the major codes. (The National Women's Football ***'n and many of the children's codes allow BBW according to the major code whose rules they use either intact or as a base.) A ruling from any of these bodies would obviously be definitive as far as that body is concerned, but until such rulings are forthcoming, the decisions will be made on the spot by game officials who are familiar with one or more of the major codes.

Robert

Hmph. I guess I'll have to abbr. that "Assoc." here! Or does that get bleeped too?

Last edited by Robert Goodman; Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 04:03pm.
Reply With Quote