The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 24, 2019, 10:55am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,670
High-low combination?

As the ball is snapped, A1, starting on the line, blocks B1 at or below the knees. B1 is deflected slightly from his charge, but continues on his feet. A2, starting immediately behind A1, seeing B1 coming, stands his ground and uses palms-forward technique, taking a short step sideways to more squarely get into B1's path, to contact him above the waist.

Is this a high-low combination block of the type either Fed or NCAA disallows?

Does it make a difference if you know A2 is carrying out an assignment by blocking B1 in that manner?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 24, 2019, 01:49pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
As the ball is snapped, A1, starting on the line, blocks B1 at or below the knees. B1 is deflected slightly from his charge, but continues on his feet. A2, starting immediately behind A1, seeing B1 coming, stands his ground and uses palms-forward technique, taking a short step sideways to more squarely get into B1's path, to contact him above the waist.

Is this a high-low combination block of the type either Fed or NCAA disallows?

Does it make a difference if you know A2 is carrying out an assignment by blocking B1 in that manner?
Seems like (considering the way you've worded your question), these would be two separate and independent blocks, so high-low is not a relevant factor, or appropriate consideration.

Can't tell what A2 is thinking, but what his plan, or intention might be, it's his action we're supposed to be observing.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 25, 2019, 12:12am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 28,730
I'm all kinds of confused as to what you are asking. Are you basically saying that the defender made contact with the offensive player after being blocked by another player? If that is the case, then I am not sure I would consider that a "block."

Peace
__________________
"When the phone does not ring, the assignor is calling."
--Black

Charles Michael ďMickĒ Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 25, 2019, 11:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 77
A1 and B1 have to be engaged when B2 blocks. As I read your description B1 has either avoided or disengaged from A1 when A2 blocks him.

No foul if I am interpreting correctly.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 25, 2019, 11:08am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
I'm all kinds of confused as to what you are asking. Are you basically saying that the defender made contact with the offensive player after being blocked by another player? If that is the case, then I am not sure I would consider that a "block."
The plan is for the blocking back to act as backup behind the lineman who's making an at-or-below-the-knees block. If the lineman knocks the opposing lineman down, the back doesn't make contact. If the lineman doesn't knock the opposing lineman down, the back is ready to block. The contacts might occur in quick succession, but only according to the defender's charge.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 25, 2019, 11:51am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 28,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
The plan is for the blocking back to act as backup behind the lineman who's making an at-or-below-the-knees block. If the lineman knocks the opposing lineman down, the back doesn't make contact. If the lineman doesn't knock the opposing lineman down, the back is ready to block. The contacts might occur in quick succession, but only according to the defender's charge.
None of that sounds like a foul. Not even sure why I would consider this illegal in any way.

Peace
__________________
"When the phone does not ring, the assignor is calling."
--Black

Charles Michael ďMickĒ Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 25, 2019, 03:49pm
CT1 CT1 is offline
Official & ***** Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
The contacts might occur in quick succession, but only according to the defender's charge.
A chop block is illegal because of the high potential for catastrophic injury to the blockee. If I canít tell thereís an obvious separation between the two blocks, itís a foul every time.

Why donít you just put that back on the line and use a legal doubleteam block, instead of trying to game the rules?
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 25, 2019, 09:39pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by CT1 View Post
A chop block is illegal because of the high potential for catastrophic injury to the blockee. If I canít tell thereís an obvious separation between the two blocks, itís a foul every time.

Why donít you just put that back on the line and use a legal doubleteam block, instead of trying to game the rules?
Because we couldn't run the other plays we want from that formation. A2 takes the snap on some of those plays. (A2 is the quarterback, A1 is the snapper.)

A1 & A2 could instead combine to each block "half" of B1, but if at the snap B1 moves toward the side of him that A1 expected to block, A2's effort would be wasted, and B1 might still defeat A1's block.

P.S.: All of football consists of gaming the rules.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2019, 10:02am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 899
Almost every chop block by linemen is miscommunication. 95% of the chop blocks I call don't result in complaints by either linemen. They result in the two of them arguing who was supposed to block that defender.

It's baffling when a back cuts a defender who is already engaged because he can clearly see that guy is engaged as he's approaching him.

Another example I haven't seen in a few years is when one lineman is trying to get to the second level and he's being held by a defender and a second offensive player then cuts the defender. That's not a chop block unless the first blocker is addressing the defender. If the only reason he's on contact with the defender is because he's being held then it's a foul for defensive holding and not a chop block. The defender was baffled the one time I called that.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 04, 2019, 03:51pm
TODO: creative title here
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by bisonlj View Post
Almost every chop block by linemen is miscommunication. 95% of the chop blocks I call don't result in complaints by either linemen. They result in the two of them arguing who was supposed to block that defender.

It's baffling when a back cuts a defender who is already engaged because he can clearly see that guy is engaged as he's approaching him.

Another example I haven't seen in a few years is when one lineman is trying to get to the second level and he's being held by a defender and a second offensive player then cuts the defender. That's not a chop block unless the first blocker is addressing the defender. If the only reason he's on contact with the defender is because he's being held then it's a foul for defensive holding and not a chop block. The defender was baffled the one time I called that.
I agree with all of this. Except I have seen a few instances of a non-chop-block due to a defensive hold in the last couple of seasons.



I did have one absolutely perplexing block a few years back. Started out as a textbook chop block... the C engaged the NT above the waist, and the LG came in and hit the NT right at the knee. Remarkably, the NT was able to remain upright, and as I was throwing my flag for the Chop Block, the NT performed a classic hook-and-turn defensive hold on the C, who by that point was attempting to escape to the second level. At no point when the chop block happened was there any defensive holding, the DH only developed about half a second after the Chop.

Hopefully that's the only time in my career as an umpire where I call a Chop Block and a Defensive Hold on the same play. When I reported it to my Referee he looked at me like I was from outer space, but when he saw the video he agreed with my call.

I've since shown the video of that block to 7 or 8 D-I and NFL umpires, and so far there's no consensus on if I should have called the CHB, the DH, or both.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 04, 2019, 05:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 899
Quote:
Originally Posted by jTheUmp View Post
I agree with all of this. Except I have seen a few instances of a non-chop-block due to a defensive hold in the last couple of seasons.



I did have one absolutely perplexing block a few years back. Started out as a textbook chop block... the C engaged the NT above the waist, and the LG came in and hit the NT right at the knee. Remarkably, the NT was able to remain upright, and as I was throwing my flag for the Chop Block, the NT performed a classic hook-and-turn defensive hold on the C, who by that point was attempting to escape to the second level. At no point when the chop block happened was there any defensive holding, the DH only developed about half a second after the Chop.

Hopefully that's the only time in my career as an umpire where I call a Chop Block and a Defensive Hold on the same play. When I reported it to my Referee he looked at me like I was from outer space, but when he saw the video he agreed with my call.

I've since shown the video of that block to 7 or 8 D-I and NFL umpires, and so far there's no consensus on if I should have called the CHB, the DH, or both.
Definitely unusual but based on your description entirely possible.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
High 5 T? just another ref Basketball 9 Sat Feb 20, 2010 11:43am
ASA uniform combination shipwreck Softball 28 Fri Jan 10, 2003 10:19pm
Combination Question rainmaker Basketball 3 Tue Sep 24, 2002 01:10pm
Jr. High Net Blue316 Volleyball 2 Wed Aug 28, 2002 03:12pm
How high is a fly? SamNVa Softball 11 Thu Apr 04, 2002 09:00am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:37pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1