NF Part 1 Test Question 54

[Warrenkicker]

Just had a meeting last night and the concensus was that 54 was True. It says:

If B1 tackles A1, who is obviously not the runner, it is defensive holding.

The rule reference I assume would be 9-2-3c.

I contend that 9-4-2b could also be a rules reference on this play and then make the question false. It states that a defensive player may not charge into or throw an opponent to the ground after he is obviously out of the play.

Say the QB hands off and as the play moves down field he backs away from the LOS watching his teammates. B1 then comes from his position and tackles him for some reason. That is a personal foul and not holding.

I know that if B1 tackles the pulling guard it is holding but what if B1 just takes a shot at the QB standing away from the play.

I know what the official answer for the test is and will answer it that way but it doesn't quite seem correct to me unless I am (once again) reading too much into the question.

[SoGARef]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Warrenkicker
[B]Just had a meeting last night and the concensus was that 54 was True. It says:

If B1 tackles A1, who is obviously not the runner, it is defensive holding.

The rule reference I assume would be 9-2-3c.

I contend that 9-4-2b could also be a rules reference on this play and then make the question false. It states that a defensive player may not charge into or throw an opponent to the ground after he is obviously out of the play.


Warrenkicker,

I think you read too much into it. Look at the question it says "obviously not the runner". Your reference states "obviously out of the play." There is a distinct difference in those two statements. I interpret "obviously out of the play" to mean a player who is standing around watching the progress of the play after it has passed him by, whereas, obviously not the runner would mean that he is still running around the play but it not the one with the ball.

[SeanWest]

I agree with SoGARef... While the question in question may not be perfectly clear, I think that the intent of rules is pretty clear and Warrenkicker I think you illustrate it pretty well with the difference between tackling a guard who's trying to block and tackling the quarterback watching the play from 5 yards back.

I've been reading a lot of these questions from past tests as a way to study the rules and a lot of them aren't very well written. This question seems to be one of those... you really need more information to make a true ruling on the situation.

-SW---

Have you guys seen this in your area? The defensive end or outside linebacker takes out the lead blocker on a sweep, usually by cutting there legs out from under them. We got films last year from a couple of games we did, and several different teams were using this so much that it had to be taught by coaches. This works very well as most of the time the ball carrier tripped over his lead blocker.

[andy1033]

goldcoastump
If the outside line backer is blocking below the waist that is a foul.

[ljudge]

And, if the blockee wasn't on the LOS at the snap it's also a foul even if it was the defensive end. Both players must be on the LOS at the snap and the ball must still be in the zone when the block takes place. (ref: 2.17.2a & b)

[SoGARef]

Goldcoastump,

I saw it happen in two of my games last year. I promptly told the coach and players that it was illegal and to stop it. (a little preventive officiating) One player didn't believe me and proceeded to do it on the very next play. I layed the flag right in front of his face while he was still on the ground. He did it again about a quarter later and I "suggested" to the coach that he might want to sit that player out. The coach pulled him and that was the end of the that.

SoGaRef,

I never noticed it, unfortunately, until a coach sent us some film, I caught it on 2 different weeks last year. Then the word got out that we were going to be looking for this and it magically stopped.