Cut Block? Shotgun Formation

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by jumpmaster
BoBo, this is interesting. Twice in the last week you have posted a question/issue that was specifically addressed by my Football Association within the previous 24 hours. Are you sure you aren't in Arkansas?

This morning the Arkansas rules interpreter issued the following ruling on BBW while the quarterback was in the shotgun formation. Here it is:

If while in a shotgun formation, the lineman are in a three point stance, we will allow the lineman, on his initial charge, to block below the waist. If, however, the lineman are in a 2-point stance or the charge isn't immediate and the ball is snapped to a back at least 3+ yards behind the line of scrimmage, then any block below the waist will be rule illegal and there will be a penalty assessed. Just to reiterate, 3-point stance you can block below the waist on the initial charge in the shotgun. In a 2-point stance you cannot block below the waist when in the shotgun.

I for one think this is pretty good interp and specifically was driven by an series of injuries during the first half of the season.

What has the stance got to do with it?

I don't see that as an issue. I've seen kids pass block from a 2 point stance but I've also seen them immediately cut a defender.

[jumpmaster]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

What has the stance got to do with it?

I don't see that as an issue. I've seen kids pass block from a 2 point stance but I've also seen them immediately cut a defender.

From a 2 point stance, the probability that a blow above a defender's knee is increased. This type of blow significantly increases the risk of a knee injury. Therefore, no 2 point stance BBW. From a 3 point stance, the interpreters felt that the likelihood of a knee injury is no greater than normal blocking. Therefore, the difference.

[BktBallRef]

The problem with is that it isn't what the rule says. There's not even a loose interp of the rule that says this.

Why would an OL be allowed to BBW if the QB is under center but not allowed to if he's in the shotgun? The risk of injury is no less because the QB is under center.

My point is that if 2 point stance blocking below the waist is illegal in the shotgun, it should be illegal in all plays. But it isn't.

I realize that you didn't invent this interp but to me, it's senseless. You either allow BBW when in the shotgun or you don't, period.

[chiefgil]

The linemen, on there initial charge, may legally BBW, as long as the ball is in the FBZ.

[PSU213]

Originally posted by chiefgil
The linemen, on there initial charge, may legally BBW, as long as the ball is in the FBZ.

Well, the real question is when does the ball leave the FBZ when A is in shotgun formation? Also, if the ball is in the zone, a lineman does not need to be on his/her initial charge for a BBW to be legal.

As for the original question, we allow a BBW if the charge happens right with the snap. Also, I agree with BktBallRef that the Arkansas interp. does not make a lot of sense with re. to the type of stance the players are in. I think you need to either say low blocks are legal or illegal when A is in shotgun formation, and don't bring up the type of stance the O-linemen are in.

[parepat]

Originally posted by mcrowder
At Varsity, and at MOST JV, I would not Coach/Preventative Officiate. The only "preventative officiating" that is appropriate at that level is the linesmen helping the WR's line up when they look out and say "I'm ON" or "I'm OFF". Maybe the occasional "Don't Do That" on mild extracurricular nonsense. Other than that, you should not be telling these kids how to block. If you have to flag it, I see no problem in coaching the COACH - and letting him handle it. (And I say MOST JV, instead of all, because there is the occasional JV game where one team is completely uncoached. Once they are getting killed on their own, preventative officiating is more appropriate)

At younger ages, I can understand telling them - but I would make it a point of telling the coach that you told them as well.

[parepat]

Originally posted by parepat

Let's try this again! I absolutely disagree with your position on preventive officiating for a couple reasons.

1. Part of our role is to protect the player. If by warning a player about a rule can prevent a dangerous foul, then we should do it.

2. We are not coaching. We are the sole enforcers of the rules. We are not telling them what to do or not to do, but instead, telling them what is legal or not legal.

3. The game is not about us. Everyone involved wants to see the players play. If we can head off some fouls, everyone benefits.

[Forksref]

We view it this way: In a shotgun formation, there can be NO blocking below the waist because the ball is out of the free-blocking zone as soon as the QB touches it. If you can get a low block off in the time it takes for the ball to be snapped and before it reaches the QB, then you are the quickest lineman ever and we doubt that you are.

[Jim S]

Sent the Arkansaw interpretation to interpreters in three states. The kindest remark was that one of them wanted a bottle of whatever they'd been drinking in Arkansaw that night.

[jumpmaster]

Originally posted by Jim S
Sent the Arkansaw interpretation to interpreters in three states. The kindest remark was that one of them wanted a bottle of whatever they'd been drinking in Arkansaw that night.

LOL! I could probably arrange that.

I'm curious, what states, what were their interps and why?

[GarthB]

Coincidentally, I had a similar play recently. Our local FED Clinician advised that for practical purposes, consider the ball out of the FBZ at the snap when A is in shotgun and the QB is more than 4 yards back.

I don't know if that's an "official" state guidline or not.