Legal Blocking Technique? (NFHS)

UmpJM · #1 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 01:43pm

Gentlemen,

I was reviewing video from our game this past weekend, and I would appreciate your comments on the video of the three plays linked below.

This is 7th/8th grade youth football, competitive league with players segregated by weight (this level is players from 125 lbs. to 107 lbs.), with NFHS playing rules for blocking.

On each of the three plays in the video I am interested in the legality of the blocking against the Right Defensive Tackle (#65 in the Orange jersey), especially in regards to the Left Offensive end (#34 in the Black jersey).

http://home.comcast.net/~jmvideos/AntBlocking.wmv

The file containing the video is about 3.5MB in size, so it is probably best viewed using a broadband internet connection.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

JM

AndrewMcCarthy · #2 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 01:52pm

What you're looking for here is a chop block call. The first 2 are borderline- are they delayed blocks while 65 is engaged high? Tough to say.

The third looks the worst to me. If it's not called a chop block I think you could argue it's an illegal block below the waist since the ball has left the zone.

Will be interesting to hear what others say about it.

JDLJ · #3 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 01:53pm

It was a little tough to see but it looks like there might be an illegal chop block on each play. They guy opposite the tackle hits him high and then there looks like maybe a very slight delay before the second guy (who is not opposite the tackle) gets over to hit him low.

I'm assuming this wasn't called and that's why your asking.

waltjp · #4 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 03:03pm

Illegal in the third clip. The other two may have included simultaneous contact against B65. Too close to call.

Snake~eyes · #5 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 03:15pm

Here's what I got

1.) Legal. The offensive player went high on 65, while the #34 went low on another defenisve player. The high offensive player just pushed 65 into the low guy.
2.) Very close - Its hard to tell when the high blocker iniated contact.
3.) I would say 3 is definitely a chop block. Looks very dangerous.

Just remember this stuff is very hard to see and I even had to watch each clip several times to make this analysis. Not only that I don't see any officials in the video?

Bob M. · #6 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 04:25pm

REPLY: snake-eyes said it all...

schwinn · #7 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 07:33pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Snake~eyes
....Not only that I don't see any officials in the video?

No kidding! There are more cheerleaders than officials. The first block looks iffy but I think the contact is inadvertant. The last one is awful. Dangerous.

BktBallRef · #8 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 07:53pm

1- Legal. The low block doesn't appear to make contact. The high blocker simply pushes the defender back over his teammate on the ground. That's not a chop block.

2- Legal. The contact by the two blockers is simultaneous.

3- Illegal. No doubt about it, the block at the knees is delayed.

stripes81 · #9 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 08:32pm

In my opinon the first two could be called leg whip penalties or illegal block below the waist. It is very close. The third one is definitely an illegal chop block. As ref it is my responsibilty to protect the players, and at this level that type of blocking needs to be flagged as often as possible. This skill level is to novice to discern between legal and safe blocking below the waist and unsafe illegal blocking below the waist. This is a safety issue for players this young.

Snake~eyes · #10 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 08:49pm

Quote:

Originally posted by stripes81
In my opinon the first two could be called leg whip penalties or illegal block below the waist. It is very close. The third one is definitely an illegal chop block. As ref it is my responsibilty to protect the players, and at this level that type of blocking needs to be flagged as often as possible. This skill level is to novice to discern between legal and safe blocking below the waist and unsafe illegal blocking below the waist. This is a safety issue for players this young.

I have to disagree greatly, the first two are definitely not "leg whipping" (also not defined in NFHS rulebook), they are good blocks below the waist. The only thing that could make the second illegal is that the block was delayed but I believe they are simulaenous. Niether of those are a leg whip IMO.

BktBallRef · #11 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 09:25pm

Quote:

Originally posted by stripes81
This skill level is to novice to discern between legal and safe blocking below the waist and unsafe illegal blocking below the waist.

I don't think that we as officials are permitted to make such a determination. There's nothing in the rule book that distinguishes a difference in rules, whther it's a game with HS varsity teams or elementary teams. If the blocking is legal, which most here think the first two plays are, then the player is within his rights to block in that manner, irregardless of his age, experience, or skill level.

ljudge · #12 (**permalink**) Tue Sep 27, 2005, 09:37pm

I wish more coaches would take the time to post videos like this. 99.999% of the time we respond to written questions about the legality of stuff. Now, as a group we're all seeing the exact same thing and comment on exactly what we have right in front of all our eyes.

I needed to watch it a few times and definitely in agreement of legal, legal, and chop in 3rd.

Jim S · #13 (**permalink**) Wed Sep 28, 2005, 12:10am

I am going to agree pretty much with the others. 1. Legal
2.Legal but darn close.
3. Illegal. But not because the ball has left the zone, which it hasn't when he starts the block
Now the question being is it the kid or the blocking scheme. It's not the kid. If you go stop motion, in each case, he starts the block immediately at the snap. This is what he's been taught to do and it's an ok technique. The problem is that in 3 definately, and close in 2, he has too far to go to make the contact with the opponent.
The coaches need to be made aware of this problem.

YellowFlag · #14 (**permalink**) Wed Sep 28, 2005, 07:45am

1. Close
2. Closer
3. CHOP BLOCK

Warrenkicker · #15 (**permalink**) Wed Sep 28, 2005, 09:05am

I mostly agree with everything else that has been said. I do notice that this is the same play run three times. I also notice that these blocks are by the snapper and the end. I see both the guard and tackle pulling on the play. All players are in the zone and the ball has not left when the blocks are initiated.

In the first play the defensive lineman is lined up close to the snapper and so the end can't actually get to him to block him. Then the snapper pushed the defensive lineman over the end.

In the second play the defensive lineman is lined up between the snapper and the end. This is why both of them get to him at the same time and why the block is legal.

On the third play the defensive lineman is lined up closer to the snapper again so the end can't get to him before the snapper starts his block. This is a chop block.

On a side note, this blocking technique, while technically legal at times, is not a good technique to teach. Often, as we see in this video, something out of the control of the offensive players can make this illegal. The end is just diving at the knee of the defensive player and the coach should be told of the danger in this type of block. I'm guessing that he has seen it blocked this way in an NFL game and he thought that it would also work for his team.