Cut block

[RochesterRef]

Agreed. No back can EVER block below the waist without a flag

[trocared]

Originally Posted by RochesterRef

Agreed. No back can EVER block below the waist without a flag

This would depend on where the high school game was played....if in Texas, or a couple of other states that use NCAA rules, it would be perfectly legal.
If it was under NFHS rules however, the previous statements are true.
cheers,
tro

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by trocared

This would depend on where the high school game was played....if in Texas, or a couple of other states that use NCAA rules, it would be perfectly legal.
If it was under NFHS rules however, the previous statements are true.
cheers,
tro

People are fully aware of Texas and those other states. No one is talking about states that do not use NF rules. And based on previous posts from the person posting, he is not from Texas (Massachusetts, which my understanding are the only two states the NCAA Rules apply).

Peace

[trocared]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

People are fully aware of Texas and those other states. No one is talking about states that do not use NF rules. And based on previous posts from the person posting, he is not from Texas (Massachusetts, which my understanding are the only two states the NCAA Rules apply).

Peace

Thanks Rut.
I was not attempting to undercut the previous posters to show how much more I know than they. I live 900 miles from Texas (and twice that far from Mass.), and through the miracle of cable tv, was able to watch my first 5A Texas High School game a few years ago. Sometime in the first quarter (after a wing official signaled "uncatchable") I realized they were using NCAA rules. The original poster, like myself, has a short history in this forum, and I was attempting to address this issue (watching a texas hs game on cable).
If I choose to assume that everyone is fully aware that tx uses ncaa, i could also assume that everyone should be fully aware that under fed, a back can never cut block anyone, anywhere.
cheers,
tro

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

People are fully aware of Texas and those other states. No one is talking about states that do not use NF rules.

How can you be so sure about what "people" know and are "talking about"? Threads here may be read years later by readers who hit it in a search of the Web and know nothing about whether Fed's or NCAA's or anyone else's rules are being discussed.

And based on previous posts from the person posting, he is not from Texas (Massachusetts, which my understanding are the only two states the NCAA Rules apply).

Best get out of the mindset that we're answering just the original poster's question, and consider that we're writing for the whole Internet.

Robert

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

How can you be so sure about what "people" know and are "talking about"? Threads here may be read years later by readers who hit it in a search of the Web and know nothing about whether Fed's or NCAA's or anyone else's rules are being discussed.


Best get out of the mindset that we're answering just the original poster's question, and consider that we're writing for the whole Internet.

Robert

Well it is obvious that I was correct as it related to the original post and what rules he was under.

Secondly I think if you want to write for “the entire internet,” then say that is what your answer is based on. Other than that most people try to stay within the topic that is being discussed. Nothing wrong with referencing other levels (I do it often), but most people here are not referring to NCAA Rules when discussing things they see in a game. And we usually know who the people are from Texas and they clarify they are not using NF rules.

Peace

[jimy2shooz]

Originally Posted by RochesterRef

Agreed. No back can EVER block below the waist without a flag

Wrong! Ever is a not always true. The initial contact can begin above the waist and while still in contact with the defender can slide down and and can eventually block below the waist.

[Blue37]

Originally Posted by jimy2shooz

Wrong! Ever is a not always true. The initial contact can begin above the waist and while still in contact with the defender can slide down and and can eventually block below the waist.

Rule 2 Definitions of Playing Terms
SECTION 3 BLOCKING
ART. 7 Blocking below the waist is making initial contact below the waist from the front or side against an opponent other than a runner. Blocking below the waist applies only when the opponent has one or both feet on the ground. (emphasis added)

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by jimy2shooz

Wrong! Ever is a not always true. The initial contact can begin above the waist and while still in contact with the defender can slide down and and can eventually block below the waist.

Wrong! What you describe is not a block below the waist. That's why it's legal.

A block below the waist occurs when initial contact occurs below the waist. It's always illegal when done by a back.

Let's not complicate things, whatcha say?

[jimy2shooz]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Wrong! What you describe is not a block below the waist. That's why it's legal.

A block below the waist occurs when initial contact occurs below the waist. It's always illegal when done by a back.

Let's not complicate things, whatcha say?

Have to respectfully disagree with you sir. If action described above is not considered blocking what do you have?? If the initial block begins above the waist and the blocking continues below the waist..I have to call that blocking in book. And legal of course. Whatcha say?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by jimy2shooz

Have to respectfully disagree with you sir. If action described above is not considered blocking what do you have?? If the initial block begins above the waist and the blocking continues below the waist..I have to call that blocking in book. And legal of course. Whatcha say?

BBR is right. Re-read the entire thread if you need to.

[PSU213]

Originally Posted by jimy2shooz

Have to respectfully disagree with you sir. If action described above is not considered blocking what do you have?? If the initial block begins above the waist and the blocking continues below the waist..I have to call that blocking in book. And legal of course. Whatcha say?

What was descibed by BBR is a block (bascially all contact between 2 players is a block...some just happen to qualify and illegal--block below the waist, from behing, etc), and he was pointing out that the block that starts high and then continues low is not blocking below the waist (and, thus, not a foul).

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by jimy2shooz

Have to respectfully disagree with you sir. If action described above is not considered blocking what do you have?? If the initial block begins above the waist and the blocking continues below the waist..I have to call that blocking in book. And legal of course. Whatcha say?

I say you need to read the definition of blocking below the waist. When we discuss football, those are the terms and definitions that we use.

2-3-7
Blocking below the waist IS making initial contact below the waist from the front or side against an opponent other than a runner.

Rochesterref wrote, "No back can EVER block below the waist without a flag." He knows what the definition of blocking below the waist IS.

What you described does not meet 2-3-7, is not BBW, and is not what the discussion is about.

That is why he is correct and you are wrong.

No back can legally ever do what is described in 2-3-7, block below the waist.

Here endeth the lesson.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by jimy2shooz

Have to respectfully disagree with you sir. If action described above is not considered blocking what do you have?? If the initial block begins above the waist and the blocking continues below the waist..I have to call that blocking in book. And legal of course. Whatcha say?

Hmm...it does become a little tedious to specify each time whether contact "below the waist" means the rulebook term or whether it has its general, non-technical meaning. I'd have to say that going by context, the poster who used that phrase meant it in its defined-term meaning. Just as usually references to "the ball" mean the one in use in the game, although it could sometimes in this forum refer to another ball.

Robert

[hawkishowl20]

Thanks for all the posts.

1)Sorry about the preposition ‘on’ in the phrase “on the guard” ‘behind’ is more accurate.

2)Game not in Texas or Massachusetts.

3)It wasn’t a “usual” kick-out block in that they didn’t need to move the defender; they just needed him not to close down the hole.

4)I didn’t see this, but I think he must have been quickly ‘popping’ the defender above the waist before cutting him. That would make sense; I didn’t have the best look at it being on the sideline (bad angle) or behind the end zone (long distance). It just didn’t look right and now I’m pretty sure that was what was happening.