Block in BIG 10 Championship

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

That's correct, but the point he made, and its the same one I made earlier, is that this type of block will soon be illegal. Probably next year. If you decide you want to wait until it is illegal to discuss it, fine, but I think its worth talking about now.

Well that is fine, but it is not in the rulebook now. I would not have called a foul on this on the field this year unless I felt their was helmet contact. That was my only point.

Peace

[maven]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well that is fine, but it is not in the rulebook now. I would not have called a foul on this on the field this year unless I felt their was helmet contact. That was my only point.

Everyone gets your point. You don't like a flag here. Fine, at present it's a borderline case, and you're entitled to your opinion (until your supervisor tells you otherwise).

But denying that there's a rule is sticking your head in the sand. UNR is a foul. You say that rule doesn't apply to this play, and others say it does.

The game is not evolving (at every level) in the direction of ruling these hits UNR. That's the point worth discussing.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by maven

Everyone gets your point. You don't like a flag here. Fine, at present it's a borderline case, and you're entitled to your opinion (until your supervisor tells you otherwise).

But denying that there's a rule is sticking your head in the sand. UNR is a foul. You say that rule doesn't apply to this play, and others say it does.

The game is not evolving (at every level) in the direction of ruling these hits UNR. That's the point worth discussing.

How close does he need to be to the play for the offensive player not to be called for UNR? Five yards? Two yards?

[Welpe]

In general a personal foul for UNR does not necessarily constitute a hit on a defenseless player or a player out of the play.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Welpe

In general a personal foul for UNR does not necessarily constitute a hit on a defenseless player or a player out of the play.

True. Such a foul is what it says it is. But in this case the roughness was necessary. There was no way to make a block under those circumstances without its being rough.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by maven

But denying that there's a rule is sticking your head in the sand. UNR is a foul. You say that rule doesn't apply to this play, and others say it does.

I don't think Jeff was ever saying or even implying that there is no rule for unnecessary roughness. And the rule site you gave merely says that UNR is a PF. Jeff then also sited the section that describes for us what UNR is. You say he's denying something that he's not denied. You say that others believe that this rule applies to this situation ... yet where are these others (other than you, and unfortunately, the official on the spot in the OP).

This is not a foul.

I don't believe THIS hit will be a foul for a long time if ever. I agree with you that protection of players is growing in importance, but I can't see them creating rules such that you cannot blindside block someone who is trying to make a tackle.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by maven

Everyone gets your point. You don't like a flag here. Fine, at present it's a borderline case, and you're entitled to your opinion (until your supervisor tells you otherwise).

But denying that there's a rule is sticking your head in the sand. UNR is a foul. You say that rule doesn't apply to this play, and others say it does.

The game is not evolving (at every level) in the direction of ruling these hits UNR. That's the point worth discussing.

Who said anything about the point not being worth discussing? You really need to read what you said and how I responded to it. I do not know about you, but I work college football. I applied these rules all year long. I worked more college games than I did HS games and if I saw this play from my position, I would not have called a foul unless there was a launch or unless there was head contact with the initial block. Also this is not a defenseless player either.

Now if you want to discuss what the rule might change to be, fine. That just is not what I was stating and you are trying to make that point because you wanted to quote the HS rule which has a very different set of standards to call these kinds of plays. The NCAA puts out video every week to show what is acceptable and the NF or many states I am sure do not do the same.

Peace

[michblue]

This call was supported by the conference.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by michblue

This call was supported by the conference.

On what grounds? Did they say their felt there was helmet contact?

Peace

[michblue]

I was not given info as to the grounds of support. I was just told from a D1 official that the conference supported the call.

[jeepinchad]

I concur. This was and should have been called an illegal block. If you watch the video, the offensive player made a choice. He could have blocked the guy dead in the belly button and a flag most likely wouldn't have been thrown. He decided to go a little high and then follow through with the arm. I can say that in real time, I would have flagged this.