The reason I ask is bc a chop block, by definition, is a combination block. Hard to discuss the play in question when it’s being defined wrong.
Ref Question
- Thread starter LakeCtyNewt
- Start date
It is a philosophy among many HS officials that if the hold did not have a material affect on the play, then it’s not necessary to disrupt the game with unnecessary flags.
A lot of people mix up the usage of “chop block”, and “cut block”. A cut block is a block below the waist...a chop block is when an offensive player uses a cut block on a defender who is already engaged with another blocker.
The chop block is illegal, the cut block can be a legal block.
The chop block is illegal, the cut block can be a legal block.
That's a good point but to be clear I'm not confusing the issue. And what you posted isn't entirely true, or at least its semantics on what you want to call this type of block when it converts from a legal "cut" block to an illegal "chop" block. This was redefined/re-emphasized in the past year or two in the NCAA.
There doesn't necessarily have to be 2 defenders. Once the BALL (not just the blocker/defender) is outside of the tackle box and beyond 5 yards, you cannot block below the waist. And this was the call I was complaining of in the Iowa/NIU game where the blocker was on the inside and only 3 yards downfield.
Here you go:
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/8/30/17472936/block-below-waist-rule-ncaa
A big part of the ever evolving NCAA block below the waist rule is the direction of force with the block. Lineman cant go to the 2nd level and make a block below the waist if the direction of force is not between the 10-2oclock(like a clockface) of the area of concentration of the defender. So if he got him low @ 3yds and it was from the side/defender couldnt see it coming, thats where you get your illegal block below the waist.
Thank you! This helps me understand the rule more clearly. I appreciate your thorough response.
I have a big problem with this philosophy .Who is to say even if the hold is happening on the other side of the field that the player can't take a great angle and save yards/TDs. That's like an unpaid in baseball saying "I changed the zone because that player wasn't going to get a hit anyways." That's garbage.
I have a big problem with 4hr long football games so let’s stick with what working
You can argue about the philosophy until the cows come home. The big truth of the matter is in most cases you do not have an official looking away from the play.
Remember there are only 5 officials on the field. 1 always has the ball carrier. 1-2 depending on the action are looking at the blocking in front of the play, same with the blocking immediately behind the play. Doesn't leave a whole lot of eyes to be looking across the field to see if the tackle 40 yards away is holding.
Remember there are only 5 officials on the field. 1 always has the ball carrier. 1-2 depending on the action are looking at the blocking in front of the play, same with the blocking immediately behind the play. Doesn't leave a whole lot of eyes to be looking across the field to see if the tackle 40 yards away is holding.
Fair enough, although the referee himself literally called it a chop block. I understand what you are saying, but still semantics. The call was an illegal block below the waist outside of the tackle box, but I believe you have to be 5 yards downfield before that applies and he wasn't. Hope that helps.
Except it met none of those criteria. He went right for the hips from straight on facing the defender, inside the tackle box and 3 yards beyond the LOS, and there was no second defender.
Kirk Ferentz is one of the biggest OL guru in all of football at any level and a generally mellow guy. It takes a light to light his fire. He was livid on this particular call.
So then maybe all of that tells you it may have been the wrong call.