NFL illegal block rule

[MPT]

2 hours ago, Simon said:

"a player initiates a block in which he is moving toward or parallel to his own end line and makes forcible contact to his opponent with his helmet, forearm, or shoulder"

 

They've been calling it for a couple years to minimize concussions and whether we like or not that was a penalty on McKenzie

 

Just because you make a separate thread about it doesn't make you any less wrong than you were in the GDT. He wasn't moving and he wasn't facing toward or parallel to his own end zone. 

[Doc]

And if this is how they want to play the rule, then they should make it a reviewable play to be look at which direction the penalized player was moving.  You know, in the interest of safety and all...

[NewEra]

2 hours ago, Simon said:

 

If your lined up outside coming down the LOS and pop somebody they will call it every time now

 

 

the key is he initiated forcible contact with his shoulder

If that’s the way it’s supposed to be called, they have to change the rule. That was a perfect block

[MPT]

Clearly doesn't meet the spirit or the letter of the rule. The defender had every opportunity to go around him but he tried to go through him instead. Not a blindside, not moving, not facing his own end zone.

 

Edit: And McKenzie clearly didn't "pop" him or lower his shoulder or head. He just stood his ground when the guy ran into him.

Edited September 20, 2020 by MPT

[Augie]

3 hours ago, Simon said:

"a player initiates a block in which he is moving toward or parallel to his own end line and makes forcible contact to his opponent with his helmet, forearm, or shoulder"

 

They've been calling it for a couple years to minimize concussions and whether we like or not that was a penalty on McKenzie

 

WAIT! It’s football and we can’t use shoulders anymore? This is just silly and needs to be fixed. Should he have taken out his knees? I’m POSITIVE what the player would prefer. 

[Doc]

5 minutes ago, MPT said:

Clearly doesn't meet the spirit or the letter of the rule. The defender had every opportunity to go around him but he tried to go through him instead. Not a blindside, not moving, not facing his own end zone.

 

Edit: And McKenzie clearly didn't "pop" him or lower his shoulder or head. He just stood his ground when the guy ran into him.

 

Yeah, he actually does take the charge.  Expecting him to not brace himself, turtle or move out of the way is idiotic.

[WideNine]

3 hours ago, Simon said:

"a player initiates a block in which he is moving toward or parallel to his own end line and makes forcible contact to his opponent with his helmet, forearm, or shoulder"

 

They've been calling it for a couple years to minimize concussions and whether we like or not that was a penalty on McKenzie

 

I thought it was a clean enough hit, but you are right. It is more about protecting players and a lot like some of the hockey rules when a player does not have his head up and gets lit up. Just need to coach McKenzie to dip that shoulder a bit more to connect lower. He was in great position to spring that play, the block was really close, and they should go to ithat play again.

[MPT]

16 minutes ago, WideNine said:

 

I thought it was a clean enough hit, but you are right. It is more about protecting players and a lot like some of the hockey rules when a player does not have his head up and gets lit up. Just need to coach McKenzie to dip that shoulder a bit more to connect lower. He was in great position to spring that play, the block was really close, and they should go to ithat play again.

 

Here's the thing though: you can't block people in hockey. That's interference. In football, though, it's completely legal. And McKenzie didn't hit him in the head, so that doesn't apply either. If McKenzie dropped his shoulder on that play, the defender would have gotten hurt much worse (looking at bruised or cracked ribs).

 

Aside from diving out of the way and letting the defender get to Moss (which is so absurd to contemplate in a football game that I can't  believe I even have to mention it), he did the safest thing he could do in a situation where another player is running right at you.

Edited September 20, 2020 by MPT

[1ManRaid]

3 hours ago, Simon said:

 

If your lined up outside coming down the LOS and pop somebody they will call it every time now

 

 

the key is he initiated forcible contact with his shoulder

The key is that it specifies "AND makes forcible contact".  The way he makes contact alone isn't enough for a call.

[auburnbillsbacker]

Did he "initiate the block" or did the defensive player run into him?

[WideNine]

6 minutes ago, MPT said:

 

Here's the thing though: you can't block people in hockey. That's interference. In football, though, it's completely legal. And McKenzie didn't hit him in the head, so that doesn't apply either. If McKenzie dropped his shoulder on that play, the defender would have gotten hurt much worse (looking at bruised or cracked ribs).

 

Aside from diving out of the way and letting the defender get to Moss (which is so absurd to contemplate in a football game that I can't even believe I even have to mention it), he did the safest thing he could do in a situation where another player is running right at you.

 

Its a ticky-tacky rule, but I was seeing a lot of defensive line stunts designed to allow a DE to come in from a wide 9 position and ear-hole the guard allowing the inside guy a lane to the QB. It was a dangerous play and although it was not a crack back, the NFL decided to make it harder to do a blind-side hits or blocks.  

 

I thought it was a good clean block, I thought that Ford threw a good clean block last year and both times I thought the defender just was not playing heads-up football with awareness.

 

But the way the rule is written and how easy the defensive player gets decleated will always lend itself to the refs stepping in to throw a flag.

Edited September 20, 2020 by WideNine

[MPT]

9 minutes ago, 1ManRaid said:

The key is that it specifies "AND makes forcible contact".  The way he makes contact alone isn't enough for a call.

 

7 minutes ago, auburnbillsbacker said:

Did he "initiate the block" or did the defensive player run into him?

 

All correct, but the argument about initiating contact is moot anyway. The rule says he has to be parallel to or facing his own end zone, which he was not.

4 minutes ago, WideNine said:

But the way the rule is written and how easy the defensive player gets decleated will always lend itself to the refs stepping in to throw a flag.

 

The rule is very clear. He must be parallel to or facing his own end zone. There is no way to interpret that wording to justify a penalty when he was neither of those things.

 

In Ford's case, he WAS facing his own end zone but the other player ran into him. That is still not a penalty but at least you can say he met the criteria. In McKenzie's case, you can't even apply the basic qualification for the penalty.

Edited September 20, 2020 by MPT

[WideNine]

3 minutes ago, MPT said:

 

 

All correct, but the argument about initiating contact is moot anyway. The rule says he has to be parallel to or facing his own end zone, which he was not.

 

The rule is very clear. He must be parallel to or facing his own end zone. There is no apparently IS a way to interpret that wording to justify a penalty when he was neither of those things. You  know....because it actually happened that way......today.      😁   Fixed.

 

 

[GoBills808]

8 minutes ago, MPT said:

 

 

All correct, but the argument about initiating contact is moot anyway. The rule says he has to be parallel to or facing his own end zone, which he was not.

 

The rule is very clear. He must be parallel to or facing his own end zone. There is no way to interpret that wording to justify a penalty when he was neither of those things.

 

In Ford's case, he WAS facing his own end zone but the other player ran into him. That is still not a penalty but at least you can say he met the criteria. In McKenzie's case, you can't even apply the basic qualification for the penalty.

This is the only response necessary 

 

it’s directional end of story

[MPT]

6 minutes ago, WideNine said:

 

 

 

They weren't interpreting the the rule at all. That's the problem.

 

If the referee called intentional grounding on that play, would you say he just interpreted the rule that way?

Edited September 20, 2020 by MPT

[Xwnyer]

3 hours ago, Southern Bills Fan said:

Was he moving toward or parallel to his own end zone? It didn’t look like it. 

It was a bull#### call 

[WideNine]

1 minute ago, MPT said:

 

They weren't interpreting the the rule at all. That's the problem.

 

I agree, just busting your chops. 

 

I do know that when the defender gets de-cleated on those clean but unexpected blocks from a player that has the right leverage, the hanky always flies. Shouldn't, but it almost always does.

[Mr. K]

3 hours ago, Simon said:

 

Its all about protecting guys heads and that's a wicked situation in regards to getting concussed by an opponent, the turf or whiplash

Thats exactly why they called it. Those old "holy sh*t" hit are awesome but when we say a guy got destroyed some times its devastating for life.

[GoBills808]

Just now, WideNine said:

 

I agree, just busting your chops. 

 

I do know that when the defender gets de-cleated on those clean but unexpected blocks from a player that has the right leverage, the hanky always flies. Shouldn't, but it almost always does.

When they’re blocking parallel or toward their endzone. Not when it’s a block in the opponent's direction. Which is the point.

Just now, Mr. K said:

Thats exactly why they called it. Those old "holy sh*t" hit are awesome but when we say a guy got destroyed some times its devastating for life.

Then call hit to the head or something, it’s not a blindside block 

[MPT]

1 minute ago, Mr. K said:

Thats exactly why they called it. Those old "holy sh*t" hit are awesome but when we say a guy got destroyed some times its devastating for life.

 

Did he get destroyed? Watch the replay. He might have gotten the wind knocked out of him, but there was no risk of injury there. He just bounced off McKenzie. It's not like his head changed direction on the hit.

[Mr. K]

2 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

When they’re blocking parallel or toward their endzone. Not when it’s a block in the opponent's direction. Which is the point.

Then call hit to the head or something, it’s not a blindside block 

I personally thought it was a clean block. I also believe the intention of the call was player safety. Or maybe some home cooking lmao.

 

[WideNine]

1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

When they’re blocking parallel or toward their endzone. Not when it’s a block in the opponent's direction. Which is the point.

Then call hit to the head or something, it’s not a blindside block 

 

I think they should call them like they do blocks on kickoffs and such where as long as it is in front of the defender, not at the knees, helmet to helmet it is a clean block... no flag. Daboll likes to run a lot of reverses and misdirection plays that lend themselves to defensive players being setup for good peal back blocks.

 

As much as I love good hard football, I understand about protecting players too and how they are trying to balance things.

 

 

 

[Mr. K]

1 minute ago, MPT said:

 

Did he get destroyed? Watch the replay. He might have gotten the wind knocked out of him, but there was no risk of injury there. He just bounced off McKenzie. It's not like his head changed direction on the hit.

I was speaking of old school decleaters that probably jack up brains. I thought the block was clean. Mckenzie didn't leave his feet or hit him in the head or lead with the crown

[GoBills808]

Just now, WideNine said:

 

I think they should call them like they do blocks on kickoffs and such where as long as it is in front of the defender, not at the knees, helmet to helmet it is a clean block... no flag. Daboll likes to run a lot of reverses and misdirection plays that lend themselves to defensive players being setup for good peal back blocks.

 

As much as I love good hard football, I understand about protecting players too and how they are trying to balance things.

 

 

 

Then you understand a peel back block depends entirely on where the blocker is moving and facing yes

[MPT]

7 minutes ago, WideNine said:

As much as I love good hard football, I understand about protecting players too and how they are trying to balance things.

 

In this case, protecting players is just about coaching them to be aware of their surroundings and keeping their head up. You can't remove blocking from football.

 

Remember Landry's hit on Aaron Williams? That's an example of a blindside block that needs to be removed from the game. He ran and launched himself into Williams' head. McKenzie was no more than a tackling dummy on this play. Or a sled dummy I guess. Sled dummies are harder to move. Regardless, they're still stationary.

Edited September 20, 2020 by MPT

[RaoulDuke79]

3 hours ago, Southern Bills Fan said:

Was he moving toward or parallel to his own end zone? It didn’t look like it. 

It looked like he was basically standing still to me. Dolphins player ran into McKenzie.

[BuffaloBillsMagic1]

3 hours ago, Simon said:

"a player initiates a block in which he is moving toward or parallel to his own end line and makes forcible contact to his opponent with his helmet, forearm, or shoulder"

 

They've been calling it for a couple years to minimize concussions and whether we like or not that was a penalty on McKenzie

Guy was running toward McKenzie.  Could have been nothing he could do as was not a blind side move on his part, he stood his ground.  BS call...watch it again

[WideNine]

1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

Then you understand a peel back block depends entirely on where the blocker is moving and facing yes

 

Absolutely and their almost impossible to execute that way as most players are moving laterally during those reverses and sweep plays, but the rule is clear that the defensive player has to be moving towards their own end zone. Thought that was close in this case as he was moving at an angle towards his own end zone.

 

Then it is a matter of keeping it above the waist and do not hit his helmet. 

 

 

[GoBills808]

Just now, WideNine said:

 

Absolutely and their almost impossible to execute that way as most players are moving laterally during those reverses and sweep plays, but the rule is clear that the defensive player has to be moving towards their own end zone. Thought that was close in this case as he was moving at an angle towards his own end zone.

 

Then it is a matter of keeping it above the waist and do not hit his helmet. 

 

 

Wait you think McKenzie was moving toward his own endzone?

[Doc]

Common sense...

[Meatloaf63]

4 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Wait you think McKenzie was moving toward his own endzone?

Wasn’t even close. McKenzie was facing up field, no arguing that unless you want to argue for arguments sake...

[WideNine]

28 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Wait you think McKenzie was moving toward his own endzone?

 

I thought we were talking about Peal Back blocks and where the focus is on where the defensive player is heading not the offensive player. Sorry about the crappy insert lost a few pixels and turned into micro-text in the embedding - but yeah, I am confused with your confusion

 

 

 

 

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, WideNine said:

 

I thought we were talking about Peal Back blocks and where the focus is on where the defensive player is heading not the offensive player. Sorry about the crappy insert lost a few pixels and turned into micro-text in the embedding - but yeah, I am confused with your confusion

 

 

 

 

Here you go, peel back doesn't apply cause the guy is clearly not moving toward his endzone

 

Blindside does not apply because McKenzie is clearly not moving toward or parallel to his endzone

 

It's just a regular old block and a terrible call

[WideNine]

Just now, GoBills808 said:

Here you go, peel back doesn't apply cause the guy is clearly not moving toward his endzone

 

Blindside does not apply because McKenzie is clearly not moving toward or parallel to his endzone

 

It's just a regular old block and a terrible call

 

We're good.

 

The peal back block reference was just part of the discussion about how hard it is to get a great block on a defender and not have it flagged. Not a part of this play.

 

McKenzie barely moved and held his ground - even the game announcers mentioned that about 5 times. All McD and Dabs can do is send the tape over to the NFL Officiating Committee and ask, "Ok, how do we draw this up or execute it in a way that does not draw a flag, or is this a good block?". See if there is anything specific they are looking for or coaching their officials to look for.

 

It is the grown up thing to do, or they could blast the officials during a presser and feel better but get fined.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

4 hours ago, Simon said:

"a player initiates a block in which he is moving toward or parallel to his own end line and makes forcible contact to his opponent with his helmet, forearm, or shoulder"

 

They've been calling it for a couple years to minimize concussions and whether we like or not that was a penalty on McKenzie

Unlike the Houston game where Ford was blocking towards his end-zone, McKenzie's block was fine. He was blocking toward the opponent's end-zone. Not parallel. It was the right call in Houston and a bad call today. 

What is happening is any violent collision is being flagged by the officials. It was a good hard block and was perfectly legal. Now he could have just stood there and the play would have netted the same yards.  But it was still a legal block.

[purple haze]

5 hours ago, Simon said:

"a player initiates a block in which he is moving toward or parallel to his own end line and makes forcible contact to his opponent with his helmet, forearm, or shoulder"

 

They've been calling it for a couple years to minimize concussions and whether we like or not that was a penalty on McKenzie

He's supposed to let the guy run him over?  He had to hit him.  They need to adjust the call with that type of block.

[WideNine]

7 minutes ago, purple haze said:

He's supposed to let the guy run him over?  He had to hit him.  They need to adjust the call with that type of block.

 

Similar to the Ford block in the playoff game where the defender simply was not looking at all in the direction he was running as he was tracking Allen and all Ford did was brace himself a bit to ensure he was not the player that was going to fly back in the wrong direction. After that, I thought it was just a case of "stoppable force" meet immovable object, but the hankies flew.

 

If it happens enough times this year they will work something out that will be more complicated and likely more terrible than what we have today... it is tough to make a violent game safe.

 

Maybe they can build some kind of imminent crash warning into the helmets of players like my wife's crappy Subaru has. All it does is ding, whistle, beep, and slam on my breaks when I am backing up and the sensors pick up the deadly shrubbery at the end of my driveway

 

... then the final kick to the sprinkler when it warns me not to drive distracted. Perfect.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Orlando Tim]

1 hour ago, GoBills808 said:

Here you go, peel back doesn't apply cause the guy is clearly not moving toward his endzone

 

Blindside does not apply because McKenzie is clearly not moving toward or parallel to his endzone

 

It's just a regular old block and a terrible call

I am not one to defend officials, and this was a bad call, but when I watched it live I thought it was a cut back because of way player fell. The NFL can clean up these kind of bad calls by using officials in the booth but I understand why mistake was made.

[dave mcbride]

It was just called on TJ Lockett a couple of minutes ago. Pretty close to the Same play.

Just now, Buffalo Timmy said:

I am not one to defend officials, and this was a bad call, but when I watched it live I thought it was a cut back because of way player fell. The NFL can clean up these kind of bad calls by using officials in the booth but I understand why mistake was made.

Not a mistake. They are calling it, and the rule is clear regardless of whether we like it. Just called it on Lockett. Players have to know the rules.

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I am not one to defend officials, and this was a bad call, but when I watched it live I thought it was a cut back because of way player fell. The NFL can clean up these kind of bad calls by using officials in the booth but I understand why mistake was made.

It’s very clearly defined in the rule book 

 

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

It was just called on TJ Lockett a couple of minutes ago. Pretty close to the Same play.

Except they were facing in different directions