forums
Chop Block call, ACC is so stupid
- Thread starter CaneFan79
- Start date
Advertisement
Drjohngreen
Recruit
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2017
- Messages
- 12
Of course it is legal when we do it because our offense does a lot of it so we have to know the rules. It is the reason our a backs line up with their inside shoulder behind the tackle. Read the rules (and interpretations) about which players in the original alignment can block below the waist and where (and how) they can do it.
CaneFan79
Senior
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Messages
- 4,864
Thanks for stopping by Coach Johnson; The NCAA would outlaw all blocking below the waist if it wasn't for the service academies being able to use it to win games...Bad optics if their records were between 0-12 and 2-10. The military saving another dumb American's ***, yours.
BLIMPTOWN
Freshman
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2012
- Messages
- 1,870
All that needs to happen is for GA tech ro play Alabama and a couple of bama's players get hurt defending that bull****e O. Have Saban go on a huge rant post game and....pooof the next year rule changed, since everything Saban says is gospel....sarcasm
QuattroCane
Junior
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2016
- Messages
- 6,596
This sums it up. I can understand if it was an egregious penalty that gave Miami an unfair advantage, but truth is had he just stood in front of the guy the results of the play would not have changed.
****, even if he completely misses the block Berrios has the angle on both defenders and only needs three yards.
Last edited:
Drjohngreen
Recruit
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2017
- Messages
- 12
Exactly, he shouldn't have committed the foul and let the chips fall where they may.
Cognizantphotos
Junior
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2016
- Messages
- 3,732
https://youtu.be/k9KtyHzWblI
1:18:15 Berrios does pretty much the same exact block, and we don't get flagged for it. So why flag it towards the end of the game.
1:18:15 Berrios does pretty much the same exact block, and we don't get flagged for it. So why flag it towards the end of the game.
apfenny3
Freshman
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,594
I thought this was only illegal if it was from the back or side....either I need to read the rule book or this was an atrocious call at a critical time of the game.
The rule for a wide receiver coming from a traditional "crack back"position was changed several years ago. Under no condition can you "crack back" low and if you do it up high, you must hit the tackler between his 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock area.
This is what we were taught
Drjohngreen
Recruit
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2017
- Messages
- 12
Because he blocked toward the end zone not from the outside back toward the previous spot.
Advertisement
Richterscale93
Redshirt Freshman
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2017
- Messages
- 166
They prefer to stay on their hands and knees..
Drjohngreen
Recruit
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2017
- Messages
- 12
Y'all do understand that Miami does it, too, right? Two videos were just posted above showing them doing it.
Loose Cannon
Junior
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2017
- Messages
- 3,810
You still here? Ya lost. With the help of the refs. Get over it. Go troll another board. What is this? Your bye week? Oh that's right. You had your bye before you played us. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
58straight
Junior
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2012
- Messages
- 1,648
It happens it's not a staple of the Miami offense or any other acc team that i know of, through some technicality i guess what you guys do is legal but i still maintain it is an awful practice in an already brutal sport why add to the injury risk lunging at guys knees and jeopardizing careers. GT is going to cost some ACC defensive player a ton of money some day.
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2014
- Messages
- 21,155
At the very least Only OL and RBs pass blocking should be allowed to cut block, and even then those Cut blocks should only be allowed within 3 yards of the LOS and if it happens immediately....so any pulling lineman out blocking for a RB shouldnt be allowed to either.
Personally I'm not a fan of the OL cutting, but I doubt they'll get rid of that any time soon. But WRs cut blocking is just stupid.
And the fact that GTech didn't get called for any of their chop blocks (high-lows) is ridiculous. They clearly get away with so much more than any other ACC team when it comes to OL penalties its ******* stupid
Personally I'm not a fan of the OL cutting, but I doubt they'll get rid of that any time soon. But WRs cut blocking is just stupid.
And the fact that GTech didn't get called for any of their chop blocks (high-lows) is ridiculous. They clearly get away with so much more than any other ACC team when it comes to OL penalties its ******* stupid
Richterscale93
Redshirt Freshman
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2017
- Messages
- 166
From the HurricaneVision post:
I have absolutely read and memorized the rule 9-1-6 and this is not a penalty. He is blocking the defender between 10 & 2, they’ve done away with the designated area that I previously wrote about (this is the first year). It has been replaced with this language: “all players after the ball has left the tackle box, are allowed to block below the waist only if the force of the initial contact is directed from the front. “From the front” is understood to mean within the clock-face region between “10 o’clock and 2 o’clock forward of the player being blocked.” Comments: Simplifies and clarifies the rule. Note that the “low-blocking zone” is no longer defined, and everything is in reference to the tackle box. Also clarifies the rule regarding the crackback block.” That is absolutely within 10 & 2 of the person being blocked. This official should be disciplined.
I have absolutely read and memorized the rule 9-1-6 and this is not a penalty. He is blocking the defender between 10 & 2, they’ve done away with the designated area that I previously wrote about (this is the first year). It has been replaced with this language: “all players after the ball has left the tackle box, are allowed to block below the waist only if the force of the initial contact is directed from the front. “From the front” is understood to mean within the clock-face region between “10 o’clock and 2 o’clock forward of the player being blocked.” Comments: Simplifies and clarifies the rule. Note that the “low-blocking zone” is no longer defined, and everything is in reference to the tackle box. Also clarifies the rule regarding the crackback block.” That is absolutely within 10 & 2 of the person being blocked. This official should be disciplined.
Advertisement
monkey1371
Redshirt Freshman
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2012
- Messages
- 179
Seems like the play was no different than this one.....not called.
[video]https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/919397210072276993[/video]
[video]https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/919397210072276993[/video]
I'm not sure where this was pulled from but this is not correct in a few different aspects. This is not the first year they've done away with the "designated area" (Tackle box?). This is an "off" year for rule changes. Only rules regarding safety and clarifications to rules can be added in off years. The Block Below Waist rule did not change from 2016 to 2017.
Regarding the play specifically. It is ILLEGAL. Correct that it was 10-2 but what makes it illegal is because the block is back towards the original position of the ball (where it was snapped from / middle of the field) before the ball carrier was past the LOS. Before the ball passes the LOS, restricted players (players outside tackle box) can't block low from the outside - in. It can only be from the inside-out.
monkey1371's play from twitter shows a LEGAL block because it is from the inside-out, before the ball crosses the LOS. Once ball crosses the LOS, everything is legal as long as the block is 10-2
Fawk_U Haters
Junior
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2015
- Messages
- 4,403
It's actually a lot different. The dude who is making the argument that is was a penalty may be a GT fan/Troll, but that doesn't mean he is wrong.
What makes GT's legal is as he says, the original alignment of the player and the fact he is block "out" away from the ball placement. It is against the runs to go below the waist when you are originally lined up outside the tackle box blocking back "in" towards the position of the ball.
Ask yourself this, DM84 made the block, up high, a couple of times in that drive. He changed his technique and got flagged.
For the poster who asked with the screen shot of Berrios attempting to cut his guy on the langham bubble. That one is an easy one, BB was cutting the guy who was lined up directly over him, albeit 10-12 yards away.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2011
- Messages
- 3,245
"9. Blocking Below the Waist (Rule 9-1-6) FR-89
Changes to paragraph a: (New language is in bold italics)
“a. Team A prior to a change of team possession:
1. The following Team A players may legally block below the waist inside the tackle
box until they leave the tackle box or until the ball has left the tackle box: (a) players on
the line of scrimmage completely inside the tackle box and (b) stationary backs who are
at least partially inside the tackle box and at least partially inside the frame of the body of
the second lineman from the snapper.
3
2. Except as in paragraph 3 (below), players not covered in paragraph 1 (above) while
the ball is still in the tackle box, and all players after the ball has left the tackle box, are
allowed to block below the waist only if the force of the initial contact is directed from
the front. “From the front” is understood to mean within the clock-face region between
“10 o’clock and 2 o’clock” forward of the player being blocked.
3. Players not covered in paragraph 1 (above) may not block below the waist toward the
line through the original position of the ball at the snap until the ball carrier is clearly
beyond the neutral zone.
4. Once the ball has left the tackle box a player may not block below the waist toward
his own end line.”"
Upon reading the rule it was illegal based on paragraph 3, which expressly excludes players outside the tackle box from blocking below the waist until the ball has passed the LOS if they are facing in towards the ball. Paragraph 2 which discusses blocking between 10-2, expressly yields to paragraph 3 in its language. Had the ball been past the line of scrimmage the block would have been legal or had the block occurred with Mullin's vector towards the sideline. I've been complaining about the call for 4 days, but it was correct.
Changes to paragraph a: (New language is in bold italics)
“a. Team A prior to a change of team possession:
1. The following Team A players may legally block below the waist inside the tackle
box until they leave the tackle box or until the ball has left the tackle box: (a) players on
the line of scrimmage completely inside the tackle box and (b) stationary backs who are
at least partially inside the tackle box and at least partially inside the frame of the body of
the second lineman from the snapper.
3
2. Except as in paragraph 3 (below), players not covered in paragraph 1 (above) while
the ball is still in the tackle box, and all players after the ball has left the tackle box, are
allowed to block below the waist only if the force of the initial contact is directed from
the front. “From the front” is understood to mean within the clock-face region between
“10 o’clock and 2 o’clock” forward of the player being blocked.
3. Players not covered in paragraph 1 (above) may not block below the waist toward the
line through the original position of the ball at the snap until the ball carrier is clearly
beyond the neutral zone.
4. Once the ball has left the tackle box a player may not block below the waist toward
his own end line.”"
Upon reading the rule it was illegal based on paragraph 3, which expressly excludes players outside the tackle box from blocking below the waist until the ball has passed the LOS if they are facing in towards the ball. Paragraph 2 which discusses blocking between 10-2, expressly yields to paragraph 3 in its language. Had the ball been past the line of scrimmage the block would have been legal or had the block occurred with Mullin's vector towards the sideline. I've been complaining about the call for 4 days, but it was correct.
Last edited: