Illegal block

[Ficklone02]

The defenseless player part states you can't lead with your the helmet, forearm, elbow or shoulder into the head or neck area of a defenseless player either.

So even though it was obvious that he lead with his shoulder, was it obvious he did not target or initiate contact to the head or neck area?

This is Mike Pereira's take:
FOX Sports Video - FOXSports.com

He basically says, the NCAA believes this is no longer an acceptable play, so fans and players have to deal with it.

His article: Pereira: Alabama beats Georgia, with no help from replay reversal

Well like I said, he led with his shoulder, but he led with his shoulder into the defenders shoulder. He didn't aim at the guys neck or head. So, if Mike wants to say its now illegal he's saying so on a very subjective basis which doesn't follow the rules as stated.

 

[Jordanj6502]

Well like I said, he led with his shoulder, but he led with his shoulder into the defenders shoulder. He didn't aim at the guys neck or head. So, if Mike wants to say its now illegal he's saying so on a very subjective basis which doesn't follow the rules as stated.

I am not sure it should be a penalty, or if it is by rule, but when I saw it, I immediately expected a flag to be thrown, and was therefore not surprised that it was thrown.

It is just the state of the game right now.

 

[BigM]

sorry

Mike P. said it was correct

well Mike P. is an NFL rules expert not a NCAA rules expert, as a former lineman (both sides of the ball) in my opinion this was a 100% legal block he may have leaned into it but who wouldn't if he would have just planted himself he'd be the one who got run over he plants his shoulder into the wiscy guy's chest the way the wiscy guy fell after the hit prooves it was a clean hit, if he goes for the head the defender's lower body and center of mass kepps going forward and his head stays in one place and he ends up flat on his bum, instead of tumbling like he did because the hit was near his center of mass instead of at the extreme from it. :45-:47 clearly show that through the hit the defender's head keeps moving forward while the rest of his body has stopped moving as a result of the hit thus the hit was legal because his head was not initially impacted by bell's hit.

 

[MrApathy]

the nebbie player didnt have to use his shoulder or helmet he could have put his hands out to block him. it was unnecessary roughness the correct call.

 

[BigM]

the nebbie player didnt have to use his shoulder or helmet he could have put his hands out to block him. it was unnecessary roughness the correct call.

really? from that angle and speed it is almost impossible to effectively use your hands to administer a legal (not hold or block in the back) without injuring yourself, if you watch the film bell pu8lls his arms in and eventually uses his left arm to finish the block, this is what causes the rotation and the flip from the wiscy defender, so in short he delivered a particularly viscous legal block that looked worse than it actually was. do you want the players wear flags and a tap of the qb flagged too?

 

[veryphil]

sorry

Mike P. said it was correct

Wow, what an embarrassing comment. Are you a sheep or something? Mike P. is wrong too. Don't follow that shepherd. It was shoulder-to-shoulder and then their helmets hit incidentally.

 

[dabears32]

Wow, what an embarrassing comment. Are you a sheep or something? Mike P. is wrong too. Don't follow that shepherd. It was shoulder-to-shoulder and then their helmets hit incidentally.

el oh el

we were having a debate, i was stating another mans opinion who knows rules better than any of us.

But dont let that get in your way of being as #$#^, thanks for the insightful comment though

 

[Clonefan94]

the nebbie player didnt have to use his shoulder or helmet he could have put his hands out to block him. it was unnecessary roughness the correct call.

"OK kids, we are going to teach you correct blocking form today, but remember, when you go to use it in a game, just kind of shove the guy. Don't get set or put any weight into it, OK."

"But Coach, what if he is coming full speed and decides to put his weight behind his hit and he just blows right past me?"

"Oh, I didn't think about that."

Has anyone here ever played football before? You don't just decide to soft push a guy when you are playing at full speed. The game is hit or be hit. You put the block on to the best of your ability, at full speed, if you hesitate, or try to pull up to only lightly hit the guy, you end up looking like a fool as you get knocked to the ground, or better yet, end up being the one who gets crushed. If he would have led with his helmet, then fine, it should have been a penalty, this wasn't that, it was a good clean hard hit. If you think a guy should pull up and not hit you hard, you are playing the wrong game.

 

[CLONECONES]

Looks legal to me, tough to tell realtime but the slow-mo confirms it

 

[isufbcurt]

Loved it

 

[Cycl1]

absolutely beautiful, legal hit.

 

[IcSyU]

The block Wagner had during The Run has exactly nothing to do with this play. The rules have changed in the past 10 years and there's a huge focus on high hits. Unfortunately for viewers the NCAA and NFL have decided that player safety and health is a bigger deal than whether a guy gets a 25 yard run or a 50 yard TD run because of a huge block.

That said it's just another one of those head scratching rules in football. Safety can't lead with his head but it's cool for the running back to put his head down and try and truck someone. You can get flagged for illegal hands to the face or facemask but it's ok to stiff arm someone by putting your hand in their facemask.

 

[CyOps]

If a receiver hit an ISU player like that I'd say it was illegal. In most other cases I'd say it was legal. In this situation I'll call it illegal because its more fun to rile up my friends that are husker fans.

 

[wonkadog]

You can't block a defenseless (not looking) player high. As stated about the rules have changed in the past 10 years so The Run does not play into this discussion. This is a serious point of emphasis and the official evaluators will be 100% behind this flag. Now whether you agree with that rule or not is another story but it was called correctly.

 

[3TrueFans]

You can't block a defenseless (not looking) player high. As stated about the rules have changed in the past 10 years so The Run does not play into this discussion. This is a serious point of emphasis and the official evaluators will be 100% behind this flag. Now whether you agree with that rule or not is another story but it was called correctly.

A defender pursuing a ball carrier is not a defenseless player.

 

[ruxCYtable]

I agreed with the color commentator on the play. If he'd been 30 yards from the play and threw that block, MAYBE you'd call it. But he was the KEY block on the play! The ball carrier was RIGHT THERE! It was an absolutely ridiculous call, IMO. If that is how the game is going to be called they might as well start playing flag football.

 

[ruxCYtable]

this was a 100% legal block he may have leaned into it but who wouldn't if he would have just planted himself he'd be the one who got run over

I agree with this 100%. If he doesn't deliver the blow, HE is the one getting run over.

 

[isufbcurt]

I agreed with the color commentator on the play. If he'd been 30 yards from the play and threw that block, MAYBE you'd call it. But he was the KEY block on the play! The ball carrier was RIGHT THERE! It was an absolutely ridiculous call, IMO. If that is how the game is going to be called they might as well start playing flag football.

It's already turning into flag football!!! Every year they come out with more rules to pussify the game. If you don't want to play a CONTACT sport go bowl or golf.

 

[Clonefan94]

You can't block a defenseless (not looking) player high. As stated about the rules have changed in the past 10 years so The Run does not play into this discussion. This is a serious point of emphasis and the official evaluators will be 100% behind this flag. Now whether you agree with that rule or not is another story but it was called correctly.

So, as a defensive lineman, my best move would be to turn my head to the nearest sideline at the snap of the ball and claim I wasn't looking when I got blocked? We aren't talking about decking a receiver or QB who just threw a pick and isn't even involved in the play, This was a block that saved a tackle. I really believe it's you who doesn't understand the rule. Defenseless means not paying attention because you weren't involved in the play. (See 10 years ago, whe a QB would get laid out right after throwing a pick) I agree in those cases you throw a flag. This wasn't that. The defender was involved inthe play and probably would have made the tackle.

IMO, it's calls like this that will eventually turn football into soccer, with everyone flopping all over the place and lying in agony on the field in hopes of the 15 yard penalty, then, bya a miracle, be back in the game after sitting out their one play. You can't flag someone for blocking too hard.

 

[IcSyU]

It's already turning into flag football!!! Every year they come out with more rules to pussify the game. If you don't want to play a CONTACT sport go bowl or golf.

What choice do they have? The NFL is getting absolutely hammered with lawsuits and they have to do something to protect their own *****.