PDA

View Full Version : 3rd Quarter illegal blocking discussion



steelnavy
09-18-2011, 07:56 PM
Was in a bar in Dothan Alabama watching the game and saw that they were discussing the dirty blocking by the Rats last week. I couldn't hear what was said. Can someone expound for me?

Thanks!

steelfin
09-18-2011, 08:36 PM
They said thats its not illegal to engage a DL up high and another down low as long as the offensive lineman are lined up next to each other.

I was surprised by the comments. I thought it was illegal to engage high and cut low regardless of where the OL line up...IMO is should be...

SF

DukieBoy
09-18-2011, 08:40 PM
The videos of those cut blocks look like major knee injuries just waiting to happen .... and Goodell wants to make the game safer for the players ???

Pahn711
09-18-2011, 08:52 PM
It was interesting because Tony Siragusa really got on Mike Pereira's case about it with the safety argument. Pereira's response was that since the NFL already restricts o-line blocking techniques like clipping and other forms of cut blocking, it was hard enough for teams to run the football as it is.

I didn't buy it but thats his stance.

Ghost
09-18-2011, 08:58 PM
According to Mike Pereira today, the Ravens are correct. It was not illegal because the linemen involved were lined up next to each other. It's just when you have a man engaged and another player, not a lineman who lined up next to the original blocker, comes in low. If it's the center and the guard it is legal

Daryl Johnston commented how he thought it was weak and you need to take a man on one on one.

Eddie Spaghetti
09-18-2011, 09:02 PM
Johnston commented how he thought it was weak and you need to take a man on one on one.

I think it was siragusa who said that.

the bum also had some kind words for dirt.

NJ-STEELER
09-18-2011, 09:11 PM
Johnston commented how he thought it was weak and you need to take a man on one on one.

I think it was siragusa who said that.

the bum also had some kind words for dirt.

they both didnt like the rule

as far as perrira's stance (and ive heard it with others as well) that you wont be able to run the ball without some cut blocking.
what the hell did that block on hampton have to do with a play that was ran to the outside

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
09-18-2011, 10:42 PM
It was interesting because Tony Siragusa really got on Mike Pereira's case about it with the safety argument. Pereira's response was that since the NFL already restricts o-line blocking techniques like clipping and other forms of cut blocking, it was hard enough for teams to run the football as it is.

I didn't buy it but thats his stance.

Pereira specifically stated something along the lines of "the NFL's response would be" as if to say that he does not agree but this is why the rule is written as it is.

SteelTorch
09-18-2011, 11:10 PM
The videos of those cut blocks look like major knee injuries just waiting to happen .... and Goodell wants to make the game safer for the players ???

He wants to water down the sport just enough so he can implement his 18-game season. :roll:

SanAntonioSteelerFan
09-18-2011, 11:24 PM
The videos of those cut blocks look like major knee injuries just waiting to happen .... and Goodell wants to make the game safer for the players ???
No, just for the Bradys* and Rivers of the league.

SteelTorch
09-19-2011, 12:01 AM
The videos of those cut blocks look like major knee injuries just waiting to happen .... and Goodell wants to make the game safer for the players ???
No, just for the Bradys* and Rivers of the league.
:Agree

Or, more generally, the marquis players of the league. Those are the ones that will sell more jerseys.

hawaiiansteel
09-28-2011, 04:41 PM
Defenseless Player?

by CRAIG WOLFLEY on SEPTEMBER 27, 2011

Todayís NFL is not your dadís NFL. Because in my era, chop blocking (cutting a man below the waist while he is engaged with another man) and a cut block (cutting a man below the waist while he is not engaged with another man) were both legal.

The game has evolved to a kinder, gentler version in accordance with todayís mandate of making the game safer, therefore much healthier. Thatís fine with me, so long as you keep the playing field level, and adhere to a safety policy that stretches across the field.

With the advent of the term ďDefenseless playerĒ now being cow-kicked around defining different players as being vulnerable, such as the wide receiver or the snapper on special teams, and most assuredly the quarterbacks, it might be time to consider the plight of the nose tackle or the 3-technique defensive tackle.

According to the NFL, the nose tackle (usually the mammoth 2-footed pachyderm lined up across from the center) is not a defenseless player if a running play is going on. Therefore it is of no interest to the NFL that ďChop blockingĒ or the art of rolling up a playerís legs from the side or behind is occurring in greater frequency.

Imagine that you are Casey Hampton playing the nose tackle. You fire off the ball on a pass play and head bang with the center and begin grappling with said center on a pass rush. Suddenly a 300-plus pound howitzer caps you in the knees with a chop block blowing you off your feet and because you are locked up with the center, you have no way of defending your lower body.

Hopefully for Big Snack (and you), the tendons and ligaments of the knees are strong enough to withstand 300-plus pounds of bodyweightxforce sawing him in half. The flag comes out because it is a propped up chop block. While engaged with one man, you canít be drilled in the lower body by another, no matter if itís the centerís next door neighbor on the offensive line or a running back trying to help out.

Same guy, same place only now itís a run play. You fire off the line of scrimmage, engage in hand-to-hand combat with the beef-a-lo and move down the line flowing towards the designated gap you are responsible for. Suddenly the guy running next to the center, the backside guard who you canít see because your back is turned, blasts you from behind in the back of the legs.

Do you mean to tell me that a guy getting drilled from behind isnít defenseless? That itís a Bozo no-no to chop (remember cut and chop blocks are two different animals) on a pass rush but itís okay on a run play?

The NFL says if a man is one-player removed from the choppee, thatís a foul on the chopper, but if heís right next to the choppee then have at it chopper. Whatís the difference? That itís not okay to see it coming on a pass rush but perfectly fine if you donít see it coming on a run play? The defensive player is still hugely at risk for injury in either situation and it makes no sense to me how being right next to the post-man is okay, but one man removed is not.

Iím beginning to think the NFL deems a defenseless player as anyone but a defensive player.

http://craigwolfley.com/2011/09/defenseless-player/

ikestops85
09-28-2011, 05:03 PM
It was interesting because Tony Siragusa really got on Mike Pereira's case about it with the safety argument. Pereira's response was that since the NFL already restricts o-line blocking techniques like clipping and other forms of cut blocking, it was hard enough for teams to run the football as it is.

I didn't buy it but thats his stance.

I don't think Pereira was advocating the rule. He was just explaining it and what he knows of the reasoning behind it.

SanAntonioSteelerFan
09-28-2011, 05:55 PM
Defenseless Player?

by CRAIG WOLFLEY on SEPTEMBER 27, 2011

Todayís NFL is not your dadís NFL. ...http://craigwolfley.com/2011/09/defenseless-player/

Wolf can write like that? Really?? Reads more like what a Philly Esq. would write. :Bow

Pahn711
09-29-2011, 09:53 PM
It was interesting because Tony Siragusa really got on Mike Pereira's case about it with the safety argument. Pereira's response was that since the NFL already restricts o-line blocking techniques like clipping and other forms of cut blocking, it was hard enough for teams to run the football as it is.

I didn't buy it but thats his stance.

I don't think Pereira was advocating the rule. He was just explaining it and what he knows of the reasoning behind it.

I wasn't implying he was an advocate, but I can see how you interpreted it that way. I know he was speaking on behalf of the owners committee.

SanAntonioSteelerFan
09-29-2011, 10:50 PM
If it's perfectly legal and being done against us, shouldn't we be doing it too?

ikestops85
09-30-2011, 12:50 PM
If it's perfectly legal and being done against us, shouldn't we be doing it too?

I think you might see a few Steelers going after Ngata the next time we play Baltimore.

RuthlessBurgher
10-01-2011, 07:09 PM
If it's perfectly legal and being done against us, shouldn't we be doing it too?

I think you might see a few Steelers going after Ngata the next time we play Baltimore.

And you'll hear Harbaugh inevitably whine about it.