"Rule of the Week" - Packers/Ravens & Buck/Aikman

[Bryan]

Basically this is the illegal low block that is frequently called on changes of possession plays. It is now extended to scrimmage downs as well, but there is an exception within the tight end box. The new rule is for "low blocks," which includes roll blocks as well.

We spilled a bit of digital ink on the topic here:
https://www.footballzebras.com/2021/04/ ... penalties/

https://www.footballzebras.com/2021/07/ ... ter-spots/

https://www.footballzebras.com/2021/08/ ... preseason/

I was surprised that this wasn't a big deal this year. Players adapted rather quickly to the rule. Taunting, not so much, initially.

But all the literature talks about offensive players performing low blocks. There is mention of defensive players performing low blocks on a change of possession (check out Dick Anderson's TD return in the 1971 AFC Championship...about 7 individual "low roll blocks" are performed by the No-Names on the INT return), and only one mention is made in the last subsection where it refers to 'both offensive and defensive players'. The intent of the rule is to limit the amount of cut blocks on unsuspecting players in the open...yet it has morphed into some perverted interpretation where DBs are performing "low roll blocks" when the offense has the ball (i.e. not a change of possession play).

I don't really understand how this interpretation came about in the first place. Can defensive players perform blocks on offensive players? It's illogical on its face. Then when you look at the Packers Ravens play, the Packers guy hit the Ravens blocker in the thigh pad just below the waist...is that considered a "cut block" if an offensive player did that to a defensive player? Of course not. And in the Bears-Vikings game, the Bears DB dove and tackled the RB while the Viking OL simply stepped over the DB and never went to the ground. There was no intent from the DB to blow out the knee of the OL...he was trying to make the tackle.

It's absurd.

[rhickok1109]

Can defensive players perform blocks on offensive players? It's illogical on its face.

It's absurd.

Why do you say it's illogical? Defensive players are often called upon to block offensive players. For example, on some stunts and blitzes, often a DL is supposed to block an OL to make room for his teammate to get to the QB. It's also a very common on punts and field goal attempts, again with DLs blocking OLs to give a teammate a path to block the kick.

As a two-way halfback in the 1950s, I was specifically taught to block a blocker in certain situations.

[Bryan]

Why do you say it's illogical?

In relevance to written rules, using the term 'blocking' interchangeably with offense and defense just makes everything confusing. I already have a hard enough time understanding them.

[Brian wolf]

When I think of a roll block tackle, I think of Pat Fischer timing his hits on Harold Carmichael at the line of scrimmage, chopping him down ...

[rhickok1109]

Why do you say it's illogical?

In relevance to written rules, using the term 'blocking' interchangeably with offense and defense just makes everything confusing. I already have a hard enough time understanding them.

Well, here's the definition of blocking from the NFL rule book. It doesn't say anything about offense or defense:

"Blocking is the act of obstructing or impeding an opponent by contacting him with a part of the blocker’s body."