Publice Service Announcement: Illegal Low Block

[TheSchwartz]

Here is the underlying problem with the NFL's referees. I have read dozens of articles and hundreds of posts about the bad calls in the game and ALL of them have claimed Hasselbeck wasn't BLOCKING he was making a tackle so he CAN'T/SHOULDN'T be flagged for an illegal block.

Well the only explanation I have ever heard for this penalty was at some point this year and the color commentator explained the penalty as...

"Playing through a Blocker below the waist to attempt a tackle."

Now I've tried for 20 minutes to get a definitive definition (say that 5 times fast) to no avail. And this is the best I've gotten...


Eligible receivers lined up within two yards of the tackle, whether on or immediately behind the line, may be blocked below the waist at or behind the line of scrimmage. NO eligible receiver may be blocked below the waist after he goes beyond the line. (Illegal cut)

From what I can understand about the rule, the defensive player cannot contact a non-ball carrier below the waist. IF he does it's a penalty. Such a situation would occur if a QB is trying to tackle a DB who just intercepted his pass and there is a blocker in front of the interceptor but the QB decides to dive at the ball carrier's knees but must go through the blocker to do so. If anyone remembers Green Bay game two years ago, Springs intercepted a pass and Brett Favre was whistled for an illegal low block on the return. I've seen it called 3 times this year, once on a kick return...

If the NFL would just release this type of information so that EVERYONE knows what these penalties are there would be less room for controversy. Remember the "Tuck Rule." NO ONE knew what that was before the Patriots used it to get to the Super Bowl. Which is why it was such an immediate controversy. The only guy in the entire country that knew what that rule was just happened to be the guy doing the replay...

Now the controversy comes down to should the penalty be called even if Hasselbeck managed to miss the blocker and only hit the guy with the ball? Again I'm not sure with that because I can't find an explanation anywhere.

But for ANYONE to claim that Hasselbeck can't be called for an illegal block while attempting a tackle just shows that they don't full understand the rules of the NFL. And as many times as I've seen that claim I would say one of the biggest problem with the NFL's rules is the fact that NO ONE seems to know what they are...

[Leonard Washington]

actually there was an illegal low block penalty during the playoffs or late in the season in which it was explained in detail. i think its a good rule to prevent injury. i believe its only applicable in certain situations like change of possession (turnover) and kick/punt returns. basically you can't cut the blocker in order to get to the ball carrier.

edit...so you are saying hassellwhatever did an illegal block? i don't think so b/c he didn't make contact with a blocker when he made the tackle.

[TheSchwartz]

actually there was an illegal low block penalty during the playoffs or late in the season in which it was explained in detail. i think its a good rule to prevent injury. i believe its only applicable in certain situations like change of possession (turnover) and kick/punt returns. basically you can't cut the blocker in order to get to the ball carrier.

edit...so you are saying hassellwhatever did an illegal block? i don't think so b/c he didn't make contact with a blocker when he made the tackle.

Well I don't know if it's a penalty or not at that point. I couldn't find any explanation for it. Just because he whiffed on the blocker doesn't automatically prevent it from being a penalty. If there is a blocker and Hasselbeck goes low but manages to miss the blocker and only hit the ball carrier I assume it could still be a penalty because he "attempted" an illegal block. But I really can't say for sure so I will have to side with the best referee in the NFL...

The only thing I'm trying to point out is all the mediots who have decided to prove how smart they are by claiming Hasselbeck can't be called for an illegal block while attempting a tackle. And all the people on this board who seem to have similar flawed logic.

What I haven't seen thus far is someone using the logic that since Hasselbeck didn't contact a blocker it shouldn't be a penalty...that would be cause for celebration at this point as it seems on one even knows what an illegal block actually is...

[ouvan59]

The only thing I'm trying to point out is all the mediots who have decided to prove how smart they are by claiming Hasselbeck can't be called for an illegal block while attempting a tackle. And all the people on this board who seem to have similar flawed logic.

What I haven't seen thus far is someone using the logic that since Hasselbeck didn't contact a blocker it shouldn't be a penalty...that would be cause for celebration at this point as it seems on one even knows what an illegal block actually is...

Would you get called for attempted holding if you didn't hold even though you meant to? Would you be called for attempted facemask if you meant to facemask but whiffed? Would you be called for pass interference if the receiver was quick enough to get out of the way even though you meant to interfere with him?

The answer is no and it is not an illegal block if you don't make contact with the blocker even if Hasselbeck meant to or not. Hasselbeck did not go through the blocker so it isn't a penalty. If he had hit the blocker first it would have been a penalty.

[TheSchwartz]

Would you get called for attempted holding if you didn't hold even though you meant to? Would you be called for attempted facemask if you meant to facemask but whiffed? Would you be called for pass interference if the receiver was quick enough to get out of the way even though you meant to interfere with him?

The answer is no and it is not an illegal block if you don't make contact with the blocker even if Hasselbeck meant to or not. Hasselbeck did not go through the blocker so it isn't a penalty. If he had hit the blocker first it would have been a penalty.

To me that's comparing apple's to oranges in terms of penalties. And how can you say with ANY certainty to what is or isn't an illegal block. Do you have some link/reference I could take a look at. Because this whole thing has me very interested in taking a look at the NFL rule book.

As far as the illegal low block it's WHY he missed the blocker not IF. If he dives to the ground in front of a blocker but the guy jumps over him should it still be a penalty? I would think so, he still puts that player in danger which is the whole point of the rule. IF he goes AROUND the blocker and THEN makes a low tackle the play should be legit

As far as your examples, your intentions on those case can't really be made out with any certainty. If Hasselbeck dives to the ground in front of a blocker but the blocker does in fact JUMP over him you can determine without a doubt that he did indeed attempt an illegal block. IF you "attempt pass interference" without making contact, actually I don't even know HOW you would do that, I think for the most part you would just look like an idiot that jumped a route, which happens all the time.

On FGs and EPs when a player jumps into the LOS it's a personal foul whether he actually lands on someone or not. You aren't allowed to do it, end of story. Sean Taylor has been flagged in the past for this even though he managed to not land on anyone..

Like I've already said, I don't know how that situation would work in this case because the NFL goes out of it's way to keep fans uninformed when it comes to the rules...which leads to pointless discussions over what is/isn't a penalty...

[Fergasun]

Sean Taylor was called for a "low block" on a kickoff against the Bears in Game 1 of the Redskins season.

You can't take out a blocker below the waist on a change of possession play. This primarily is wedge-busting but applies to interceptions as well. The call was bad in this instance.

[skinz1972]

i think it was an illegal block,if u look at it,hasslebrokeback tackled the man who didnt have the ball.

[redwoody86]

There is a different rule for after a turnover. It says something like "after a turnover, it is a penalty to block below the waist". Check the digest, it happened earlier this year on MNF and Madden said it was a bad call. I read TMQ that week and he lambasted Madden for not knowing the rules.

Either way, the refs blew the call. They saw something that didn't really happen. This was the only controversial call which was actually, definitively, wrong.

[TheSchwartz]

There is a different rule for after a turnover. It says something like "after a turnover, it is a penalty to block below the waist". Check the digest, it happened earlier this year on MNF and Madden said it was a bad call. I read TMQ that week and he lambasted Madden for not knowing the rules.

Either way, the refs blew the call. They saw something that didn't really happen. This was the only controversial call which was actually, definitively, wrong.

I don't really get what you are saying...

So it's OK if Hasselbeck takes out a blocker who doesn't have the ball by hitting him below the waist?

Or is it OK because Hasselbeck whiffed on the blocker on only hit the ball carrier?

And if it was called on MNF, and Madden called it a bad call, but then TMQ lambasted Madden for getting it wrong, doesn't that mean that Hasselbeck could've made an illegal block?

Because if it's the first then you are wrong, or the call is continuously misapplied by EVERY NFL official. And if they can manage to pull the "Tuck Rule" out of their ass in a playoff game when no one else in the stadium had any idea what it was, including every player and coach, I would have to assume they know what they are doing when it comes to the last 4 times I've seen the "illegal block" called on a play involving a "defender"...

[BigRay]

If there was a call that was so baffling that was it..

[ChiefPowhatan17]

It was a bad call, he was putting himself in position to make the tackle.

[skinzfan4life]

If he meant it or not he ended up making a tackle on the player with the ball so the penalty should not have been called. If you stick your foot out to trip but no one trips, i highly doubt they are going to call a peanlty.

[MLSKINS]

Here is the underlying problem with the NFL's referees. I have read dozens of articles and hundreds of posts about the bad calls in the game and ALL of them have claimed Hasselbeck wasn't BLOCKING he was making a tackle so he CAN'T/SHOULDN'T be flagged for an illegal block.

Well the only explanation I have ever heard for this penalty was at some point this year and the color commentator explained the penalty as...

"Playing through a Blocker below the waist to attempt a tackle."

Now I've tried for 20 minutes to get a definitive definition (say that 5 times fast) to no avail. And this is the best I've gotten...



From what I can understand about the rule, the defensive player cannot contact a non-ball carrier below the waist. IF he does it's a penalty. Such a situation would occur if a QB is trying to tackle a DB who just intercepted his pass and there is a blocker in front of the interceptor but the QB decides to dive at the ball carrier's knees but must go through the blocker to do so. If anyone remembers Green Bay game two years ago, Springs intercepted a pass and Brett Favre was whistled for an illegal low block on the return. I've seen it called 3 times this year, once on a kick return...

If the NFL would just release this type of information so that EVERYONE knows what these penalties are there would be less room for controversy. Remember the "Tuck Rule." NO ONE knew what that was before the Patriots used it to get to the Super Bowl. Which is why it was such an immediate controversy. The only guy in the entire country that knew what that rule was just happened to be the guy doing the replay...

Now the controversy comes down to should the penalty be called even if Hasselbeck managed to miss the blocker and only hit the guy with the ball? Again I'm not sure with that because I can't find an explanation anywhere.

But for ANYONE to claim that Hasselbeck can't be called for an illegal block while attempting a tackle just shows that they don't full understand the rules of the NFL. And as many times as I've seen that claim I would say one of the biggest problem with the NFL's rules is the fact that NO ONE seems to know what they are...
:applause: :applause: :applause: