Spearing on 72?

You can't tell from the pic if he is making contact. Honestly you could call spearing/leading with the helmet a ton in games but unless it is with malicious intent it won't get called

Here is the shot before the fumble:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]42020[/ATTACH]

 

Looks like a chop block by the defender on offensive lineman which is a 15 yard penalty so ball goes back to Scott Co. Tough call but I am sure their is a lot of tough calls in the course of the game

Looks like a chop block by the defender on offensive lineman which is a 15 yard penalty so ball goes back to Scott Co. Tough call but I am sure their is a lot of tough calls in the course of the game

Chop block is if the player is engaged by another defender and gets chopped by a second defender isn't it? or am i confusing that with something else? Doesn't look like he is engaged by a 2nd defender to me

Looks like a chop block by the defender on offensive lineman which is a 15 yard penalty so ball goes back to Scott Co. Tough call but I am sure their is a lot of tough calls in the course of the game

 

Disagree. Looks like the kid simply ducked to avoid the block. Need to see the film.

Chop block is if the player is engaged by another defender and gets chopped by a second defender isn't it? or am i confusing that with something else? Doesn't look like he is engaged by a 2nd defender to me

 

There is a rule that prevents a defender from going at a blockers knees.

Looks like that defender was trying to keep his outside arm free and got rolled by the pulling g. For a team to get a call because the puller/lead blocker is getting illegally chopped down that defender would of had to have his shoulder pads into the pulling G and that G would of had to keep his hands off of him. If the G contacted with the hands the official is going to say the downward force pushed the defender into the legs.

 

I have a feeling if you watch the film you'll see a DE coming up field and getting rolled and nothing like a chop block.

I used the wrong term. It is not a chop block but an illegal block below the waist which can be called on the defense. If you are a real good power/counter team then teams will do it to you until they get called. Often it is combined with a wrong arm technique to spill the rb into a lb

I'm sure the offensive player would rather have you call it a "pancake " block by him.

 

Look I was at the game and it was definitely a live ball and should have been ruled as such with a TD awarded to Meade County. All this talk about "spearing and illegal defensive block is just silly.

 

I will also add that there were still about 3 minutes left in the game so it doesn't necessarily mean that Meade would have won the game on this one play but it would have been interesting to see what would have happened if the correct call was made.

 

It was a very hard fought and physical game by two teams pretty evenly matched. Good sportsmanship was shown by both teams and fans throughout.

 

I'm extremely proud of the boys in Green.

 

Congratulations to Scott County.

I've always been of the opinion that it's very difficult to lay the result of any game on one play.

 

That being said, it appeared to be a missed call that was a huge momentum-changer.

Looks like a chop block by the defender on offensive lineman which is a 15 yard penalty so ball goes back to Scott Co. Tough call but I am sure their is a lot of tough calls in the course of the game

 

This is not a "chop" block. This is not illegal. The defender makes first contact with the offensive player against the upper body. In order for it to be "an illegal block below the waist", contact has to be initiated against at body part below the waist (the legs). Contact in this case as you can see is against the offensive players chest and forearm.

From what I've read here it was on the last drive when Scott scored the winning TD. Had it been called a fumble Meade at worst would have taken the ball with the lead but Meade's kid picked it up and scored so it would have padded their lead.

 

Game was tied at 14-14. Would have given Meade the lead, not padded it.

This is not a "chop" block. This is not illegal. The defender makes first contact with the offensive player against the upper body. In order for it to be "an illegal block below the waist", contact has to be initiated against at body part below the waist (the legs). Contact in this case as you can see is against the offensive players chest and forearm.

 

That is why the O-lineman is parallel with the groud. Trust me they went for his knees more than once when Scott Co pulled their lineman. One picture cant show it all but video can

That is why the O-lineman is parallel with the groud. Trust me they went for his knees more than once when Scott Co pulled their lineman. One picture cant show it all but video can

 

Cut blocks are legal in the FBZ if it is the initial action - by either side of the line. A cut block is below the knees and is legal. A chop is double engagement high and low. Except for chop blocks, if the FBZ is intact not much gets called. If the FBZ is intact and the engaged parties were in the FBZ at the start of the play - block below the waist - legal, block in the back legal, cut block (as initial move) legal.

 

Most people do not like the cut block - but its legal and helps if you LBs are your primary tacklers.

Leading with the head - maybe...stills can deceive on such events. But definitely a fumble.

 

Did Scott Co. not pony up ransom money for these?

Cut blocks are legal in the FBZ if it is the initial action - by either side of the line. A cut block is below the knees and is legal. A chop is double engagement high and low. Except for chop blocks' date=' if the FBZ is intact not much gets called. If the FBZ is intact and the engaged parties were in the FBZ at the start of the play - block below the waist - legal, block in the back legal, cut block (as initial move) legal. Most people do not like the cut block - but its legal and helps if you LBs are your primary tacklers.[/quote']

 

You can't cut the linebackers in the FBZ.