PDA

View Full Version : What constitutes an illegal chop block?


maddog78
10-19-2012, 08:00 AM
Remember the 2011 opener when Baltimore was cutting our DL every play, much to Hampton's (and the fans') chagrin? There was a big curfuffle about it, only to have the league come out and say that if the OL next to the engaged OL cuts the DL, it's okey dokey, and that the Steelers would do well to shut their collective traps?

Fast forward to last night. Last offensive play of the game for Seattle, the RT is engaged with Aldon Smith when the RG chops Smith down.

Flag, chop block in the EZ, safety for SF. The announcers all agreed with the call. Not a peep about the "linemen next to the engaged linemen" nonsense we heard after the Baltimore game.

Did they just make up that rule on the fly when the Steelers complained, and forget to write it down?

:noidea:

teegre
10-19-2012, 08:12 AM
I was wondering the same thing. Here is what I thought:
if BALT did indeed have an OL engaged w/ a Steeler, and another player blocks him below the knees: chop block.

Up high: no chop block.

But, I recall some (BS) explanation, after that game, about two OL side-by-side "can indeed" chop block...

Two inquiring minds want to know. [El-Gonzo, I'm sure that you know...]

Darkstorm05
10-19-2012, 08:35 AM
According to the NFL rulebook, it's a chop block if the lineman were lined up more than 1 spot apart. So, for example, if the center is engaged with a defender, and a guard hits the guy, it's cool. If, however, one of the tackles comes in and hits the same defender below the line, it's a chop block.

harrison'samonster
10-19-2012, 09:09 AM
sounds like a load of bs to me. If their concerned about safety it shouldn't matter how far apart the linemen are lined up.

maddog78
10-19-2012, 09:29 AM
According to the NFL rulebook, it's a chop block if the lineman were lined up more than 1 spot apart. So, for example, if the center is engaged with a defender, and a guard hits the guy, it's cool. If, however, one of the tackles comes in and hits the same defender below the line, it's a chop block.

Right, so last night's block should not have been a penalty. That fact escaped the refs and the announcers.

Darkstorm05
10-19-2012, 09:53 AM
Right, so last night's block should not have been a penalty. That fact escaped the refs and the announcers.

Most likely you can thank Brian Cushing for that. After the media backlash, at the next ref meeting there was probably a slide that said "Crack down on chop blocks until this blows over".

steelfury02
10-19-2012, 10:21 AM
Section 18.2.A.QQ.867-5309:
"If the rule benefits the Steelers' opponents, then rule in the opponents' favor."

teegre
10-19-2012, 12:43 PM
Section 18.2.A.QQ.867-5309:
"If the rule benefits the Steelers' opponents, then rule in the opponents' favor."

Similarly...

Section 18.2.FDPS: 123.43:
"If a DL (or any defender) dives at BB's knees, that it is allowed... but, if a defender sneezes in the general direction of ANY other QB, a personal foul penalty must be called."