peel backs

[They Call Me Coach]

I thought this year the UIL and TASO were making it a strong point of emphasis of stoping unnessisary contact of peel back blocks when the ball is more than 10-15 yards up the field. Is that not supposed to fall under the new defenseless player rule and be considered targeting? Just wondering because it happened twice in our game on the same play to the same player. He was blindsided then got up and was blind sided again. I have spoken to other coaches who said that there was no flag thrown in their games for peel backs either.

 

[CoachBurger]

happened in our game too. I pointed it to the ref and he said it wasnt a peelback "because he led with the shoulder." im pretty sure its still a peel back block no matter what you lead with. I would also like clarification.

 

[fencewire]

Ok I'll try to get this all in one post but if you need anymore clarification just ask.

Peel back blocks are legal, provided,

#1 the blocker does not target the blockee above the shoulders or that the blocker doesn't use the crown of their helmet in the block. (Targeting) this is because a player that receives a blind side block is now by definition defenseless, but that doesn't mean he can't be blocked legally.

#2 the blocker doesn't block the blockee below the waist. (Illegal block below the waist) provided that the block occurs after the ball has left the low blocking zone and the block was at any angle toward team A's end line.

#3. The third test on the legality of a peel back block is was the blockee clearly out of the play. Ie A lineman trotting down the field 20 yards behind the action getting blown up. (Unnecessary roughness)

You can have a peel back fall in 0-2 of those categories, a peel back could be almost at the ball carrier, think punt return or 30yards behind the play.

 

[fencewire]

Also, none of those are new fouls, the only "changes" are the penalty if you are called for #1 you are disqualified for the remainder of the game, and receivers of PBB are now by definition defenseless.

 

[CoachBurger]

Thats a pretty good explanation. Thanks.

 

[cowman52]

Me think you are putting way too much into this. Peel back is blocking toward offensive goal line below the waist. In or out of the play has no bearing on the deal. Targeting is going after the head, a defenseless player, a player out of the play. Peel back can happen anywhere on field, distance away from LOS no part of the deal.

 

[coachsatcher]

Me think you are putting way too much into this. Peel back is blocking toward offensive goal line below the waist. In or out of the play has no bearing on the deal. Targeting is going after the head, a defenseless player, a player out of the play. Peel back can happen anywhere on field, distance away from LOS no part of the deal.

Actually, at the coaches conference, it was stated the distance away from the ball had a lot to do with "defenseless" player. That was the whole point they were making, trying to eliminate the peel back blocks that had no bearing on the outcome of the play. It was reiterated at both our scrimmages, and prior to both of our games. But I watched two severe peel back blocks, more than twenty yards behind the play, de-cleat a kid who had no clue it was coming. Both blocks were high and viscous. I'm not saying it should be a penalty (you used to get stickers on your helmets for blocks like this), I'm just saying when you warn the coaches for four weeks that it's going to be called and then we watch it happen twice, right in front of the official (and on one play the official actually stopped watching the play to make sure the kid was able to get up), it really leaves the rest of the officials open to ridicule when they finally make the call. Either call it or don't! But mean what you say and say what you mean. It makes it tough on a coach when we coach our kids to not do these blocks anymore and then they're coming to the sidelines thinking they're Batman because someone else was able to get away with it.

 

[cowman52]

Let s take a play where the runner is 40 yards past the LOS, a blocker running along side, feels a player gaining on the ball carrier and turns back toward his own goal line and blocks defender below the waist. This guy in no way defenseless, but is it a penalty YES. Distance away may be a part, of the defenseless player deal, but not a very big part.

Separate any connection between peel back and defenseless. They ain't . If it was away from the play, late, back, front, 10 o'clock 2 o'clock 7:39 makes no difference

 

[Shad Kline]

I think Coach Satcher might be on to something there. It's not even whether or not it should be called. Which in my opinion, 20 yards behind the play and catching someone by surprise and decleating them is fun to watch, but should be a penalty. It should be about it being called the same, throughout the six man nation. That way, you learn what to not do. Right now, with this and so many other rules, you learn what you can sometimes get away with instead of what to not do. It's mainly due to a lack of consistency. I would rather have a consistantly blind ref than inconsistant fella out there.

 

[They Call Me Coach]

Nice reference to the late ninties-early two thousands snickers bar commercial!!!!!!!!!

Me think you are putting way too much into this. Peel back is blocking toward offensive goal line below the waist. In or out of the play has no bearing on the deal. Targeting is going after the head, a defenseless player, a player out of the play. Peel back can happen anywhere on field, distance away from LOS no part of the deal.

Actually, at the coaches conference, it was stated the distance away from the ball had a lot to do with "defenseless" player. That was the whole point they were making, trying to eliminate the peel back blocks that had no bearing on the outcome of the play. It was reiterated at both our scrimmages, and prior to both of our games. But I watched two severe peel back blocks, more than twenty yards behind the play, de-cleat a kid who had no clue it was coming. Both blocks were high and viscous. I'm not saying it should be a penalty (you used to get stickers on your helmets for blocks like this), I'm just saying when you warn the coaches for four weeks that it's going to be called and then we watch it happen twice, right in front of the official (and on one play the official actually stopped watching the play to make sure the kid was able to get up), it really leaves the rest of the officials open to ridicule when they finally make the call. Either call it or don't! But mean what you say and say what you mean. It makes it tough on a coach when we coach our kids to not do these blocks anymore and then they're coming to the sidelines thinking they're Batman because someone else was able to get away with it.

 

[VanguardVikings]

Had this happen to our team several times last week behind the play, results were one of my kids getting a concussion and the other a broken arm. When you have a team of 11 guys and 2 are out for unnecessary contact that will not dictate a play it's pretty rough.

 

[Johnny South]

Had this happen to our team several times last week behind the play, results were one of my kids getting a concussion and the other a broken arm. When you have a team of 11 guys and 2 are out for unnecessary contact that will not dictate a play it's pretty rough.

Vanguard, more than once or maybe twice in a game is not the blocking teams fault. You need to tell your kids, and practice it, to have more than tunnel vision on the field. That is what coaching is for. If you are easy prey, you will have to learn the hard way. And I'll bet the same kid didn't get blocked twice.

 

[GFL 2012]

Head on a swivel ...it is a contact sport....20 yards behind a little to far 10 fair game ...

 

[Hondo]

I'm going to try and clear some of this up. First let's use the same terms to describe the same play. As officials a "peel back" block is a low block toward a players own goal line. A "blind side" block is a block that a player does not see coming.

Now both of these can be legal and illegal depending on the circumstances.

Peel back. If the ball has left the low blocking zone (think 7yds either side of the center) NO ONE can block low back towards their own goal line. That's it. You mention "peel back" that's what officials are thinking - an illegal low block.

Blindside blocks
1 If a blindside block or any really block is delivered against a player "obviously out of the play", irregardless of where the blow (on the blockee's body) is delivered that is a UNR (unnecessary roughness).

2. A person that receives a blindside block is considered defenseless player this year. Therefore if this block his to the head/neck are it would fall under the new targeting rules and would result in an ejection. This block could occur anywhere on the field, right beside the runner or 25 yards behind.

While I'm on it. A clip is a low block below the waist from behind. Too many times I've heard "that's a clip" when they are talking about a block in the back. A "chop" is a 2 person high/low or low/high block. Also hear "they're chopping us" when I think they are talking about a low or cut block.