To Chop or not to chop... there is no question

[T_Braun78]

Against my better judgement, I offer an explanation:

The reason we “Cut” backside has to do with the momentum of the defenders in concert with the flow of the play. When the offense’s action indicates to a defender they are backside (a pulling guard for example), said defender will flow across the LOS to the ball carrier (to either make a tackle or maintain gap assignment). Now, the OL’s angle of engagement on that flowing DL is much more acute due to the spread option’s wide splits. In order to change the DL momentum vector, the OL wold have to overtake them, engage them perpendicular to the LOS, then change their velocity and apply enough force to cancel out the defenders initial momentum across the center and move the defender backwards away from the B back’s running lane.

A more successful way to stop a persuing defender is remove their source of acceleration (their legs), keeping them on the backside, removing them from the B Backs running lane. Often, defenders will counter this tactic by doing what 25 did above, reversing direction away from the play and taking themselves out of an impact position.

The path of the cut and the level (how high off the ground) of engagement determines whether a cut block was “good” or not. The cut above was not bad in terms of execution, and may have resulted in a defender down in 25 had tried to make the play. The “chop” is much more a function of the center getting amazing drive off the line.

 

[gtg147g]

The call hurt (fortunately didn't affect the end result of the game) and I watched this in slow motion like 30 times yesterday (thanks for posting it). It looked to me as if it was not intentional. I do not fault the ref for calling it, as it was hard to see in real time and the defender did wind up being engaged by two, even if it was unintentional.

I'm more irritated about the play before the half where there was not a flag on VT #94 Hill for what he was doing to Marshall after landing on top of him. The ref had to pull him off of Marshall after he landed on him, then remounted and tried to twist his neck and pull on his helmet. I haven't known VT to play dirty like Miami and Duke, and it made me angry. Fans were calling for a flag at the time, but I couldn't see it from my seat. I watched it over and over again last night and just got more irritated every time, as the ref was right there!

There was a family of VT fans with kids sitting in front of us. After that play I yelled so loud (worst thing they heard me say was 'hell') one of the kids got upset and a while later they all moved to different seats. Felt a little bad after - it's "just a game" after all - but I did appreciate the newly acquired leg room..

 

[B Lifsey]

Thanks for first hand explanation. Do OL at other schools use word/phrases like momentum vector and velocity? Do fans from other schools understand them if they do?

 

[stech81]

Please post

Against my better judgement, I offer an explanation:

The reason we “Cut” backside has to do with the momentum of the defenders in concert with the flow of the play. When the offense’s action indicates to a defender they are backside (a pulling guard for example), said defender will flow across the LOS to the ball carrier (to either make a tackle or maintain gap assignment). Now, the OL’s angle of engagement on that flowing DL is much more acute due to the spread option’s wide splits. In order to change the DL momentum vector, the OL wold have to overtake them, engage them perpendicular to the LOS, then change their velocity and apply enough force to cancel out the defenders initial momentum across the center and move the defender backwards away from the B back’s running lane.

A more successful way to stop a persuing defender is remove their source of acceleration (their legs), keeping them on the backside, removing them from the B Backs running lane. Often, defenders will counter this tactic by doing what 25 did above, reversing direction away from the play and taking themselves out of an impact position.

The path of the cut and the level (how high off the ground) of engagement determines whether a cut block was “good” or not. The cut above was not bad in terms of execution, and may have resulted in a defender down in 25 had tried to make the play. The “chop” is much more a function of the center getting amazing drive off the line.

Welcome back

 

[Longestday]

I am wrong according to CPJ : ( or maybe I think CPJ is wrong : )

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I am wrong according to CPJ : ( or maybe I think CPJ is wrong : )

I agree with CPJ. It wasn't intentional, but I would have. Allied the penalty, because the effect is the same.

Just like when Qua Searxy was hit late out of bounds - twice - on one play. It wasn't intentional, but it's still a penalty.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Johnson just said on the call-in show that it WAS the correct call by the refs.

 

[takethepoints]

Johnson just said on the call-in show that it WAS the correct call by the refs.

Not the first time he's been wrong.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Not the first time he's been wrong.

So you know more than the coach? He didn't say that it WAS a chop block; he said that the refs were not wrong in calling it. From what I have read on here, pretty much everybody agrees with that.

 

[RonJohn]

The rule does not say anything about intent:

"Chop Block
ARTICLE 3. A chop block is a high-low or low-high combination block by any two players against an opponent (not the ball carrier) anywhere on the field, with or without a delay between blocks; the “low” component is at the opponent’s thigh or below. (A.R. 9-1-10-I-IV). It is not a foul if the blockers’ opponent initiates the contact. (A.R. 9-1-10-V)"

The way I understand the coach's complaints about chop block calls is that the high offensive lineman isn't initiating contact. He is trying to go by the defender and the defender holds him. Not that the high offensive lineman isn't intending to block, but that he isn't blocking he is being held.

This play looks like the very reason that you would have a penalty in the first place. If this was the type of block normally used by linemen, then many defensive linemen would be hurt very often. GT doesn't normally block this way even though other fans think they do.

 

[takethepoints]

So you know more than the coach? He didn't say that it WAS a chop block; he said that the refs were not wrong in calling it. From what I have read on here, pretty much everybody agrees with that.

He also castigated the call in his presser after the game. I think he was right then and he still thinks he was. He's saying nice things now about how "understandable" the call was because he doesn't want to be in the sights of refs in future games. If he kept calling them out they would, of course, start calling chop blocks right and left just to show who's boss on the field.

Btw, the rule directly implies intention by referring to a "combination block". You can't combine unintentionally.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

He also castigated the call in his presser after the game. I think he was right then and he still thinks he was. He's saying nice things now about how "understandable" the call was because he doesn't want to be in the sights of refs in future games. If he kept calling them out they would, of course, start calling chop blocks right and left just to show who's boss on the field.

Btw, the rule directly implies intention by referring to a "combination block". You can't combine unintentionally.

Yes you can. Kenny Cooper was engaged high. The cut block was intended for another player, but clearly in the video you see him end up cutting the guy Kenny Cooper was engaged with. It does not matter what the reason was for his cutting out the legs of the player engaged high (unless I suppose an opposing player pushed him into it or something like that). I would have called the penalty too. It wasn't what we were trying to do, but the outcome was what it was.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

He also castigated the call in his presser after the game. I think he was right then and he still thinks he was. He's saying nice things now about how "understandable" the call was because he doesn't want to be in the sights of refs in future games. If he kept calling them out they would, of course, start calling chop blocks right and left just to show who's boss on the field.

Btw, the rule directly implies intention by referring to a "combination block". You can't combine unintentionally.

I'm not going to listen to it again, but IIRC, CPJ "apologized" to the refs on the call-in show last night, so he apparently doesn't still think he was right.

 

[takethepoints]

Yes you can. Kenny Cooper was engaged high. The cut block was intended for another player, but clearly in the video you see him end up cutting the guy Kenny Cooper was engaged with. It does not matter what the reason was for his cutting out the legs of the player engaged high (unless I suppose an opposing player pushed him into it or something like that). I would have called the penalty too. It wasn't what we were trying to do, but the outcome was what it was.

Uh, you did look at the film, didn't you? Because "… unless I suppose an opposing player pushed him into it or something like that" is exactly what happened. It's right there at the start of this thread. You can check.

Now, like you, I might have called the penalty; the umpire has one of the toughest jobs of any ref, especially with the new "holding rules". If all he saw was the end of the play, I understand why the flag was thrown. That doesn't make the call any less bogus, however. And, I might add, that crew missed more calls last Saturday then any I've seen in many a moon. This was the worse, however, imho.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Uh, you did look at the film, didn't you? Because "… unless I suppose an opposing player pushed him into it or something like that" is exactly what happened. It's right there at the start of this thread. You can check.

Now, like you, I might have called the penalty; the umpire has one of the toughest jobs of any ref, especially with the new "holding rules". If all he saw was the end of the play, I understand why the flag was thrown. That doesn't make the call any less bogus, however. And, I might add, that crew missed more calls last Saturday then any I've seen in many a moon. This was the worse, however, imho.

Meh, I think that's a stretch. The defender's original direction was inside, which is why the cut block was thrown in that direction. It was just bad luck that the defender then shifted back outside, Kenny Cooper's man was moving inward too, and we ended up cutting the wrong guy.

There were tons of missed calls, I agree with that for sure. I wouldn't say this was the worse. The play looked like a legitimate chop block. Meanwhile, Qua got hit by not 1 but 2 guys out of bounds, the last of which when he was 15 yards off the field. TaQuon got hog collared and drug down backwards while trying to make a tackle on the pick 6. I thought the guy had blown TaQuon's knee out. When Lance got pushed on 4th and 8 the commentators yelled louder than I can remember anybody yelling about a missed call. When I watch some of these games, I just don't understand how Refs can be so incompetent. If there is something happening away from the play, or inside a group or pile of 10 guys, I can understand. But when things are happening right where the ball is being played and where everybody's eyes are, and then you miss a completely obvious call...I don't get it.

The booth wasn't much better. When CPJ had to walk out on the field to get a review on the 4th down spot (that was terrible)...I can forgive the Refs on that because sometimes spots can be difficult. But for the folks in the booth to not buzz in that they need a second to check the spot...awful.

 

[RonJohn]

Uh, you did look at the film, didn't you? Because "… unless I suppose an opposing player pushed him into it or something like that" is exactly what happened. It's right there at the start of this thread. You can check.

Now, like you, I might have called the penalty; the umpire has one of the toughest jobs of any ref, especially with the new "holding rules". If all he saw was the end of the play, I understand why the flag was thrown. That doesn't make the call any less bogus, however. And, I might add, that crew missed more calls last Saturday then any I've seen in many a moon. This was the worse, however, imho.

I saw the replay and thought it was a chop block. I just listened to the radio show and CPJ's exact words were "definitely a chop block".

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

 

[katlong]

Meh, I think that's a stretch. The defender's original direction was inside, which is why the cut block was thrown in that direction. It was just bad luck that the defender then shifted back outside, Kenny Cooper's man was moving inward too, and we ended up cutting the wrong guy.

There were tons of missed calls, I agree with that for sure. I wouldn't say this was the worse. The play looked like a legitimate chop block. Meanwhile, Qua got hit by not 1 but 2 guys out of bounds, the last of which when he was 15 yards off the field. TaQuon got hog collared and drug down backwards while trying to make a tackle on the pick 6. I thought the guy had blown TaQuon's knee out. When Lance got pushed on 4th and 8 the commentators yelled louder than I can remember anybody yelling about a missed call. When I watch some of these games, I just don't understand how Refs can be so incompetent. If there is something happening away from the play, or inside a group or pile of 10 guys, I can understand. But when things are happening right where the ball is being played and where everybody's eyes are, and then you miss a completely obvious call...I don't get it.

The booth wasn't much better. When CPJ had to walk out on the field to get a review on the 4th down spot (that was terrible)...I can forgive the Refs on that because sometimes spots can be difficult. But for the folks in the booth to not buzz in that they need a second to check the spot...awful.

The biggest missed call is still the one near the end of the first half where #94 Hill was on top of Marshall WAY after the play and was trying to intentionally hurt his neck by pulling and twisting on his helmet. This one makes my blood boil as it was clearly malice and the ref knew it was happening as he was pulling Hill off of Marshall and the fans were booing loudly. And yet, no flag. GRRRR!

 

[Deleted member 2897]

The biggest missed call is still the one near the end of the first half where #94 Hill was on top of Marshall WAY after the play and was trying to intentionally hurt his neck by pulling and twisting on his helmet. This one makes my blood boil as it was clearly malice and the ref knew it was happening as he was pulling Hill off of Marshall and the fans were booing loudly. And yet, no flag. GRRRR!

Yep, I had forgotten about that one. The announcers said it was a penalty and that CPJ took exception to it too.

 

[Enuratique]

Against my better judgement, I offer an explanation:

The reason we “Cut” backside has to do with the momentum of the defenders in concert with the flow of the play. When the offense’s action indicates to a defender they are backside (a pulling guard for example), said defender will flow across the LOS to the ball carrier (to either make a tackle or maintain gap assignment). Now, the OL’s angle of engagement on that flowing DL is much more acute due to the spread option’s wide splits. In order to change the DL momentum vector, the OL wold have to overtake them, engage them perpendicular to the LOS, then change their velocity and apply enough force to cancel out the defenders initial momentum across the center and move the defender backwards away from the B back’s running lane.

A more successful way to stop a persuing defender is remove their source of acceleration (their legs), keeping them on the backside, removing them from the B Backs running lane. Often, defenders will counter this tactic by doing what 25 did above, reversing direction away from the play and taking themselves out of an impact position.

The path of the cut and the level (how high off the ground) of engagement determines whether a cut block was “good” or not. The cut above was not bad in terms of execution, and may have resulted in a defender down in 25 had tried to make the play. The “chop” is much more a function of the center getting amazing drive off the line.

Thank you for the firsthand insight. I would hope others on the board realize who you are. Go Jackets!

 

[katlong]

Yep, I had forgotten about that one. The announcers said it was a penalty and that CPJ took exception to it too.

thanks for posting this! Marshall is tough, but this is wrong!