"Illegal crackback block on a defenseless player, with targeting."

TierbsHsotBoobs

FremontTroll said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

FremontTroll said:

MikeDamone said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

Horseshit call

I don't get it I guess. The guy was coming after Ross. No helmet leading, no crack back, no blind side. Hit him square in the shoulders. The guy was leveled on a clean block.

A bunch of people are missing the meaning of a blind side block.

Blind side refers to the position on the field in relation to which way the play is moving. Not which way the player is facing.

He is a defenseless player by rule. The only discretionary issue is whether Perkins targeted him. Its a weak call because he used his shoulder and he was barely moving before initiating the block. But what the ref must have looked at is that he left his feet on the follow through.

The ref should watch some hockey games. There is a huge difference between launching yourself through the air and powering up and through a hit such that you leave the ground on the follow through. One should be ejectable and the other shouldn't.

He's not a defenseless player. He was blocked from in front by a player moving forward.

Hope this helps.

I didn't write the rule.

He is defenseless by rule because of Perkins moving parallel to his goal line and approaching from the defenders side. Doesn't matter that he turned and got hit in the chest.

The issue is whether he was targeted. I already explained he was not targeted and that is why it was a bad call.

Hope this helps.

1. You have be moving toward your own goal line.
2. Perkins was moving toward Cal's goal line.
3. He approached from the front. The Cal guy turned his head like a bitch, but his torso was still facing Perkins.