olyfan63
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2012
- Messages
- 5,774
- Reaction score
- 1,830
chris98251":15y9bv47 said:olyfan63":15y9bv47 said:Uncle Si":15y9bv47 said:chris98251":15y9bv47 said:The Saints game where the Lineman got a interception and he stiff armed him yet the trailer got a flag for block in the back.
was it a block in the back?
HELL YES, it was a block in the back, an obvious flag. I confess I didn't notice that until the second time I saw that clip, then it jumped out at me. None of the clips at the time mentioned there was a flag on the play, so I just figured the refs missed it. Glad to hear it was called. The announcers were too busy crowing about how the QB got lit up making the tackle, and totally glossed over the blatant block in the back on said QB.
He barely touched him if at all, the stiff arm drove him 180 degrees and that touch if that had no effect. In fact if there was contact it probably was due to the stiff arm, I would need to really see it again.
I didn't see it the first time I watched it.
Watch it again, and if you still see it differently, certainly your right to do so. I'd be interested in what you think after a 2nd closer look.
So QB's are not known for being big-time defensive tackling hitters in the first place, and many have been injured on INT return plays. The QB was going to get trucked a bit anyway, but then add the shove in the back from a freakishly strong NFL player, and the not-so-stout QB is going to go FLYING on the hit. Which he did.
The real point is, what the hell is the player shoving the QB in the back thinking? Regardless of how much or how little the pressure of the push, it's going to draw a block-in-the-back flag from any official who has eyes on it. It looks bad, even if he whiffed, which he didn't IMO, and it's simply a brain dead, unnecessary play.