Ask A Back Judge: Holding Refresher, Perimeter Blocks, And The Pass Rush Exception

14 Comments

1. 

   bkimbrough88 October 29, 2025 at 8:25 PM

   While this was interesting, I clicked on this because I wanted to know more about how you can rough a passer when it was ruled a forced fumble. Even just the terrible officiating overall, that leads one to question whether this squad was just incompetent or were they getting orders from the ACC to help Cal out wherever they could to make sure they get bowl eligible.
   1. 

      TechHokie13 October 29, 2025 at 9:00 PM

      I hate to break it to you, but the answer is even dumber and more infuriating than that. No orders from on high or even incompetence. The ACC confirmed that this is just how they want things called when it comes to contact on the QB, and ACC white hats make the calls they're supposed to. That's right, according to the conference, that was the correct call. And I've written no fewer than 3 articles about how much I disagree with the ACC when it comes to roughing the passer, because Friday night was only a slight outlier. I'm most annoyed because it shows that the ACC *can* be competent and consistent. If the conference decided to call RTP in a non-insane way, they clearly have the officials and the training to do so. I never thought I'd be one to lament a decision prioritizing player safety, but I'm firmly in the "they've taken it too far" camp on this one.
2. 

   Cobyfitzhugh October 29, 2025 at 8:22 PM

   Is anybody going to deal with ridiculous unnecessary roughness call in 4th Qtr of tech vs Cal. Potentially game changing call and to me (and everyone else I’ve spoken to including an official not to be named) a bad call . Also 2 targeting calls against tech that were overturned?
   1. 

      TechHokie13 October 29, 2025 at 9:07 PM

      Unfortunately, as ridiculous as it sounds, the ACC confirmed that's how they want it called. And it sucks. I've written no fewer than 3 articles about how much I disagree with how the ACC handles contact on the QB. There's no way that Bell's hit on the Cal QB was roughing. It was a sack. I don't even know how the ACC can conclude that the defender landing with his body weight on the QB warrants a flag, all I know is that's the conclusion they've inexplicably come to. Sorry to disappoint, no grand conspiracy here. Just a conscious decision that I personally (and just about every sane football fan in the country) disagree with. They've been calling it consistently as long as I've been writing this series for TSL at the very least.
3. 

   brownsummithokie October 29, 2025 at 3:55 PM

   "The hand(s) shall be: (a) In advance of the elbow." It would truly suck if your hands were behind your elbow
   1. 

      TechHokie13 October 29, 2025 at 4:05 PM

      Every time I read that rule, I spend a good 3 minutes trying to get my hands/arms in the position described. It's neither easy nor comfortable.
   2. 

      HtownHokie October 30, 2025 at 4:44 PM

      i can not understand that either; it would take a double-jointed contortionist. unless the arms are raised over the head and twisted at the elbows. or the arms are hanging down below the waist and twisted inward and backward — in which case, why would they be there in a football game and very ouch! and call for a stretcher, not just arm support to get to the sideline. but thank you for quoting the rule in the article for all of us who do not own rule books.
      1. 

         TechHokie13 October 30, 2025 at 6:09 PM

         If you put your knuckles together in front of your chest and push your elbows out, you can kind of get there. No idea who would ever attempt an actual block like that though. And anyone can actually download a PDF of the rule book for free - that's what I do every season. Just Google "NCAA Football rule book [year]". There's a check box you click for a free PDF download, and then bam! You can peruse all 400+ pages whenever you like ?
4. 

   RhinoVT October 29, 2025 at 2:41 PM

   Excellent article. Thanks!
   1. 

      TechHokie13 October 29, 2025 at 4:32 PM

      Thanks, glad you enjoyed it! Part 2 dropping in the near future!
5. 

   MKD October 29, 2025 at 2:04 PM

   Thanks for your time to clarify your observations.
   1. 

      TechHokie13 October 29, 2025 at 4:31 PM

      I'm happy you consider that clarified ?. Part 2 coming soon! The one you really should thank is Chris - he's the poor guy who had to edit this 2-part monstrosity.
6. 

   4dhokies October 29, 2025 at 12:56 PM

   Good stuff as always Tristan.
   1. 

      TechHokie13 October 29, 2025 at 4:28 PM

      Thanks for reading!