You Make The Call!

[TXMike]

Foul for early blocking by Team A?

https://youtu.be/4ZGI_R1qcWg

[Etref]

Yes

And what's with the B? He was no where near ready of focused

[goodgrr]

Foul for early blocking by Team A?

https://youtu.be/4ZGI_R1qcWg

and one for Free kick out of bounds.

[Kalle]

Why would this not be illegal blocking by A?

[TXMike]

At least 2 very credible sources have said the contact was not "enough".   I have a hard time with that but I could at least consider maybe the contact was started by B.  I do not see it that way but can understand how some mihht

[Etref]

How would it differ "contact" of a wide receiver making a stand up contact screen block on a LB and causing an offensive DPI

[blindref757]

To be consistent, this is a foul.  If B comes out hard and is trying to go at an A player, I might see it differently, but it can be argued that B is trying to get to the ball here and A prevents that.  It is a poorly executed trick play and that gives B the benefit of the doubt IMHO.

[psv]

What is Team B's responsibility in relation to blocking before the kick goes 10 yards?

To me, the B team player at the top of the screen isnt going for the ball, he takes 2 steps forward to engage Team A (:09).

[goodgrr]

What is Team B's responsibility in relation to blocking before the kick goes 10 yards?

To me, the B team player at the top of the screen isnt going for the ball, he takes 2 steps forward to engage Team A (:09).

Team B don't have any responsibility (I don't think). They can recover it before it's gone 10 and as such their players are within their rights to begin blocking for that potential run. No different really to a ball that has gone 10 over their heads and has yet to be possessed by the returner when they engage the chasing team A.

[Joe Stack]

contact was not "enough".

The problem with this thinking is that the foul really isn't a blocking foul (i.e. BBW, IBB, holding, etc.) but rather an interference foul like D/OPI, KCI, etc. Yes, we CALL it illegal block, but what are we going to call it? Blocking is what they're doing where in the other cases, the players are by rule protected from CERTAIN kinds of contact or non-contact (KCI). The intent of the rule is so Team A doesn't put up a wall so that Team B doesn't have a shot at the ball.

I'm not saying ANY contact creates the foul, but any block that results in contact pretty much does. Maybe not 100% but close.

[Fatman325]

Mike
This is not an easy play but I would contend that the B player was moving forward to block. It doesn't look like he is breaking down in a position to catch the ball and it doesn't look like he is "clearly" moving forward to block so that someone else can catch the ball. If you put a gun to my head and made me declare I would say no foul for blocking early based on B's action.
I would offer that by moving to the back of the white area the calling official might have more distance and a better view of the play.

[NVFOA_Ump]

I'm not saying ANY contact creates the foul, but any block that results in contact pretty much does. Maybe not 100% but close.

That's also what we have been instructed regarding onside kicks - that the "defenders" (team A) have to avoid contact with team B players in the 10 yard zone until they can legally touch the ball.  Unless this is a very clear and obvious intentional block by team B I've got a flag.  On the case play here I'm dropping the flag.