[Camron Rust]

Yes, you have (although not everyone agrees with me)

The RULE says (and only says... actually it doesn't really say it but it has been interpreted to mean it) a defender doesn't have LGP if they have OOB status. Nowhere does it define it to be a blocking foul for being OOB.

The CASE declares the player who is OOB as having committed a block but the read-between-the-lines of the case play is that the player is actively guarding his opponent and steps OOB in the process of moving to maintain position. Thus, the player loses LGP by being OOP and is called for the block as a result of not having LGP.

It is intended to cover the situation where a defender shifts over to cut-off a baseline drive and puts their foot on the line. It isn't intended to apply to a player who was near OOB and happens to be on the line when a player comes along and runs into them.

On top of that, this was the other way for 100 years until someone on the rules committee decided to make an interpretation that flipped the way everyone had been calling it (and coaching it) forever.