They haven't lost LGP just because they "lose verticality". That's not a requirement in the rule.

I'm really not interested in trying to sell a player control foul when a player is already falling backwards well before contact.

No contact, no call. With contact: Block. Don't flop next time, kid.

You're just a coward, then. ;)

I'm not a pioneer, either.

I go with no call on both. I'm calling a block that isn't.

Why? What rule do you use to justify this call?

I ask because we have a number of guys in our association who call it this way also - even though the defender is allowed to recoil, turn away, etc in order to lessen the contact.

So I don't get calling a block on a kid who has LGP and starts falling backward so that they don't get put into the hospital.

Since when do I have to justify a block call with a rule citation?

I'm not talking about a kid who fades away slightly as the player comes into him -- I'm talking about a kid who starts falling to the floor when the player is still quite a distance away and causes awkward contact that puts both players at risk.

Lots of big dogs call it this way (and I'm not calling myself a big dog, I'm just repeating what I've heard from NCAA officials who are in a position to tell HS officials how to call plays).

I agree completely Rich. Especially the bolded parts.

Wasn't asking you to justify it to a coach or player...was asking you to explain your rule basis for calling it that way to me as another official so I could understand your reasoning.

And it sounds like I was simply picturing the play differently (less extreme) than you were.

It's been a real issue the past few years. I had one on Friday night where the player fell back so early, the offensive player never made contact and wen't through the space the player once occupied (and over the player who fell to the floor). I no called that, but it could've been ugly.

I'm not saying I expect a player to stay in there and "take a charge like a man," but starting to fall to the floor before contact, while probably not flopping, is really not what's intended by the "absorb contact" or "protect himself" statements, either.

My partner said he told the player that he could call a technical foul for flopping and I encouraged him to not be a pioneer in that area, either.

Isn't calling a block when it's contrary to the definition of a block also being a pioneer?

This isn't a pioneer call...I'd actually venture more officials than not officiate this play just like Rich has talked about.

Okay, somebody else pioneered it, but my problem is that it has no rules basis.

Call it that way because everybody else does it? Sounds familiar, I guess.

For me, it's not pioneering if that's the way your bosses want it called. I don't like it, and I don't call it that way; but that's not a hill worth dying on for me.

How does a defender fading away cause any contact? Seems to me that the offensive player is the one who has caused this contact by continuing to go at the defender in his path. Maybe if we were to properly call charges when they happen, defenders wouldn't fell compelled to fade away so much.