Find the illegal block! (video play)
 

Check out the video here
(click here for the slow motion version of the play)

Just to give you a little information that is not found on the video, after the play was over and the penalty enforced, the down was replayed from the 30 yard line. The penalty called was an IBIB, so it should have occurred around the 40.

The block by the slot receiver on the left side around the 30 yard line looks suspect, but that's the only one that I can find.

Let me know your thoughts.

Which official threw the flag?
I agree, the slot on the 30 is the only thing I see.

According to the referee, the linesman threw the flag

The block at the 30 was on the side at the shoulder and legal. Philosophically, a block in the back should only be called on blocks at the numbers. This block wasn't close. Bad call.

You're screen and vision are both probably better than mine. From what I see it probably could have been called but this apparently wasn't the block that drew the flag.

The right side SE runs all the way across the field and is coming back at about the 42 when he hits a defender (looks to be from the side but is close). This is FAR from the point of attack. If it is a foul it probably should be for a personal foul, not a BIB.

I think I found it. The camera is panning away from the HL's side of the field when a Team A player appears to contact a Team B player at about the 40 knocking both the Team B player and his teammate to the ground. If the HL did throw a flag the camera would not have picked it up.

However, what I thought I saw was a fairly good heads up contact and not a block in the back.

This block looked clearly in the back to me (the block :06 seconds into the movie at the 32).

I see the block you're talking about but not well enough, IMO, to decide on its legality from this video because the camera jerks as it is being panned.

The block at the 30 looks like a BIB but I can't exactly tell from the video.

As a side note, PA play by play announcers drive me nuts! :mad:

I think that the block @ the 30 was good, as was this one. It looks like when the defenders go down it looks like they both land on their side. Even if that 2nd block was a block in the back, I'm not sure how good a call it is because the point of attack was reversed and the ball was at the numbers at the time of the block. If that was the call it probably could have been passed on.

There is what appears to be a 3rd block in the back at the B45 (:14) that sprung the RB allowing him to run down to the 15, though...

I believe the slot at :06 is the guilty party. He goes out 5 yards and then comes back to block the OLB. If you watch, the OLB doesn't go sideways after the block, he falls forward indicating the block was in the back. I think he would have made the tackle and was a good catch be the HL.

I see 4 potential blocks in the back, although 2 of them look to be either good blocks or there isn't enough on the screen to determine if they are blocks in the back. 1st one is the one everyone is talking about, the one on the 30 in front of the HL. But from the original post, the play was replayed at the 30, so that can't be the one they worked from.

Second one I see is the one Ed found, at the 40 on the HL side. That has to be the one because of the location of the ensuing spot. However, I'll agree with Welpe that the camera doesn't show it very well to determine if it was a block in the back. One of those HTBT moments.

Third one looks like a block on the back, but because of the camera angle, it looks like a good block on the side, is around the 48 on the LJ side. It's the same defender that supposedly gets nailed in the back on the 45 (looks more like the 43) that refbuz was talking about. I would say either of those couldn't be it because of the ensuing spot after the penalty enforcement, and since TerpZebra said the referee said that the linesman threw the flag.

This play had penalty written all over it from the moment the reverse started, and really turned south on the offense penalty-wise the moment the flanker decided to reverse course and go the other way. As a former coach, I wouldn't have been shocked if just about EVERY official on the field had his flag down for something on that play.

The block in the back I saw was at the top of the screen with the slot receiver before the ball reversed to the bottom of the screen. I am not sure what others saw, but that was clear as day to me. Of course the officials on the field had a better look, but from our angle I see that as a BIB all the way.

Peace

I see a whole lot of "almosts" there but nothing I'd throw a flag on. Our BIB's are to be clear contact directly in the back, which I don't see anywhere on this video.
TXMike brings up a good point about a block away from the POA, it's at one hash while the ball is at the other, but I'd think with this play I'd be wondering if that's callable, and if I "wonder" or "think" it's a foul, then the flag stays home.

The slot receiver looks like the guilty party. As he makes contact with the other player note where his helmet is (on the backside of the player) I believe this could be not only BIB, but also a crackback block. Correct me if that's not the case. The other possible BIB is as the offensive player is running down the sideline a few blockers come in and w/o the best field position and one appears to push the defense to the sideline.

Ray, it makes no difference where the blockers helmet is. This is a common misconception that should not be a determining factor. Now, if the head is in front, I'd say it is probably impossible for a block to be a BIB, but it is not one just cuz the head is behind the side.

2-5-2 Blocking in the back is a block against an opponent when the initial contact is in the opponent’s back, inside the shoulders and below the helmet and above the waist, and not against a player who is a runner or pretending to be a runner.

The block at the .06 mark IMO is legal cuz it is from the side and is not inside the shoulders. Another good thing to help determine if a potential block is a BIB is how the player falls. If the contact is in the "back" the player will often fall on his stomach. Now, not always but it can be a helpful factor in making the call. In the block at .06, the player falls on his left side, which could help indicate the block was on the right side, not in the back.

AMEN! Everyone knows you don't do play by play over the PA system...

I have nothing on that play.

I observe and evaluate a lot of games. If the crew called the slot back's block in the back at the 32 I wouldn't say anything, and if I was the R on this game and saw that from his angle I would flag it, the blocker made initial contact on the back below the neck above the waist and between the shoulders. If I observed a crew with the call at the 40 I would have the HL re-read the definition of the BIB. As I saw that contact was legal. It looked ugly because two players went down, but dominos do fall that way.

Can someone please define what people mean by crackback block. I can't find an illegal crack back block anywhere in my rule books. I hear it a lot, but cant find it anywhere.

Several years ago my first season doing varsity I was working at BJ and A ran a sweep to my right and I was keying off that side receiver who on the snap made a b line towards the B linebackers. I had my eye on him as he hit with his shoulder on the numbers on the front of the jersey (at full speed with great force) the team B linebacker who was running full speed with his head turned watching the ball carrier. Needless to say the linebacker had the wind knocked out of him and trainers and the hc came out to help him off the field and the hc looked straight at me and yelled the entire way out to the field that I missed the most obvious crack back block he had ever seen. At halftime we talked about the play and our wh asked what I saw and I told him just what I said, and he said good call. We left our lockerroom and the hc of that team was in the hallway outside the gym and as we passed him by he continued at me, You (words I should not repeat) I have never seen an official miss such an obvious crack back block." And our wh who was about 75 years old said, "Hey Bob he didn't miss anything, but you missed the definition of an illegal block." Needless to say Bob watched the second half from the team school bus in the parking lot.

I think CBBs are near the same in any code: it's when a WR comes back towards the ball and blocks a B player below the waist.

In Canada, the CBB area is 5 yards ahead of the LS, back to A's dead ball line. In addition, if before the snap, the WR was always less than 3 yards from the tackle, then no CBB.

You cannot find it in the rule book, cuz it is a word used to describe a "real rule book" term, the BBW. It is kind of like how they use the term lateral for a backwards pass.

When someone refers to a crack back block, they are referring to a block by a receiver back towards the location of the ball which is usually against a defensive end or outside linebacker. It is a block that needs to be seen as it may often be illegal if they go low and then you have the BBW, which they are calling an illegal crack back block.

This is the only block that I could see as being illegal.

However, my laptop's display isn't the highest resolution that is out there, so often when viewing amateur video with this screen, I wish I had a better view.

We are sure that when it was said that the down was replayed at the 30 it was meant A30 right? It appeared to me that there was a defender knocked down from behind at B20 so an enforcement for BIB from there would get to the 30. However this contact against B was by B and not A. However if the linesman did throw the flag then he could have been shielded enough to not see who made the contact.

The only thing I saw back at A40 was at A42. The right side wide receiver was trying to stay in front of the safety but after the play went back to the right this receiver came back from mid-field and hit a defender in the side and took him out as well as another offensive player. By the time of this contact L moved out of the shot and since he had not thrown a flag up until that point this contact may have been his foul.

The block by the slot receiver is the only one I see.

And it is very clearly a BIB in my opinion.

I think the first block by the slot receiver is an IBW. Watch the way the defender falls. If it was truly a side block, he wouldn't land on his face/stomach like that. I watched it twice slow and thought it was clean but in full speed it is clearer. Hard to believe because of his angle that he got the back.

My question is though, I never saw the H throw a flag on that block and using enforcement, that wouldn't be foul he called. It would appear that it is the late block that causes one or two to fall towards the top of the screen. The block/contact had nothing to do with the play and isn't overly flagrant. I think a talk-to would be in order for that. And FWIW, the contact here looks to be from the side.