OK, how about this one?

YouTube - KNOCK OUT BLOCK!!!

bigjohn couldn't get anyone to agree with him on the Fed board so he's bringing it up over here. According to him, buttblocking happens all the time.


2009 Fed Case book cite
2.20.1 SITUATION A: From a four-point stance on the offensive line, interior
lineman A1: (a) initially contacts an opponent by driving his face mask directly
into the opponent’s chest who is not the ball carrier; or (b) contacts an opponent
with his shoulder so that his head is to the side of the opponent’s body and the
helmet does not make initial contact; or (c) attempts to block an opponent with a
shoulder, but because of a defensive slant, primary contact with the opponent is
made with A1’s helmet. RULING: The block in (a) is illegal butt blocking. In (b),
even though there was some contact with the helmet, the block is legal because
the helmet or face mask was not used to deliver the blow. In (c), the covering official
will have to judge whether or not it is a foul. Because of defensive slants and
stunts, there will be instances in which the blocker attempts to make a legal
shoulder block, but inadvertently contacts an opponent with either his face mask
or helmet. When this is the case, contact does not result in a direct blow and is
legal. (9-4-3i)

Of course, the title should be "Good Block or foul?" A Penalty is punishment for a foul. Players commit fouls, not penalties.

Having said that, there is no foul in the video. It was shoulder-first from the side.

Also legal. shoulder first, head was in front [I know that's coach-speak and had noting to do with anything but it describes it]

These are all helmet first contact. You guys can not be serious!

First one, it looks to me as though the initial contact was helmet to helmet, and intentional at that. Granted, it's not the best angle. And not to put words in bigjohns mouth, but I don't think he was suggesting that you'd make a call on the field based (solely) on SOUND. rather, that when discussing a close play on video, you could use the sound to help formulate an opinion of what exactly the video shows.

Second one, good clean block all the way, imo.

ADD: based only what we've seen, I'd flag the first one. Not the second one.

Chowder, you seem like a reasonable man. In the second one there is a nice shoulder block but the blocker hits the kid head on head first. You can not disregard that part of the contact. INITIAL CONTACT is what IHC is all about!


ART. 1 . . . Illegal helmet contact is an act of initiating contact with the helmet
against an opponent. There are several types of illegal helmet contact:
a. Butt Blocking is an act by an offensive or defensive player who initiates
contact against an opponent who is not a ball carrier with the front of his
helmet.
b. Face Tackling is an act by a defensive player who initiates contact with a
ball carrier with the front of his helmet.
c. Spearing is an act by an offensive or defensive player who initiates contact
against any opponent with the top of his helmet

We need to hook BJ up with KB.

Both spin words to make their argument. Both are never wrong.

One poster on the FED board put in right....

"It doesn't matter what you think"....... don't feed the troll........

Nothing. Absolutely nothing but a de-cleating.

Yup. Shoulder to shoulder. Good block.

I suspect you may already be aware of this, but just in case; a basic principle of officiating is unless an official is absolutely sure a foul has been committed, he should NOT throw a flag. That principle will not guarantee perfection, but it does help to insure level and equally applied judgment, which is all that should be expected.

Any suggestion that two plays, whether they be in the same game by the same player on the same team, are the same is simply a flawed observation.

Football plays are snowflakes, a lot of them look similar but no 2 are exactly alike. Bang-Bang plays can produce different judgments, even when viewed from vantage points only steps apart. The powers that be found it necessary to establish one level of judgment above all others and, rightly or wrongly, have decreed that the game official's judgment shall prevail over all other assessments.

In the case of spearing/butt blocking/face tackling, etc. I think the normal philosophy of not calling a foul unless your 100% is a key part of the problem that the NFL, NCAA and NFHS have with these calls not being made.
For the spear, etc. we really need to look at it in the opposite way - unless we're 100% sure it's legal, we should throw the flag. The failure to penalize these hits is so great (death or paralysis) that we can't wait until it's a textbook case with a perfect angle before we call it. If we let these go because we're not 100% sure, then the kid will try it again and again until we either call it or he breaks his neck. We'd be doing the players, coaches and parents a favor to be too quick with the flag rather than hold off.

I doubt that this approach is feasible in practice. There must be thousands of blocks every Friday night that are "almost" spearing or "might be" a butt block. And how many such injuries have you seen in your games?

I agree with the general principle of making calls to promote safety. But this seems like a solution in search of a problem to me.

The first one....picture quality is of such cr@p at the pt of impact I can't be sure where the initial contact is, and if I can't be sure I can't throw a flag.

The second one....nice block. Yeah maybe he dropped his head on the way in but the illegal contact rule requires intial contact with the helmet, which doesn't happen here.