2 video clips. What do you think ...

[jaybird]

Play #1- No foul
Play #2- RTK. No foul on the side block at the 37.

[jemiller]

Tough camera angle on the first one. I didn't see an infraction. Looking at it from the other side it might have been, and that is where the U was who thru the flag.

2nd one is tough too. If the blocker launched himself at the defender's head I think that there could be a basis for unnecessary roughness. That's why we are on the field and I suspect have a better angle to judge these blocks. Jim

[PSU213]

I don't really see the foul in play 2 (other than RTK).

Just to play devil's advocate here...should the R signaled for a TD on the play even though he was the one who threw the roughing the kicker foul?

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by jaybird

Play #1- No foul
Play #2- RTK. No foul on the side block at the 37.

Agree x2

[jjrye22]

We have been told to not signal if we personally have a flag (at any position).

[Rich]

Originally Posted by jjrye22

We have been told to not signal if we personally have a flag (at any position).

Personally, I think you were told wrong.

[Ref inSoCA]

Originally Posted by jjrye22

We have been told to not signal if we personally have a flag (at any position).

You have been told wrong. The result of the play is TD until changed by any penalty enforcement. You should signal.

[jjrye22]

Nice that you guys think it is wrong. But since that is what I was told to do, that is what we do here.
There are quite a few things that different associations decide for various reason, and not all of them are the best solution. It is however the decision that has been made.

[JRod37]

Agree with everyone here. Both bad calls from what we can see on the video. If I were a coach I'd give out a helmet sticker to the guy on the first tackle for a fantastic form tackle.

[REFANDUMP]

I don't think you should be calling a helmet to helmet hit on a runner who has put his head down, unless it's intentional anyway.

I agree on the violation on the kicker. In my opinion, the block looks legal.

[Texas Aggie]

Good video picture, btw. I didn't detect a leading with the helmet in either. Just because the helmet gets there first doesn't mean its a foul.

should the R signaled for a TD on the play even though he was the one who threw the roughing the kicker foul?

Yes. In this example, its obviously coming back but in others it may not plus you want to be clear in what the result of the play was. Again, here, the guy goes into the end zone and no one is within 5 yards of him. If he's tackled, is it short? Is it a TD? Under NCAA rules, it may make a difference on penalty enforcement on a PF where someone scores, so I want to make sure everyone is aware of what happened.

Now, the R is not going to mirror the signal to the press box, but if he's the covering official, he'll give it.

[REFANDUMP]

One more comment on the second video. I noticed that the R is on the non-kicking foot side of the kicker. Shouldn't he be on the other side ?? This may have given a better angle of the contact on the kicker.

[Durham]

I can speak to his being on the side he is. In our group the R is always on the side of the LJ because we have the LJ release down field when the snap is secured and it is apparent that the ball will be kicked. We do not follow Fed Mechanics on a lot of things so I am not sure what the fed mechanics are for a punt.

[DocLogic]

The protocol of signaling TD or any other mechanic is still in effect. While you know in your mind that the play will likely come back, it's still proper mechanics to signal.

As a BJ, I had a block in the back foul at the LOS Friday night on a 70 yard run. I knew it would come back, but had to race to get to the goal line. It was a torpedo flag toss about 15 yards forward to the penalty and then turn and run.

[kdf5]

Impossible to tell on the first clip. The second clip looks like it would have been a great no-call.