RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: ElvisLives on January 12, 2022, 01:31:09 PM
-
1. Mouthpieces. If they really want players to wear mouthpieces, then require that the mouthpieces be on a strap attached to the facemask (no exceptions). Any dangling mouthpiece would then be clear evidence of not having it properly in place. (He might have two, you might argue. But why would he have two, strapped to his facemask?) A rule like that could be enforced. (But, by whom, you might ask. Read on.)
2. Take us out of uniform and equipment enforcement. If they want compliance with uniform and equipment rules, then make that the responsibility of the conferences. Have them hire and assign a U & E officer to each game, and he/she has the authority to issue fines to the teams for U & E violations. Say, $1,000 per violation. Quadruple that for post-season games. That would probably get their attention somewhere around week 3.
3. If they are going to leave U & E enforcement to us, then change the pant/knee pad rule to something enforceable. Maybe forget the knee pads, but require the pants to extend below the knee cap while in a standing position, with the entire belt line above the top of the hips. And require that there be no exposed leg skin, for all players. Either wear stockings that extend above the knees, or underpant style leggings.
4. Require that all jerseys be tucked into the pants, OR require undershirts that EXACTLY match the jersey color, tucked into the pants. Nothing - NOTHING - extends below the beltline, and there shall be no skin exposed below the neck (except lower arms - see item 5).
5. Jersey or undershirt arms must extend to the crook of the elbow. There shall be no skin exposed above the elbows.
6. Towels, if worn, must be at the belt line and between the front of the hips on the anterior side of the player's body. Exception: The player designated to be the snapper, and who subsequently snaps the ball, may wear a towel on his posterior side, at the belt line.
7. By rule, the Head coach is responsible for all players on his team wearing uniform and equipment in compliance with the rules. Officials have no responsibility to verify that players are properly equipped. (So no certification needed.)
8. Only linemen within the tackle box at the snap may block below the waist toward the ball (right now, backs can BBW toward the ball, but from the front; I'd like to see that go away).
Probably some other things, but that's it for now.
-
#3 - what makes the current rules around kneepads unenforceable? For HS at least, it's a lack of willingness of officials to call it for fear of being scratched. Higher levels, I don't know. But regardless, a unified front by officials to enforce a rule that has clear, unambiguous language, and isn't really even a judgement call, would go a long way towards addressing this. But, we all know how likely that is.
What's your rationale for #5?
This is what you are proposing would look like: https://images.complex.com/complex/image/upload/t_in_content_image/xughgui0nxlqqgt4n5rx.png
But what's wrong with this? https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/MiSAHQgJuc5NbhcbI4NnDkN5e1M=/0x0:620x933/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:620x933)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/8709483/Orange_Orange_White.jpg
If this is a wishlist, I'd do away with BBW altogether, although that's not likely to ever happen. (I fully support this as you worded it though, to simplify the rule)
I'd like to see a change to the HCT rule, so that any abrupt downward pull, that buckles the knees, is a HCT, regardless of when the tackler latches onto the runner. Had one where I got overruled this year for that, and I was not happy about it. Their rationale was that since he 'rode' him a few yards, the pulldown was not immediate.
-
#3 - what makes the current rules around kneepads unenforceable? For HS at least, it's a lack of willingness of officials to call it for fear of being scratched. Higher levels, I don't know. But regardless, a unified front by officials to enforce a rule that has clear, unambiguous language, and isn't really even a judgement call, would go a long way towards addressing this. But, we all know how likely that is.
What's your rationale for #5?
This is what you are proposing would look like: https://images.complex.com/complex/image/upload/t_in_content_image/xughgui0nxlqqgt4n5rx.png
But what's wrong with this? https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/MiSAHQgJuc5NbhcbI4NnDkN5e1M=/0x0:620x933/1200x0/filters:focal(0x0:620x933)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/8709483/Orange_Orange_White.jpg
If this is a wishlist, I'd do away with BBW altogether, although that's not likely to ever happen. (I fully support this as you worded it though, to simplify the rule)
I'd like to see a change to the HCT rule, so that any abrupt downward pull, that buckles the knees, is a HCT, regardless of when the tackler latches onto the runner. Had one where I got overruled this year for that, and I was not happy about it. Their rationale was that since he 'rode' him a few yards, the pulldown was not immediate.
I'm trying to clean up the image of the game. Exposed gut and butt ain't pretty. Exposed legs ain't pretty. The NFL already has those under control. Exposed upper arms ain't pretty, especially with all the butt-ugly tattoos. Requiring the upper arms to be covered would go a long way to cleaning up the image.
-
regarding these comments made before:
3. If they are going to leave U & E enforcement to us, then change the pant/knee pad rule to something enforceable. Maybe forget the knee pads, but require the pants to extend below the knee cap while in a standing position, with the entire belt line above the top of the hips. And require that there be no exposed leg skin, for all players. Either wear stockings that extend above the knees, or underpant style leggings.
#3 - what makes the current rules around kneepads unenforceable? For HS at least, it's a lack of willingness of officials to call it for fear of being scratched. Higher levels, I don't know. But regardless, a unified front by officials to enforce a rule that has clear, unambiguous language, and isn't really even a judgement call, would go a long way towards addressing this. But, we all know how likely that is.
Just look at the Rose bowl where the (very talented) receiver for Ohio State appeared to play the whole second half without a single pad used from the waist and below.
Maybe we just need to say that only thing required beyond shoes, pants, jersey is a helmet and mouthpiece. Not saying they couldn't wear more but it's not mandatory. Makes our job easier. yEs:
-
Two things that i would really like to change for player safety and ease of enforcement.
#1 eliminate all BBW except for the 5 linemen on the LOS and only if they are within 3 yards of the ball at the snap. They can block BBW within 2 yards of the LOS only. Easy to understand and enforce.
#2 the HCT is any tackle with the hand inside the side or back of the collar of the jersey or grasping the nameplate. Again, simple to see, to enforce and protects the players.
(and if we are throwing in pipe dreams.... coaches are not allowed to speak to officials)
-
More things from me:
-Require that a player laying atop an opponent (laying prone/supine) must immediately get himself off of the opponent, and may not further contact the opponent until the opponent is on his feet (no part of his body other than feet are touching the ground). Require that a player on his feet may not contact an opponent that is on the ground (laying prone/supine, or with both knees on the ground) until the opponent is on his feet (no part of his body other than feet are touching the ground).
-Change the rule regarding a kicking team player going OB during the kick to apply only between the goal lines. A player that goes OB from the end zone gains no advantage whatsoever, but loses a valid opportunity to return inbounds and legally recover the ball (especially a live ball in the end zone).
I'll have more later.
-
I'd like to modify the wedge rule, for it to be a foul regardless if the kick goes OOB - if it's a safety foul, that foul shouldn't get waved off just because the kick isn't returnable.
-
I'd like to modify the wedge rule, for it to be a foul regardless if the kick goes OOB - if it's a safety foul, that foul shouldn't get waved off just because the kick isn't returnable.
I think the Rules Committee would tell you that a wedge block, which is simply 2 or more receiving team teammates blocking a kicking team player, above the waist, and not in the back, is NOT a safety foul. Blocks that are safety fouls are those blocks below the waist, or when the player being blocked can’t defend himself. Multiple players blocking an opponent above the waist and from the front doesn’t fit that model.
-
More.
-Let’s just go ahead and leave the game clock running when a BC or a loose ball goes OB, and when Team A reaches their line-to-gain. With virtually all conferences restarting the game clock within just a few seconds after stopping the clock, there doesn’t seem much point in stopping the clock.
(Now, for UIL football, we should just leaves things as they are.)
-Change the (scoring) safety/impetus rules back to be that impetus is the action on the ball IN THE FIELD OF PLAY by a player that puts the ball from the field of play into the end zone, where it becomes dead. Impetus can NOT be changed in the defending team’s end zone. (That’s how it was under Nelson and Adams. For the life of me, can’t figure out why Redding changed it.)
-Change KCI to require physical contact that causes the receiver to not be able to get into position to catch the ball, or causes the receiver to muff the ball. A receiver that wants to get into position can run through a kicking team defender in his way, and a foul would be on the kicking team player.
-
I think the Rules Committee would tell you that a wedge block, which is simply 2 or more receiving team teammates blocking a kicking team player, above the waist, and not in the back, is NOT a safety foul. Blocks that are safety fouls are those blocks below the waist, or when the player being blocked can’t defend himself. Multiple players blocking an opponent above the waist and from the front doesn’t fit that model.
So what's the purpose of the wedge rule, if not safety? What makes it any different than a high-speed double team block?
-
I think the Rules Committee would tell you that a wedge block, which is simply 2 or more receiving team teammates blocking a kicking team player, above the waist, and not in the back, is NOT a safety foul. Blocks that are safety fouls are those blocks below the waist, or when the player being blocked can’t defend himself. Multiple players blocking an opponent above the waist and from the front doesn’t fit that model.
It's certainly a safety foul, although indirectly. No wedges = no wedge busters from the kicking team. This is to prevent concussions.
No return means there really is no opportunity to set up a wedge and block someone, so I can see why it would be a foul here.
-
It's certainly a safety foul, although indirectly. No wedges = no wedge busters from the kicking team. This is to prevent concussions.
No return means there really is no opportunity to set up a wedge and block someone, so I can see why it would be a foul here.
Typo? Did you mean “…why it would NOT be a foul here…?”
The rule has worked. Since we first got the rule, wedge blocking has all but disappeared. When we do see it, it is virtually always two blockers who have come together, usually nearly stationary while they wait for an advancing kicking team player to reach them. If they move forward, it usually is only a step or two - no real opportunity to reach high speed.
When we first got this rule, officially, this was a foul, regardless of the outcome of the down. Very quickly, we got the ‘philosophy’ to rule no foul if the result of the down is a TB, a KOB foul, or a fair catch. Then the philosophy became actual rule. If the rules committee was concerned about the safety aspect of this type of block, they would not have adopted these no foul ‘exceptions.’ A block below the waist during the down will never be ‘excepted’ by the result of the down.
-
Start the game clock after an incomplete pass at the RFP outside of the last 2 minutes of a half.
-
Typo? Did you mean “…why it would NOT be a foul here…?”
The rule has worked. Since we first got the rule, wedge blocking has all but disappeared. When we do see it, it is virtually always two blockers who have come together, usually nearly stationary while they wait for an advancing kicking team player to reach them. If they move forward, it usually is only a step or two - no real opportunity to reach high speed.
When we first got this rule, officially, this was a foul, regardless of the outcome of the down. Very quickly, we got the ‘philosophy’ to rule no foul if the result of the down is a TB, a KOB foul, or a fair catch. Then the philosophy became actual rule. If the rules committee was concerned about the safety aspect of this type of block, they would not have adopted these no foul ‘exceptions.’ A block below the waist during the down will never be ‘excepted’ by the result of the down.
Contrary to those other fouls, this one doesn't require contact. Just the formation of the wedge is a foul. So if there is no return, then there's no foul, as you rarely have contact when there is a touchback or FC.
-
Here's one that, in my world, is 'needed,' from a technical perspective. (My world is the one that wants to treat rules as though they were written to be read by someone from outside our universe, and the alien would fully understand the game and the rules, just by how the rule language reads).
We, as "officials" are not defined, as such, but we are acknowledged by our function (1-1-4), which is a definition, of sorts. No change needed there.
'Captain' isn't defined, either, but, like us, the purpose of a captain is acknowledged (1-1-5). No change needed. I recall that, at one time, we presented penalty options to the Captain of the offended team (who then, dutifully, looked to the sideline to get his coach's choice). That changed some years ago, and we now just go directly to the head coach. But....
What is a coach? The term is used in the rules, but, unlike virtually everybody else, 'coach' isn't defined, or the purpose of a such a person acknowledged in the rules. 9-2-5, 6, and 7 reference 'coaches,' but what are they?
I mentioned that we customarily, now, go directly to the 'head' coach to get penalty options, etc. So, what is a 'head' coach? Neither defined nor acknowledged anywhere in the rules. But they have responsibilities within the game. 3-2-2-a, any shortening of remaining periods must be mutually agreed by the 'head' coaches and the referee. 9-2-2-e (more than 2 squad members wearing the same number) requires us to assign the foul to the 'head' coach.
What is a 'head' coach?
So, yeah, just for record, I'd like to have a definition, or acknowledgement of what a coach is, and what designates a person as a 'head' coach. I'd kinda like to have all coaches wear badges. No badge? Stay 12' off the sideline, and say nothing. Head Coach has a special badge that emits a 12 volt/1 amp electric shock to him every time he or one of his assistants crosses the sideline. Even during a T/O. The team can come to them. Stay off the dang field.
Ewwwwwww. I bet I opened myself up on this one. OK..... GO!
-
Instead of a badge, I'd settle for a beanie with a propeller on top!
-
Here's one that, in my world, is 'needed,' from a technical perspective. (My world is the one that wants to treat rules as though they were written to be read by someone from outside our universe, and the alien would fully understand the game and the rules, just by how the rule language reads).
We, as "officials" are not defined, as such, but we are acknowledged by our function (1-1-4), which is a definition, of sorts. No change needed there.
'Captain' isn't defined, either, but, like us, the purpose of a captain is acknowledged (1-1-5). No change needed. I recall that, at one time, we presented penalty options to the Captain of the offended team (who then, dutifully, looked to the sideline to get his coach's choice). That changed some years ago, and we now just go directly to the head coach. But....
What is a coach? The term is used in the rules, but, unlike virtually everybody else, 'coach' isn't defined, or the purpose of a such a person acknowledged in the rules. 9-2-5, 6, and 7 reference 'coaches,' but what are they?
I mentioned that we customarily, now, go directly to the 'head' coach to get penalty options, etc. So, what is a 'head' coach? Neither defined nor acknowledged anywhere in the rules. But they have responsibilities within the game. 3-2-2-a, any shortening of remaining periods must be mutually agreed by the 'head' coaches and the referee. 9-2-2-e (more than 2 squad members wearing the same number) requires us to assign the foul to the 'head' coach.
What is a 'head' coach?
So, yeah, just for record, I'd like to have a definition, or acknowledgement of what a coach is, and what designates a person as a 'head' coach. I'd kinda like to have all coaches wear badges. No badge? Stay 12' off the sideline, and say nothing. Head Coach has a special badge that emits a 12 volt/1 amp electric shock to him every time he or one of his assistants crosses the sideline. Even during a T/O. The team can come to them. Stay off the dang field.
Ewwwwwww. I bet I opened myself up on this one. OK..... GO!
When, in the history of ever, has this been a problem which would require a rule change or even a clarification? A guy says he's the head coach and we acknowledge that. What else do we need to define?
-
The recent Cowboys playoff game demonstrates why stopping the clock on first downs is a good idea. In these end of game situations it allows the team to run a play up the middle for a big gain and potentially get one more play. By stopping the clock, the crew gets a chance to spot the ball without the problems that occurred in that game. There may be a benefit to stopping the clock on first downs only in the last 2 minutes of each half, but why fix what is not broke.
-
The recent Cowboys playoff game demonstrates why stopping the clock on first downs is a good idea. In these end of game situations it allows the team to run a play up the middle for a big gain and potentially get one more play. By stopping the clock, the crew gets a chance to spot the ball without the problems that occurred in that game. There may be a benefit to stopping the clock on first downs only in the last 2 minutes of each half, but why fix what is not broke.
The original purpose for stopping the clock for a new series had nothing to do with spotting the ball, in, and of, itself. That was back when, even in the NFL, the ball was declared ready with a whistle/wind after the chains had been moved to the succeeding spot. The amount of time it took to move the chains was significant-to-substantial, which did, in fact, impact play of the game. Thus, it was only fair to stop the game clock, get the chains moved, then re-start the game clock, and start the play clock.
Today, in NCAA, with the automatic 40-second play clock, we don't wait for the chains to get set to re-start the game clock (which does require the box man to hustle to the succeeding spot, but that's another story). BY RULE, we are to re-start the game clock when the ball is ready-for-play, as defined (ball spotted by an official and the official steps away to their position). However, as we have been noting, the directed CFO practice is to re-start the game clock ASAP after the previous down, only making sure that there is no likely impediment to getting the ball spotted. So, the amount of time the game clock is stopped is, sometimes, very, very brief - perhaps only a couple of seconds, in many cases. The door is open for severe criticism, should a team be denied an opportunity to snap the ball before the clock expires and the ball has yet to be spotted, even though the crew may be operating with 100% consistency in how they manage spotting the ball and re-starting the clock. They may be consistent, but they aren't following the rule. By the opposite token, they may be open for severe criticism by being inconsistent, should they allow a team an opportunity to snap the ball, after waiting for the ball to be spotted (for any of a variety of reasons) before re-starting the game clock.
The NFL avoids this issue, by having the game clock simply continue to run. This is fair and equal for both teams. The ball still must be spotted by a game official. The snapper doesn't get to spot the ball. That takes time, just as it does for every down. If the clock expires before Team A can get the ball snapped, or, as in the Cowboys' case, they are able to get the ball snapped, but the clock expires during the down (however brief the down may be), that is just their tough luck. Get better. Teams can help themselves by getting the ball to a game official immediately after the down, and clearing a path to allow the ball to be spotted. The crew in the Cowboys' game did the very best that any crew could have done. They did it right.
If the direction from the CFO is to get the clock re-started ASAP after a first down, in spite of the current rule, then stopping the clock at all is virtually pointless. The NCAA should seriously consider adopting the NFL rule. Or, tell TV, "Too bad. We're waiting for the ball to be spotted before we re-start the game clock. Get over it. Charge your sponsors more."
-
What else do we need to define?
Oh, I don't know. How about:
-RPO (WTF?)
-Lateral
-Late flag
-Offsides
-Illegal Procedure
-Red Zone
-Tackle Eligible
Anybody? Anybody? Bueller?
;)
-
FWIW, here's the changes I'd like to see...
1) Modify 3-4-3 to simply give the option to the offended team inside 2 minutes. The verbiage about "clock is stopped to complete a penalty" is confusing.
2) 10 sec runoff rule should not depend on a first down. This is an administrative stoppage that is not "caused" by either team and should not save someone from a runoff.
3) On a Try or OT, let 15 yard UNR fouls get enforced at the succeeding spot like flagrant fouls and UNS would.
4) Clarify 6-3-13 / 10-2-4 that not ALL fouls on kicking plays have to be enforced EXPLICITLY at the previous spot as an option. I think the intent of the rule was to "enforce as normal, or tack it on". So therefore with the "previous spot" hard-coded in, we have to enforce illegal kicking on a blocked punt at the previous spot, which is silly when normal 3 and 1 would make it a spot foul.
5) Remove "if by Team A prior to a change of possession" part of the penalty for illegal forward pass. It's unnecessary if you know your definitions, and just adds confusion on whether we extend the period if Team B throws an IFP at the end of a half and we wouldn't need a clunky Rogers interpretation to say that we don't extend.
6) Editorial for location of the ball in relation to the plane of the NZ when it touches something that determines whether it's beyond or behind the NZ (as is officiated that way today via replay).
7) ITP by an originally ineligible player should be 3 and 1 and loss of down (high school rule) instead of previous spot.
8) Clarify by rule or case book play whether a lineman going from a 2 to 3 point stance as the ball is being snapped is a live ball illegal motion or a dead ball false start.
9) Dead ball UNR/UNS yardage should cancel on a pro-rata basis instead of everything offsetting. So if Team A has 2 UNR and Team B has 1 UNR, we would enforce 1 UNR on Team A. (High school rule).
-
FWIW, here's the changes I'd like to see...
1) Modify 3-4-3 to simply give the option to the offended team inside 2 minutes. The verbiage about "clock is stopped to complete a penalty" is confusing.
I don't mind the rule intent, as it is, but the language is, indeed, ambiguous. If they change the language to, "...clock is stopped to complete a penalty for a foul by the team ahead in score (or either team if the score is tied), and would otherwise next start on the referee's signal, inside the last two minutes of a half, it will start on the snap, at the option of the offended team."
2) 10 sec runoff rule should not depend on a first down. This is an administrative stoppage that is not "caused" by either team and should not save someone from a runoff.
I guess you are talking about an injury or helmet off situation. The point of the 10SS in those situations is to keep a team from gaining a clock advantage by faking an injury or deliberately losing the helmet, to cause the clock to stop. If Team A earns a new series, the clock stops, anyway, so the offending team gains no advantage. Now, if the NCAA were to adopt the NFL rule for first downs, yeah, they'd be gaining an illegal advantage, and the 10SS should apply.
3) On a Try or OT, let 15 yard UNR fouls get enforced at the succeeding spot like flagrant fouls and UNS would.
:thumbup
4) Clarify 6-3-13 / 10-2-4 that not ALL fouls on kicking plays have to be enforced EXPLICITLY at the previous spot as an option. I think the intent of the rule was to "enforce as normal, or tack it on". So therefore with the "previous spot" hard-coded in, we have to enforce illegal kicking on a blocked punt at the previous spot, which is silly when normal 3 and 1 would make it a spot foul.
:thumbup
5) Remove "if by Team A prior to a change of possession" part of the penalty for illegal forward pass. It's unnecessary if you know your definitions, and just adds confusion on whether we extend the period if Team B throws an IFP at the end of a half and we wouldn't need a clunky Rogers interpretation to say that we don't extend.
OK as is, for me, but if that might somehow make other lives easier, OK.
6) Editorial for location of the ball in relation to the plane of the NZ when it touches something that determines whether it's beyond or behind the NZ (as is officiated that way today via replay).
Eh? You've lost me on this one. Please expound.
7) ITP by an originally ineligible player should be 3 and 1 and loss of down (high school rule) instead of previous spot.
It used to be LOD, but they dropped that some years ago. Good as is, for me.
8) Clarify by rule or case book play whether a lineman going from a 2 to 3 point stance as the ball is being snapped is a live ball illegal motion or a dead ball false start.
Hear! Hear! :thumbup
9) Dead ball UNR/UNS yardage should cancel on a pro-rata basis instead of everything offsetting. So if Team A has 2 UNR and Team B has 1 UNR, we would enforce 1 UNR on Team A. (High school rule).
Let's use correct terminology (it matters). They don't "offset." The penalties 'cancel.' Big difference. Offsetting fouls require that the down be repeated. Canceling penalties leave the down alone.
Yeah, canceling them all might let somebody get away with something that they shouldn't. Canceling equal opposing distance penalties, and penalizing a 'leftover' single UNS/UNR would complicate our job, but, if that is more fair and is better for the game, so be it.
-
The practice in these parts that is endorsed by every coordinator that I know is to make the clock start after a first down slower after the 2 minute mark at the end of each half. In the Cowboys’ situation I as the R would tell the QB that the clock is starting on my signal. I know what the rule book and manual say but the coordinators and coaches expect the lee way to get that one more play in if there is a first down near the end of the game. We would get in trouble if we handled these situations in critical situations the same as the rest of the game. Like it or not the rules and practices tilt toward the offense. The coaches, players and fans blame us if the offense cannot get that one more play. This is what they call “situational awareness” these days.
As an aside, I do not blow my whistle on the start the clock signal except for during the last 2 minutes of each half. I picked this up from a BCS R and it works quite well, and keeps the game moving along. I have never heard 1 complaint about this practice.
-
1) Modify 3-4-3 to simply give the option to the offended team inside 2 minutes. The verbiage about "clock is stopped to complete a penalty" is confusing.
I don't mind the rule intent, as it is, but the language is, indeed, ambiguous. If they change the language to, "...clock is stopped to complete a penalty for a foul by the team ahead in score (or either team if the score is tied), and would otherwise next start on the referee's signal, inside the last two minutes of a half, it will start on the snap, at the option of the offended team."
2) 10 sec runoff rule should not depend on a first down. This is an administrative stoppage that is not "caused" by either team and should not save someone from a runoff.
I guess you are talking about an injury or helmet off situation. The point of the 10SS in those situations is to keep a team from gaining a clock advantage by faking an injury or deliberately losing the helmet, to cause the clock to stop. If Team A earns a new series, the clock stops, anyway, so the offending team gains no advantage. Now, if the NCAA were to adopt the NFL rule for first downs, yeah, they'd be gaining an illegal advantage, and the 10SS should apply.
3) On a Try or OT, let 15 yard UNR fouls get enforced at the succeeding spot like flagrant fouls and UNS would.
:thumbup
4) Clarify 6-3-13 / 10-2-4 that not ALL fouls on kicking plays have to be enforced EXPLICITLY at the previous spot as an option. I think the intent of the rule was to "enforce as normal, or tack it on". So therefore with the "previous spot" hard-coded in, we have to enforce illegal kicking on a blocked punt at the previous spot, which is silly when normal 3 and 1 would make it a spot foul.
:thumbup
5) Remove "if by Team A prior to a change of possession" part of the penalty for illegal forward pass. It's unnecessary if you know your definitions, and just adds confusion on whether we extend the period if Team B throws an IFP at the end of a half and we wouldn't need a clunky Rogers interpretation to say that we don't extend.
OK as is, for me, but if that might somehow make other lives easier, OK.
6) Editorial for location of the ball in relation to the plane of the NZ when it touches something that determines whether it's beyond or behind the NZ (as is officiated that way today via replay).
Eh? You've lost me on this one. Please expound.
7) ITP by an originally ineligible player should be 3 and 1 and loss of down (high school rule) instead of previous spot.
It used to be LOD, but they dropped that some years ago. Good as is, for me.
8) Clarify by rule or case book play whether a lineman going from a 2 to 3 point stance as the ball is being snapped is a live ball illegal motion or a dead ball false start.
Hear! Hear! :thumbup
9) Dead ball UNR/UNS yardage should cancel on a pro-rata basis instead of everything offsetting. So if Team A has 2 UNR and Team B has 1 UNR, we would enforce 1 UNR on Team A. (High school rule).
Let's use correct terminology (it matters). They don't "offset." The penalties 'cancel.' Big difference. Offsetting fouls require that the down be repeated. Canceling penalties leave the down alone.
Yeah, canceling them all might let somebody get away with something that they shouldn't. Canceling equal opposing distance penalties, and penalizing a 'leftover' single UNS/UNR would complicate our job, but, if that is more fair and is better for the game, so be it.
Some replies:
1) Even your version is too clunky. Why mention the clock at all? What does it have to do with anything? Just have it read "If a penalty is accepted with less than two minutes remaining of a half, the offended team will have the option to start the game clock on the snap." EASY!
2) Remember, stopping the clock for a first down is a very TEMPORARY stoppage and natural part of the game. Stopping for a helmet off or injury takes a lot more time. Best example I can give you is the offense having no time outs and down by 1... QB throws for a first down in bounds with 0:02 left on the clock at the B20 and fakes an injury. While tending to the QB, the offense runs their field goal team on and then kicks the game winning field goal.
5) My whole issue with this is that we need a clunky Rogers interpretation about extending the period, when the "if by Team A" part is superfluous and not needed.
6) Modify 2-19-3a to clarify that it is the location of the ball in relation to the plane of the neutral zone when it touches something that determines whether it’s beyond or behind the neutral zone. Currently, a player is not beyond the neutral zone unless his entire body is beyond the neutral zone. We can have a situation where the ball has crossed the plane of the neutral zone but the player has not. By definition, the ball has not crossed the neutral zone since it touched a player who is “behind” the neutral zone, but that’s not how we officiate it in replay. Just modify the end of the first sentence to say “...or anything beyond *the plane of* the neutral zone inbounds”.
9) I'm just saying, they do it in high school with no problem... and if doing a 1st grade subtraction problem is "complicating our job", then I can't help you. haha!
-
1. Mouthpieces. If they really want players to wear mouthpieces, then require that the mouthpieces be on a strap attached to the facemask (no exceptions). Any dangling mouthpiece would then be clear evidence of not having it properly in place. (He might have two, you might argue. But why would he have two, strapped to his facemask?) A rule like that could be enforced. (But, by whom, you might ask. Read on.)
2. Take us out of uniform and equipment enforcement. If they want compliance with uniform and equipment rules, then make that the responsibility of the conferences. Have them hire and assign a U & E officer to each game, and he/she has the authority to issue fines to the teams for U & E violations. Say, $1,000 per violation. Quadruple that for post-season games. That would probably get their attention somewhere around week 3.
3. If they are going to leave U & E enforcement to us, then change the pant/knee pad rule to something enforceable. Maybe forget the knee pads, but require the pants to extend below the knee cap while in a standing position, with the entire belt line above the top of the hips. And require that there be no exposed leg skin, for all players. Either wear stockings that extend above the knees, or underpant style leggings.
4. Require that all jerseys be tucked into the pants, OR require undershirts that EXACTLY match the jersey color, tucked into the pants. Nothing - NOTHING - extends below the beltline, and there shall be no skin exposed below the neck (except lower arms - see item 5).
5. Jersey or undershirt arms must extend to the crook of the elbow. There shall be no skin exposed above the elbows.
6. Towels, if worn, must be at the belt line and between the front of the hips on the anterior side of the player's body. Exception: The player designated to be the snapper, and who subsequently snaps the ball, may wear a towel on his posterior side, at the belt line.
7. By rule, the Head coach is responsible for all players on his team wearing uniform and equipment in compliance with the rules. Officials have no responsibility to verify that players are properly equipped. (So no certification needed.)
8. Only linemen within the tackle box at the snap may block below the waist toward the ball (right now, backs can BBW toward the ball, but from the front; I'd like to see that go away).
Probably some other things, but that's it for now.
I agree 100% with suggestions 1-3. Either make the uniform rules enforceable, or have a 3rd party do it. It is a joke when I try to make the teams and players correct uniform issues, but then they show up again several plays later. And then I look like the bad guy for actually doing my job.
I believe that 4-7 will do a great deal for simplifying uniform rules. Also, restricting BBw to linemen will improve the safety of the game.
-
Also, restricting BBw to linemen will improve the safety of the game.
I am not proposing that BBW be restricted to linemen. By current rule, a back may BBW in a couple of ways. One is, if they are within the TB at the snap, they may BBW toward the ball, but ONLY from the front. That is very difficult to officiate, and I’d like to to see that prohibited. Other types of legal BBW by backs are OK by me.
-
Low blocks in the TB by anyone in the TB at the snap should be legal. All other low blocks should be banned.
-
I would change the rule to make it easy to officiate:
All players numbered 0-49 and 80-99 can go farther than a yard down field on a forward pass but can not block below the waist.
All players numbered 50-79 can block below the waist but can not go further than 1 yard down field on a forward pass.
Choose your number and play accordingly…
-
That would be a change I would absolutely get behind.
-
Low blocks in the TB by anyone in the TB at the snap should be legal. All other low blocks should be banned.
The service academies would like a word with you...
-
The service academies would like a word with you...
Do you mean in addition to, "...sign here"?
-
Do you mean in addition to, "...sign here"?
I'm not falling for that twice... Uncle Sam got his 4 years out of me, that's all he's getting.