RefStripes.com

Football Officiating => National Federation Discussion => Topic started by: ncwingman on October 15, 2017, 02:18:08 PM

Title: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: ncwingman on October 15, 2017, 02:18:08 PM
We had an odd play that I realized after the game we signaled incorrectly (and I believe enforced wrong as well). 1st and 10, A7 goes to hand off the ball, realized the RB is not where he should be an then quickly throws a pass to A83, which falls incomplete. A83, not thinking it was going to be involved in the play had failed to remove his mouth guard from his facemask and put it in his mouth -- which is failure to wear required equipment during the down. (He had been previously warned about this as well -- he had a habit for not putting his mouthpiece in if he wasn't going to be involved in the first play of a series off the bench).

We enforced the five yard penalty, and replayed 1st and 15. However, since it was during the down (and not killed before the play) this is a violation of 9-9 and not 3-6-2d, and this should have been a succeeding spot foul (which wouldn't have changed the yardline of the next play), but this means it should have been 2nd down, correct? There's no case play that explicitly states this, but the succeeding spot enforcement says this has to be true.

Furthermore, the appropriate signal is listed as S27-23 for violating 9-9 (The WH only gave S23 in our game). Since it is only a 5 yard penalty, I assume S27 is used under the context of a noncontact foul, not a USC, which means you get to explain to the coach of B why it was only 5 (not 15) yards and why that foul wouldn't count towards disqualification. There are no other fouls that use S27 that would not be 15 yard penalties and/or would not count towards disqualification, therefore this seems like it would be a very confusing (albeit unusual) signal. There are many other "non contact" fouls that we don't use S27 for, is there a reason why this one still includes it?
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: CalhounLJ on October 15, 2017, 05:19:48 PM
It is a succeeding spot foul, so IMO the down counts, we mark off 5 yds and play next down. I always thought the UNS was  charged to the HC, who supposedly had verified to the WH before the game that all his players were legally and properly equipped. 9-8-1h. But then that would make it a 15yd penalty.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Stinterp on October 15, 2017, 06:41:51 PM
9-9,  5 yards , succeeding spot.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: GA Umpire on October 15, 2017, 08:46:47 PM
The appropriate signal is listed as S27-23 for violating 9-9 (The WH only gave S23 in our game). Since it is only a 5 yard penalty, I assume S27 is used under the context of a noncontact foul, not a USC, which means you get to explain to the coach of B why it was only 5 (not 15) yards and why that foul wouldn't count towards disqualification.
Ralph,
Can you explain why the signal for this penalty is listed as S23 and S27?
When it would appear that only S23 is needed?
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Rulesman on October 15, 2017, 10:05:15 PM
Ralph,
Can you explain why the signal for this penalty is listed as S23 and S27?
When it would appear that only S23 is needed?
See 9-8-1h and 1-5-6. As in the case with many other rules, a single one standing on its own (in this case 9-9) does not fully cover the situation. I would also assume the language in 9-8-1h makes this foul count as one of the head coach's UNS allotment. Correct, Ralph? That being said, don't let it happen!
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: ncwingman on October 16, 2017, 09:46:13 AM
That being said, don't let it happen!

I was trying not to, but he lined up in the slot as a back looking in towards the ball, so he never looked at me until after the pass -- which is when I could get a good look at his facemask. I warned him in the first quarter and he was doing good... then he forgot after halftime.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Rulesman on October 16, 2017, 09:54:34 AM
I was trying not to, but he lined up in the slot as a back looking in towards the ball, so he never looked at me until after the pass -- which is when I could get a good look at his facemask. I warned him in the first quarter and he was doing good... then he forgot after halftime.
At that point you have no choice.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Ralph Damren on October 16, 2017, 10:10:56 AM
Ralph,
Can you explain why the signal for this penalty is listed as S23 and S27?
When it would appear that only S23 is needed?


#27 for noncontact foul is an abridged version of : "This penalty is added to the succeeding spot because it either (A) Had no baring on the outcome of the play-USC, illegal substation {big ole Bubba wandering out on field to see what's happening during the play}, or the topic play; (2) intentional pass interference - called as often as Halley's Comet passes - so that extra 15 isn't considered a multiple foul."

In pregame a coach verifies that all players are legally equipped . He doesn't verify that his players will then wear it properly - that's why the 5 yarders come it. Remember, guys, to flag it if you see it prior to snap as a preventive measure. Also remember to include signal #21, is this is in the delay of game family. With DOG, clock starts on the snap - this prevents big ole' Bubba from spitting out his mouthpiece to keep the clock running.

 :puke:       ^flag
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: CalhounLJ on October 16, 2017, 12:00:43 PM
9-8-1h seems to imply the Head coach is responsible to make sure the players wear required equipment during the down. It gives an unsportsmanlike foul as being the failure of the coach to have the player wear and/or use legal and/or required equipment.
How does this not apply?
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Rulesman on October 16, 2017, 12:22:00 PM
9-8-1h seems to imply the Head coach is responsible to make sure the players wear required equipment during the down. It gives an unsportsmanlike foul as being the failure of the coach to have the player wear and/or use legal and/or required equipment.
How does this not apply?
I agree. It should apply.
Title: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: CalhounLJ on October 16, 2017, 12:30:18 PM
There’s actually casebook support for this, but it deals with an illegal eyeshield instead of required equipment. But the way the rule reads, it should apply to required equipment as well. IMH, and often-wrong opinion. 🤓


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: OHref71 on October 16, 2017, 01:24:42 PM
In Ohio this year on an experimental basis we are not throwing flags for missing or illegal or failure to wear equipment.  We treat it like a helmet coming off and just send them to the sideline for 1 play.  It has actually worked well and now we see players covering their shoulder pads and doing other clean up without our having to request it.  Also when we ask now a player knows they cannot ignore us because if we ask and he ignores us and just gets into formation with his shoulder pads out we kill it and send him to the sideline.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: js in sc on October 16, 2017, 02:24:59 PM
In Ohio this year on an experimental basis we are not throwing flags for missing or illegal or failure to wear equipment.  We treat it like a helmet coming off and just send them to the sideline for 1 play.  It has actually worked well and now we see players covering their shoulder pads and doing other clean up without our having to request it.  Also when we ask now a player knows they cannot ignore us because if we ask and he ignores us and just gets into formation with his shoulder pads out we kill it and send him to the sideline.
I agree.  Although it is not a statewide initiative, some of the crews I have been on this year in SC are doing the same thing.  Not only does it get the players' attention, it really targets the coaches who are getting more involved.  We tell them before the game, if they are improperly equipped, we are going to send them out for a play.  Nothing works better than sending the star player to the sideline in a critical point in the game.  He won't do it again.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: CalhounLJ on October 16, 2017, 02:26:21 PM
I saw a great example of corrective officiating in a college game Saturday. the QB came out and immediately I saw his mouthpiece stuck in his helmet. Apparently the WH saw it too, because at the end of the play he eased up beside him, said something, and immediately the QB reached up, grabbed his mouthpiece and put it where it belonged. No flag, no foul, just a quick word, and all was well.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Rulesman on October 16, 2017, 04:51:56 PM
I agree.  Although it is not a statewide initiative, some of the crews I have been on this year in SC are doing the same thing.  Not only does it get the players' attention, it really targets the coaches who are getting more involved.  We tell them before the game, if they are improperly equipped, we are going to send them out for a play.  Nothing works better than sending the star player to the sideline in a critical point in the game.  He won't do it again.
Any pushback from the coach who wants to know where that interpretation is in the rule book? It’s one thing if it’s supported as a state-wide initiative. It’s something else if it’s not.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: js in sc on October 16, 2017, 07:15:48 PM
Any pushback from the coach who wants to know where that interpretation is in the rule book? It’s one thing if it’s supported as a state-wide initiative. It’s something else if it’s not.
We explain that it is improper equipment and rather than hit him with a 15 yard UC, we will send them out.  They are grateful.  Have not had any problems.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Ralph Damren on October 17, 2017, 10:51:56 AM
9-8-1h : Coach has verified that all his players have legal or/and required equipment. Kid shows up in game with illegal or missing required equipment = 15 yards- USC -head coach.

3-6-2d : Kid has all required and legal equipment, but doesn't bother to wear it properly = 5 yards.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: CalhounLJ on October 17, 2017, 11:50:21 AM
Makes sense, especially in light of 9-9.
Stir-pot question simply for the sake of argument: Does that mean if a kid shows up on the field without a mouthpiece, it's 15UNS on coach, but if he has one dangling from his hat but is not wearing it, it's 5?
I'll hang up and listen. :sTiR:
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Ralph Damren on October 17, 2017, 12:14:04 PM
Makes sense, especially in light of 9-9.
Stir-pot question simply for the sake of argument: Does that mean if a kid shows up on the field without a mouthpiece, it's 15UNS on coach, but if he has one dangling from his hat but is not wearing it, it's 5?
I'll hang up and listen. :sTiR:
AYUH, and 'spect coach will be dag-glum sure all players have mouthpieces.

We used ta' : Tweet our tweeter and yell : "Tugboat, Bubba, Forklift, Porkchop and Tank (offensive linemen) git your dag-glum mouthpieces in  P_S !" and then,again, hit RFP. We did this often  deadhorse:

Now we : Blow and ^flag . Coach got  >:( at the player. Now we don't see it no more ^talk ^talk yEs: (5 man crew). Let 'em know that your both watching :o and flagging  ^flag and the problem ain't a problem no more. :laugh:
Title: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: CalhounLJ on October 17, 2017, 02:24:54 PM
No doubt


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Rulesman on October 17, 2017, 02:48:16 PM
Just don’t make up rules as is suggested by sending him out for one play.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: NorCalMike on October 20, 2017, 03:35:39 PM
We have been told by our association to send the player off for one play. I know that there is no support in the rules for this but we tell both coaches before the game is a player comes out not wearing his equipment properly, he will be sent off to get it straightened out. This works well. As a U I remind the any players that are wearing required equipment improperly that if they come out on the field that way, they will be sent off to fix it.

A couple of weeks ago, we advise both coaches of that this will happen. First offensive series, WR comes out with his knees not covered. LJ notices, whistles, kills the clock and sends the kid to the sideline. Replacement comes out and lines up. R winds the clock. LJ notices the replacements knees are also exposed so he whistles, kills the clock and sends the kid to the sideline. Second replacement comes out with his knees covered. We didn't see a knee cap the rest of the game. What took about a minute of time to make the point that we were going to enforce the uniform rules fixed an all game problem without having to flag anyone.

I know some people will say we should flag a player for not properly wearing required equipment but this is supported by rule 1-5-5 which states any missing or illegal equipment found must be corrected before allowing participation. We do not allow the player to participate in the down if his equipment is not legal.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: NVFOA_Ump on October 20, 2017, 03:42:56 PM
Just don’t make up rules as is suggested by sending him out for one play.
I don't believe that we are making up rules by sending a player out to correct illegal equipment.  In fact the rules require us to do so.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Rulesman on October 20, 2017, 05:08:34 PM
I don't believe that we are making up rules by sending a player out to correct illegal equipment.  In fact the rules require us to do so.
Rule reference?
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: NVFOA_Ump on October 20, 2017, 06:51:59 PM
Rule reference?

1-5-5 and 1-5-6 require that missing/damaged/improper equipment must be made legal prior to a player being allowed to play.  By rule we're not supposed to allow the ball to be snapped if we know ahead of time that the equipment rule is not being satisfied.  Per 1-5-5 that's on us.  The updated references in the 2017 rule book (3-5-2b, 3-5-5b, 3-5-7e) add more details to the process.  Our supervisor has made it very clear that we are not to knowingly allow an improperly equipped player to participate until the equipment issue is addressed and unless the HC is willing to use a charged TO to fix the problem the player must leave the field.

Also from the 2015 NFHS Point of Emphasis memo:

Illegal Equipment

No player shall participate while wearing illegal equipment. This applies to any equipment, which in the opinion of the umpire is dangerous, confusing or inappropriate. The coaches’ pregame verification to the referee and umpire that all players are properly equipped in compliance with the rules also includes the exterior helmet warning labels. Coaches should bring casts, braces and other such items to the game officials’ attention so that the umpire can inspect the items.

Players should be instructed on how to wear equipment properly, and must wear all mandatory equipment when participating in the game. When a player’s equipment becomes damaged during play, it must be corrected before the player may participate further.

Players cannot be allowed to participate in the game, and substitutes cannot be allowed to become players when they are not properly wearing required equipment or when they are wearing illegal equipment. Game officials should not allow players to enter the game or let the ball become live when they observe infractions of the equipment rule. It is not always necessary for a game official to call a foul and penalize a team if game officials are able to make the player and coach aware of the problem so it can be fixed before the ball becomes live.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Magician on November 02, 2017, 10:10:30 AM
Had a player ask me last Friday to take an official's time out so he could get his chin strap snapped. It was a little rusted so needed more effort to get snapped. He looked at me like an alien that I wouldn't stop the game for him. I'm not going to be a jerk on that, but I'm also not going to extend the game too much for it. I have taken an official's time out for quick equipment corrections, but something like that either needs to be corrected during the normal dead ball period or be subbed.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: Eastshire on November 03, 2017, 07:14:02 AM
Had a player ask me last Friday to take an official's time out so he could get his chin strap snapped. It was a little rusted so needed more effort to get snapped. He looked at me like an alien that I wouldn't stop the game for him. I'm not going to be a jerk on that, but I'm also not going to extend the game too much for it. I have taken an official's time out for quick equipment corrections, but something like that either needs to be corrected during the normal dead ball period or be subbed.

I get this all the time in soccer about untied shoes. For some reason they think they game should stop because they don't know how to double knot their laces.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: AlUpstateNY on November 03, 2017, 10:10:29 AM
I have taken an official's time out for quick equipment corrections, but something like that either needs to be corrected during the normal dead ball period or be subbed.

Remembering that our PRIMARY objective is player safety, the common sense and judgment of the covering official, is supported by rule, to deal with the full spectrum of these situations.

NFHS: 3-5-2b, covers situations requiring extensive equipment repair, NFHS: 3-5-7e, addresses simple delays and NFHS: 3-10-d addresses the special situation of a dislodged helmet NOT caused by a foul.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: KWH on November 03, 2017, 12:43:36 PM
Just don’t make up rules as is suggested by sending him out for one play.

RULESMAN, RULESMAN, RULESMAN

Member states may apply to the NFHS to experiment with a rule change.
If the NFHS approves the experiment, other states may become "Tag-on" states allowing them to experiment with it also.
This particular proposal has been tossed around for a few years and it is good to see some are experimenting with it. I look forward to reviewing their statistics in January.

Other experiments would include the Oregon/Hawai'i/Connecticut/Colorado/Alaska Blindside Block which became the NFHS rule in 2017 after only 2 years of experimental use.
Experimental rules are provided to all officials and coaches who are part of the experiment as a supplement their rules book.

When experimental rules are in force they are the official rule of the day! So, no one is "Making up rules," as you suggested.

 
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: CalhounLJ on November 08, 2017, 01:08:13 PM
I think saying "no one is making up rules" may be a little presumptive.
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: KWH on November 21, 2017, 04:08:10 PM
I think saying "no one is making up rules" may be a little presumptive.

Calhoun, while that may be what you "think," I am totally "convinced" you totally missed my entire point!
If your state mandates you are to enforce a rule in a way that deviates from the Rules Book for the duration of an experiment,
then, by enforcing said rule as per the mandate, NO ONE IS MAKING UP RULES! as was suggested.
Title: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: CalhounLJ on November 22, 2017, 07:18:05 AM
I think you missed my point. I should have emphasized the “no one” part if my comment. I run into officials and coach who “make up rules” every week. Just a bit of bad humor.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Live ball equipment violation
Post by: KWH on November 22, 2017, 04:07:54 PM

Got it!

Thanks