Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10
1
NCAA Discussion / Team A player OB voluntarily
« Last post by ElvisLives on Today at 07:28:05 PM »
Interesting action during the Chiefs/Bengals game, that points out another difference between NFL and NCAA rules. On a punt by the Bengals in the first period, a Bengals player went out of bounds. Not sure if he went OB voluntarily, or if he was forced out. Regardless, he ran a long way while OB (and not being contacted). He then returned inbounds and stood over the still slightly moving ball, then he picked up the ball, where the ball was declared dead and the down ended. The Bengals were penalized 5 yards at the dead-ball spot, 1/10 for KC. The announcers asked Steratore about that, and Steratore explained that the Bengals were penalized for “Illegal Touching,” since he was the first Team A player to touch the ball.
In an NCAA game, touching of the ball by such a Team A player, is not a foul. If the ball has not been touched by Team B, yes, it is illegal touching, but that is a ‘violation,’ not a foul - no distance/down penalty. A Team A player that is voluntarily OB and then returns inbounds, commits a foul for an “illegal return,” (5 yards, previous spot, or spot where dead-ball belongs to B) regardless of any action he takes once he is back inbounds. He may block any opponent (by legal means). He may tackle a ball carrier. The rules governing illegal touching of a kicked ball apply equally to him as any other Team A player, but such action would be a violation, as defined, not a foul.
Let’s don’t get the NFL action confused with action using NCAA rules.
2
National Federation Discussion / Re: NFHS 2023 Rule Changes
« Last post by AlUpstateNY on Today at 10:33:52 AM »
Maybe we, as a society (not just us officials) should be reinforcing the notion that sexual assault is wrong and you shouldn't sexually assault people, and if you see one of your "friends" about to sexually assault somebody, you should intervene because sexual assault is wrong.

I also don't think that we're going to see a rise in sexual assault as non-binary people feel more free to be themselves rather than trying to hide in the shadows.

However, if I ever see a sexual assault during a game I am officiating, I will quickly eject them for a flagrant foul, report to whatever authorities are relevant and hope they learn a quick and valuable lesson. I'm not anticipating that it will happen, however.

Maybe I would be more concerned if I watched more Fox News?

We've always had whacky people warning that "the sky is falling".  The problem today seems more, that we have a lot more otherwise rational and reasonable people who are eager to pay attention to the "whacky peoples" most ridiculous warnings.
3
General Discussion / Re: Live Sports on TV and the FCC
« Last post by AlUpstateNY on Today at 10:23:34 AM »
Since most professional and college sports have endorsed betting, I think a 15 or 20 second delay in the live broadcast would or could influence to betting lines during the game. The sports books, etc. are not going to allow that.

We were all told, "Stupid is, as stupid does" and warned to keep wolves away from the herd, because....they're wolves.  Despite really bad lessons learned in the 20s-30s we decided to let the wolves back in, thinking they've changed their ways. Unfortunately, the best bet remains that, wolves will ultimately remember that they are wolves, and the herd will pay a steep price, again.
4
General Discussion / Re: Live Sports on TV and the FCC
« Last post by ElvisLives on Today at 08:52:26 AM »
And there are a lot of folks still shouting - ever louder - “LET’S GO BRANDON!”
5
General Discussion / Re: Live Sports on TV and the FCC
« Last post by Ralph Damren on Today at 08:27:50 AM »
the 'bleep button dude' may not always hear clearly what is being said  >:D . Some of you may recall this 'event' from last Fall.....

THE PLAYERS:   A racecardriver named Brandon
                        A lady reporter will a possible hearing problem
                         President Joe Biden (in name only)
                          A racetrack full of fans

THE SCENE:    Brandon has just won the race aWaRd
                       The reporter is about to interview  8]
                        Some/many fans chant: "F&%# Joe Biden  >:D !"'

ACT I :       Reporter : "WOW, Brandon, listen to the fans  tR:oLl "
                  Brandon : " Well  :!# , er......"
                   Reporter: " They are all chanting 'LET'S GO BRANDON  tR:oLl !"
                    Brandon :  " I  :!# don't think so  :o "

ACT II :   'LET'S GO BRANDON'  became a greeting or bumper sticker in some circles.
                Crowd noice has been muffled at some events.

IF PAUL HARVEY WAS STILL ALIVE, YOU WOULD HEAR : "..AND NOW YOU KNOW THE REST OF THE STORY "  tiphat:
6
General Discussion / Re: Live Sports on TV and the FCC
« Last post by Ralph Damren on Today at 08:01:03 AM »
Since most professional and college sports have endorsed betting, I think a 15 or 20 second delay in the live broadcast would or could influence to betting lines during the game. The sports books, etc. are not going to allow that.
There is currently such a delay, as the TV signal bounces off one of our man-made moons and returns to earth. Try listening to your radio, whose radio waves travel from the broadcast tower  to it. You'll hear the difference.

BEFORE YOU PLACE A BET, BEWARE THE BOOKIE MAY BE LISTENING TO HIS RADIO  tR:oLl

.............................THE NEW RULES WILL BE HERE SOON  8]
7
General Discussion / Re: Live Sports on TV and the FCC
« Last post by sir55 on Yesterday at 04:25:45 PM »
Since most professional and college sports have endorsed betting, I think a 15 or 20 second delay in the live broadcast would or could influence to betting lines during the game. The sports books, etc. are not going to allow that.
8
General Discussion / Re: Live Sports on TV and the FCC
« Last post by AlUpstateNY on Yesterday at 01:47:41 PM »
my meaning is:
if network live broadcasts have to have a censor and build in a delay to catch any salty language...
how is it live network sports seemingly dont have to?

I mean we never read about FCC fining xyz network because of whatever game, yet time to time we see FCC fining radio and live non-sports tv broadcast for salty language.

Does technology exist, that monitors pre-selected individual voices , that would provide similar instantaneous monitoring of the multi-thousands of voices/languages of spectators, players, sidelines at televised/Radio sporting event broadcasts?
9
National Federation Discussion / Re: NFHS 2023 Rule Changes
« Last post by ncwingman on Yesterday at 01:45:47 PM »
The heck you say!   :o  What? Where?
Wow. Well, they’ll never make it to college football!
What’s next? Female officials?
Hmmm. Wait. It’s coming back to me now. Seems like I remember an NCAA bowl game that had the first female official in it. Like maybe in Detroit. Ooooooooh, yeah! Now I remember. I was the referee!

The percentage of non-male players in secondary school football is very small - a fraction of 1%. And even smaller in NCAA football. So, the opportunities for ‘offensive’ contact between players of the opposite sex - or whatever gender identities - have been few and far between. I’ve not actually heard of any. But, when/if those percentages grow to be significant, we may see some claims of “inappropriate” contact by one gender on another gender. Don’t know what that might look like when it happens, but you can go to sleep tonight assured that, with the country’s culture changing as is it, such incidences, or claims of incidences, will present themselves in the coming years, maybe sooner than later.

Maybe we, as a society (not just us officials) should be reinforcing the notion that sexual assault is wrong and you shouldn't sexually assault people, and if you see one of your "friends" about to sexually assault somebody, you should intervene because sexual assault is wrong.

I also don't think that we're going to see a rise in sexual assault as non-binary people feel more free to be themselves rather than trying to hide in the shadows.

However, if I ever see a sexual assault during a game I am officiating, I will quickly eject them for a flagrant foul, report to whatever authorities are relevant and hope they learn a quick and valuable lesson. I'm not anticipating that it will happen, however.

Maybe I would be more concerned if I watched more Fox News?
10
NCAA Discussion / Re: Punt fair catch/KCI question
« Last post by AlUpstateNY on Yesterday at 01:35:54 PM »
Until the rules states, "A player that has given a valid signal for a fair catch and then muffs the ball shall not be contacted by an opponent until he is has fully gained his balance and is able to protect himself from contact by an opponent," then we have no choice but to rule even violent contact (not targeting) after the muff to be legal. That would be the same for a player at mid-field (unless he still had the opportunity to complete the catch, which case he is still protected by KCI). I would have no heartburn if such a rule change were made. But that's not the rule, today. And, I would have no heartburn if they changed to rule to allow a player with one foot out of bounds to protected by KCI. And, I would actually LIKE for a rule to be added that prohibits blocking an opponent that is out of bounds (i.e., blocking opponents can only occur inbounds - period).
Now, could the BSB rule be tweaked, or interpreted, to include such players? Maybe. That would not be a stretch, at all, I don't think. But Shaw would have to issue something on that.

But we don't have any of that, yet. If coaches don't like these things, they need to contact their rules committee representatives, and lobby for a change(s).

In as much as the Receiver has the sole discretion to decide whether, or not, to create a FC scenario, which in effect is claiming an opportunity to make an unobstructed opportunity to catch a kick, in exchange for giving up any chance of advancing the ball after making the catch (or allowing the kicked ball to continue to it's own spot). 

A, Muff" is failing to successfully complete that catch after touching the kicked ball. When the receiver fails to complete his side of that bargain, (He, alone, has imposed on the kicker) why should the Kicking team continue to be held responsible for compliance? 

Should there be contact AFTER, or prior to a "catch", the Kicker is responsible for, and subject to, KCI.  It seems however (unmolested) "Catching" is a prerequisite of the (Receiver) to initiate activation of the FC agreement.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10