TD Signal on offensive penalty

[cougar729]

Was reviewing film and saw a play where during a Team A run, the Line Judge has a flag for holding, the run is to the Line Judge's side and down his sideline.  He does a nice job continuing to officiate after the foul, and gets to the goal line and signals TD. 

I guess my question is since he is the calling official of both the foul and the touchdown is it necessary to give the TD signal? (I've been told on the NCAA side of things that the TD signal isnt necessary, just stop the clock and go report to the white hat)  But couldnt find anything to support that in the mechanics manual.  So would like to get some other opinions on it.

[Atlanta Blue]

Suppose the defense declines the penalty?   

I would think signal it, that was the ending of the play.  Then let the call bring it back.

And you will be helping the stat crew, who records such things.

[Kalle]

Not an NF official, but what would you signal in this situation?

4th and goal from B-5. You as the LJ flag A80 for holding before the RB A32 falls down so that the ball barely crosses the goal line in front of you. Do you signal TD or simply stop the clock?

[gsrc]

I don't signal TD.

[Rulesman]

I don't signal TD.

Why not? The result of the play is a TD. Then you worry about the foul. I agree with the coach (AB).

[bama_stripes]

Why not? The result of the play is a TD. Then you worry about the foul. I agree with the coach (AB).

As do I.  There's really no need to modify our normal mechanics for an infrequent play.

[gsrc]

I heard it at a clinic I attended sponsored by a college conference. I think the rationale was it was another way to communicate what you had on the play. Guess I will start signalling TD.

[VALJ]

In our area, we DON'T signal the TD if we know that the penalty is going to wipe it out.  One if the sayings we have is "Touchdowns are forever."  Once those arms go up, it's tough for a coach to accept having the points come off the board.

Check with your individual supervisor, though - your mileage my certainly vary on this one, based on their preference.

[Atlanta Blue]

Game this seaason, UGA leading over Ga Tech by 1.  Georgia has the ball on the Tech 20 with about a 1:30 to go, just got a 1st down.  UGA running back breaks through the defense and scores.  However, the "break through" was allowed by Tech, as they knew if they didn't get the ball back, they had no chance of scoring.

Suppose UGA held on the play?  RB heads into the end zone, but the officials don't signal TD because they know UGA was guilty of holding on the play.

Tech declines the penalty.  Well the result of the play WAS a touchdown.  Looks silly signalling it now when no one signalled that he got into the end zone to begin with.

Even as the offensive coach, I want to know if my back got into the end zone, even if it's being called back.

[Rulesman]

I'll take AB's play a step further. What if the covering official at the goal line doesn't know the offensive team held at the LOS? Quite possible if he subscribes to the "stay-with-your-keys-and-fish-in-your-own-pond" theory.

Yeah, when in Rome... But the emperor isn't always right, either. 

[Magician]

I'll take AB's play a step further. What if the covering official at the goal line doesn't know the offensive team held at the LOS? Quite possible if he subscribes to the "stay-with-your-keys-and-fish-in-your-own-pond" theory.

Yeah, when in Rome... But the emperor isn't always right, either. 

He would definitely signal TD.  The scenario brought up above was the calling official and the covering official are the same person.  Our supervisor has told us to NOT signal in this instance.  If for some very strange reason the defense choses to decline the penalty and allow the offense to score, after the R gives the decline signal, he will then signal TD.  If he has a microphone, even better.

I can live with either approach but I will do the approach instructed to me by my supervisor.

[neil99]

I like my guys to signal for a few reasons...... 1.) It makes it a no brainer when asking the kids if they want the penalty and 2.) If it's a close play lets say he is going down as he goes in I dont even have to ask if he was in or not for the sake of winding the clock.

[LarryW60]

I'd ring it up even if there was a 100 percent chance it's coming back.  Coaches are not stupid (no matter what we may believe in private  ) so simply telling him that you were signaling the result of where the ball was downed should suffice.  "Yeah coach, I signaled touchdown even though I'm the one that dropped the flag, but that was just to let the other officials know what the end result of the play was.  NOW we enforce the penalty, which negates the score."

The official's signal does not override the rulebook.  Never has and never will.  I think that's something most coaches understand.

[Mike L]

Or what do you do if it's 4th and goal at the 5, everybody sees your flag, the tackle is made at the goal line, you determine he's in but you just kill the clock because you "know" they will take the penalty. Does not everyone now assume he was stopped short and the penalty will be declined with the ball going to B?

I kinda prefer instead of worrying about what situation it may be to always signal a TD whenever A as possession in B's goal and then sort things out if needed after. I'm pretty sure everybody knows the TD is going away with a foul by A, this is not confusing to anyone.

[LarryW60]

True.  What's the fundamental?  "Possession of a live ball in an opponent's end zone is a touchdown."  Signal that fundamental, then officiate the foul.

[VALJ]

I'll take AB's play a step further. What if the covering official at the goal line doesn't know the offensive team held at the LOS? Quite possible if he subscribes to the "stay-with-your-keys-and-fish-in-your-own-pond" theory.

Yeah, when in Rome... But the emperor isn't always right, either. 

If I don't know that the play is coming back, I'm going to signal the TD.  Even if I see the other official's flag, I don't know for certain who the foul is on.

[foureyedzebra]

If I don't know that the play is coming back, I'm going to signal the TD.  Even if I see the other official's flag, I don't know for certain who the foul is on.

Then one would need to signal   on any play where a team has posession of a live ball in their opponent's endzone; regardless of whether or not one was the calling official who threw the flag for a foul on the "scoring" team. There is no way that one can ever be 100% certain that any given, non-flagrant foul, will consequently have the prescribed penalty enforced. There is always the possibility that the offended team will decline the penalty.

That being said, I am pretty confident that the percentage by which the offended team would decline said penalty would be significantly reduced if the covering official were to go ahead and signal   after the offending team "scored"; thereby notifying all interested parties that the result of the play was a Touchdown.

Now.... To those who are fortunate enough to have a supervisor  ,  respect his instruction  , and do it like he wants it done.  

[Rulesman]

Now.... To those who are fortunate enough to have a supervisor,      respect his instruction and do it like he wants it done. 

...even if the supervisor is the Lone Ranger! 

[VALJ]

Now.... To those who are fortunate enough to have a supervisor  ,  respect his instruction  , and do it like he wants it done.  

And there's the crux of my argument.  My boss says "don't signal a score if you've thrown a flag on the scoring team that will nullify the score."  So, when I flag the offense and they put it in the EZ, I don't signal.  Simple as that.

[VALinesman]

And there's the crux of my argument.  My boss says "don't signal a score if you've thrown a flag on the scoring team that will nullify the score."  So, when I flag the offense and they put it in the EZ, I don't signal.  Simple as that.

I somewhat disagree with that assessment. What if you think that you have, for example, a hold only to find out that, say the WH or U had a better look at the play? The policy not to signal TD may work 99/100 times, but the one time it does not work, it may reflect poorly on the crew in my opinion...

[T.C. Welton]

My two cents...you signal the TD so the defense knows it should accept the penalty without quite a lengthy conversation...

[AlUpstateNY]

Ther are clearly two trains of thought on this, and neither is "wrong".  More importantly, regardless of which approach taken, to what extent your decision is handled crisply, efficiently and decisively will have a lot more to do with how well it may be received and understood.

It would be helpful, whichever presentaion method is chosen, to have considered and decded how to handle this situation long in advance of actually having to deliver it.

[Harry]

I was watching the 2010 USA football video narrated by Bill Lemonnier.  There was a play where an official throws a flag against A and a TD is scored.  The same official that threw the flag signaled TD.  Bill said this is incorrect and a TD shouldn't be signaled if the official knows it will be called back.

[cougar729]

Good spot Harry, my college supervisor agrees with Bill, but no direction really exists in the high school side of things

[VALJ]

I somewhat disagree with that assessment. What if you think that you have, for example, a hold only to find out that, say the WH or U had a better look at the play? The policy not to signal TD may work 99/100 times, but the one time it does not work, it may reflect poorly on the crew in my opinion...

As I said, my boss says "don't signal it when you throw the flag and the foul will bring it back."  So, I don't.

And, FWIW, if I "think" I have a hold, I don't have a flag on the ground.  That flag doesn't leave my belt unless I know damn good and well that I saw a foul.