Is this legal in NFHS???

[CalhounLJ]

Respectfully submitted,
- Some guy on a message forum!
[/quote]

For the record, that’s really all you (or any of us) are. All these opinions Carry no official weight whatsoever. I’ve already apologized for the dig. Get over it.

[Ralph Damren]

After FURTHER and FURTHER review by the Replay official.... IT APPEARS THAT....

* The 'injured' player was in the backfield as HL is a couple of yards beyond.
* The HL was on the sidelines and in clear view of the 'razzle-dazzle'.
* This was a 7-man crew.
* There was no sign of any foul  called.

While we all have had 'brain freeze' and realized we may have missed a call, one/all of our crewmates will come thru and correctly apply the proper rule.

I STILL PONDER....

* Did the officials confer as to play being legal  ?
* Did B's coach ask for a ref/coach conference to discuss it's legality ?
* How many watching this considered it 'razzle-dazzle'  .

[NVFOA_Ump]

* How many watching this considered it 'razzle-dazzle'  .

I can't find that term in any of the NFHS rules?      

That must mean it's a non-defined rules violation?   

[HLinNC]

Did the officials confer as to play being legal  ?
* Did B's coach ask for a ref/coach conference to discuss it's legality ?

I found the game on NFHS Network so I will pull the clip later today and we might can see what the aftermath was.

Pure speculation on my part but it appears to me that the HL looked right at A8 so I'm wondering if at a minimum he got tipped off prior to the play.  We have no idea if this was brought up in the pre-game conference, how it was presented by the coach if it was, and what the referee and rest of the crew said as a response.  With no context, which is what video lacks a lot of the time, we can only guess but it is obviously an illegal play and should have been flagged at some point.  One would hope that someone in a state semi-final 7 person crew would be able to say "wait a $#@!&%+ minute".

Plays like this usually have repercussions.  Perhaps someone from Virginia will be able to hear about it and give an update.

It is definitely a learning tool to show each of our associations.  I've already put the clip that I made up on our YouTube channel and forwarded to our RSO and state AC.

[HLinNC]

https://vimeo.com/667308541/330c16011f

The play in question is a 2nd down play so I started the recording with the 1st down play as I wanted to see how the substitution was worked from the standpoint of how many players did A have.  I began to think of the prospect that A might have had 12 on the field.

A runs their first down play with 11 players with 4 backs.  The right HB goes downfield, hits the ground and then goes off to his sideline when the play ends so we now have 10 players for A.  The QB, who ran the ball towards the home sideline is the one feigning injury and runs towards his sideline and stops inbounds.  As he is appearing to run off, another sub runs on to make 11 A players.

2nd down is the TD play.  After the score, the BJ appears to confer with the HL but that is the extend of any officials conferring.  We do not see any of the home team staff being overly demonstrative or approaching the officials to discuss the play.  I cut the video off as the BJ prepares for the subsequent kickoff.

It would appear that the crew just kicked it and B had no clue any of this was illegal.

[ElvisLives]

I found the game on NFHS Network so I will pull the clip later today and we might can see what the aftermath was.

I am curious as what happened on the previous down. I think we've all been assuming that Team A only had 11 players on the field during the down in question. That is probably a relatively safe assumption. But, after the previous down, another A player must have left the field, to make a player vacancy for the substitute that did run onto the field. (Unless Team A played with only 10 players on the previous down??? I suppose it could have happened.)
If this was a crew of 7, and a Team A player left the field after the previous down, the deep wing on that side should have observed that, which should have raised a red flag for him, i.e., he should expect to see a substitute come off the sideline. Well, a sub did come off the sideline. So, all is good, except that the guy holding his wrist is 'apparently' leaving the field. Again, this should have raised a red flag for the deep sideline guy, in terms of expecting to see another substitute come off the sideline to replace this guy that appears to be leaving the field. When he doesn't see a sub, but sees the player stop near the sideline, he should now be on high alert for a 'hideout' play.
Apparently, the specific rule covering this action is unclear in NFHS, as well as whether it is a live-ball foul or a dead-ball foul. But, it appears that everyone agrees that it is illegal, and that is the most important thing. Regardless of which rule set under which the game is being played, this is an egregious act of illegal deception. Call it unsportsmanlike conduct, call it illegal participation - but do not allow the score, and hang 15 on 'em at the previous spot (if live-ball), or succeeding spot (if dead-ball). As I have said before, this is cheating - plain and simple.

Note: There is deception in football. Like, faking a hand off; almost everybody on the team running in one direction while the BC runs in the other direction; faking a kick and running/passing/handing the ball; signaling for a fair catch and faking like you are catching the ball and letting it bounce into the end zone. But, hideouts, fumblerooskis, concealing the ball in your clothing, bounce-backward pass-pretend-it-was-incomplete-forward-pass plays, etc., are simply illegal deception.

Let's have the courage to make these calls.

[ElvisLives]

https://vimeo.com/667308541/330c16011f

The play in question is a 2nd down play so I started the recording with the 1st down play as I wanted to see how the substitution was worked from the standpoint of how many players did A have.  I began to think of the prospect that A might have had 12 on the field.

A runs their first down play with 11 players with 4 backs.  The right HB goes downfield, hits the ground and then goes off to his sideline when the play ends so we now have 10 players for A.  The QB, who ran the ball towards the home sideline is the one feigning injury and runs towards his sideline and stops inbounds.  As he is appearing to run off, another sub runs on to make 11 A players.

2nd down is the TD play.  After the score, the BJ appears to confer with the HL but that is the extend of any officials conferring.  We do not see any of the home team staff being overly demonstrative or approaching the officials to discuss the play.  I cut the video off as the BJ prepares for the subsequent kickoff.

It would appear that the crew just kicked it and B had no clue any of this was illegal.

Looks like we had similar thoughts. It just took me too long to type my post. 

[HLinNC]

Looks like we had similar thoughts.

It should prove the intent that this was planned and not some off the cuff thing dreamed up on the sideline.

I'd be interested to see if there were any recriminations afterward for the crew.  Given the fact that no one on B's sideline is pitching a hissy-fit, no complaint may have ever made its way to the PTB.

One other thing I noticed when I went through the video online; B (green) started the game kicking off from the K35 so apparently there were some shenanigans in pre-game too.

[Snapper]

Note that the R & U signal that they have 11 on A.  They either knew that guy was the 11th or else they signaled without actually counting.

With a 7 man crew, I'm leaning toward they thought that play was ok.  If not, then somebody didn't speak up.

[KWH]

Playing Monday morning quarterback...
Had the officials stopped the clock for the  apparently injured player as in 3-5-10
the officials action would have then squashed this bullsh*t play altogether without any flags.

I understand why they did not stop the clock in this situation as it is similar to when a kids helmet comes off and
he immediately grabs his helmet and runs off the field in which, while we are supposed to, we don't always stop the clock?

Just a thought?

Respectfully submitted,
Some guy on a message forum!

[KWH]

Next week there is a meeting with some very influential NFHS people.
This play might just happen to come up.
If that should happen, perhaps a ruling? or a POE? or an addition to 9.9.1 SITUATION B?

Respectfully submitted;
Some guy on a message forum!

[blandis]

Please tell me the crew penalized that.

[HLinNC]

Playing Monday morning quarterback...
Had the officials stopped the clock for the  apparently injured player as in 3-5-10
the officials action would have then squashed this bullsh*t play altogether without any flags.

I understand why they did not stop the clock in this situation as it is similar to when a kids helmet comes off

I agree.  I would not have killed it as it appears he was making his way off and a sub had already made their way onto the field.  I would have also been making a re-count of my A players.

Please tell me the crew penalized that.

  I think the post thread pretty well indicates they didn't.

The lack of any real crew discussion after the play would tend to make me believe that this play was presented to the crew in pre-game and it was erroneously indicated to Team A that the play was legal.  Team B's lack of protest indicates they don't know the rules (surprise!) or have that play in their arsenal also.

[AlUpstateNY]

I agree.  I would not have killed it as it appears he was making his way off and a sub had already made their way onto the field.  I would have also been making a re-count of my A players.
  I think the post thread pretty well indicates they didn't.

The lack of any real crew discussion after the play would tend to make me believe that this play was presented to the crew in pre-game and it was erroneously indicated to Team A that the play was legal.  Team B's lack of protest indicates they don't know the rules (surprise!) or have that play in their arsenal also.

Having enough trouble reading my own mind, I hesitate to think I can read the minds of others.  It's understandable to refrain from interrupting play to insure the (apparently injured exiting player's LAST step cleared the sideline.  However, once he instantly turned up field, at full steam, (with the verbal encouragement of his coaching staff, the intent was OBVIOUS. 

That intent was to "CHEAT", which was apparently deliberate and choreographed, to gain an UNFAIR ADVANTAGE.  An immediate whistle, stopping play may have been appropriate, but the slight hesitation to review the possibilities of what was occurring, to confirm the seriousness of the conclusion, was appropriate & understandable.  This was CLEARLY premeditated UNS behavior, calling for THAT specific penalty, holding the HC responsible.

Although the delayed whistle allowed the play to momentarily continue, the action itself prohibits ANY benefit from this behavior from gaining ANY of the sought advantages.  The only question resulting is whether this behavior rises to the level of FLAGRANT, causing instant disqualification of the offending HC, or merely the first of two such behaviors requiring disqualification.

[KWH]

I agree with ALF. But I am split.
As an official, I am canceling the play going with UNS on HC - previous spot! I would consider deeming the act flagrant.
As an SRI I would never downgrade a a crew for a flagrant UNS for this type of Bullsh*t football.

If we make this a flagrant UNS, the likelyhood is it would go away that much faster?