Back Side Coverage

[jason]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1zg2FA31tE

Judging from replays it appears to be a 5-man crew, so let's just assume that as a starter.  Ignore the out of bounds PF and the flag that hit a cloud.  Who should have the secondary back side coverage on the blindside hit?  

I have a pretty firm opinion on this one, but I'm curious what others have to say.

[cincybearcat]

BJ primarily...possibly the U if he wasn't just strolling along inside the hashes...and man oh man, do those black pants look bad with short sleeves

[Mike L]

BJ....a receiver coming from the middle of the field making a long run back toward the runner should be a big time attention getter well before the hit happens.

[Reff54]

Ok.....what's with the short sleeves and the winter pants....  if it's warm enough for short sleeves....isn't it warm enough for the knickers....

[AlUpstateNY]

Ok.....what's with the short sleeves and the winter pants....  if it's warm enough for short sleeves....isn't it warm enough for the knickers....

This game was played in Arizona, does it ever get cold enough for long sleeves?

[Pivo Ref]

Was it raining? Black pants can be worn in rain.

[JugglingReferee]

The black pants aren't just for foul weather.  In many areas, it won't take long for them to be adopted for any contest.  That's my prediction.

[110]

The black pants aren't just for foul weather.  In many areas, it won't take long for them to be adopted for any contest.  That's my prediction.

They've got to be better than the knickers for mud. There's no fun washing pants once a night before going back out into the field the next day.

[JugglingReferee]

They've got to be better than the knickers for mud. There's no fun washing pants once a night before going back out into the field the next day.

This is true.  I happen to have 4 pair of knickers though.  Having bought them in Canada, I just can't throw them out knowing what I paid for them. 

[110]

This is true.  I happen to have 4 pair of knickers though.  Having bought them in Canada, I just can't throw them out knowing what I paid for them. 

Fah. Whatchoo complaining for? You can do games from Thursday to Sunday without doing laundry!

[WingOfficial]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1zg2FA31tE

Judging from replays it appears to be a 5-man crew, so let's just assume that as a starter.  Ignore the out of bounds PF and the flag that hit a cloud.  Who should have the secondary back side coverage on the blindside hit?  

I have a pretty firm opinion on this one, but I'm curious what others have to say.

Back Judge.  Though it looks like the Umpire was closest.  Between the two of them, this should've been flagged.  The Back Judge needs to be able to view all of this from a wide view and clean up this kind of stuff.  And yes, those pants look horrendous with short sleeves!   

[LarryW60]

Just so I'm on the same page as everyone else, the action being discussed is NOT a BiB, but a personal foul for essentially hitting a defenseless opponent, right?

[MrFbOfficial]

Just so I'm on the same page as everyone else, the action being discussed is NOT a BiB, but a personal foul for essentially hitting a defenseless opponent, right?

Correct.

[Jackhammer]

I definitely don't think that's the U.  He's watching the point of attack in that situation and I just don't think he's going to see it, even though he is the closest...BJ is most likely to see it.

[jason]

Almost the same debate we had when this play was first discussed. 

Just to add fuel to the fire...
1) How many receivers are there on the play?
2) How many of the receivers go deep?
3) How many of the receivers come back?
4) How many players is the umpire looking at who are involved in the action when the PF happens?

[Welpe]

Could the opposite wing pick this one up?

Call me crazy, but I like the look of the black pants with short sleeves.  That'd be ideal in Houston where we get some pretty wam rain that turns the field into a quagmire.

[VALJ]

Could the opposite wing pick this one up?

That was my first thought - BJ or the far wing should have the best view of the headhunter in the middle.

[NAUmp]

Could the opposite wing pick this one up?

I wouldn't call you crazy with that suggestion at all, but what's with him still on the sideline with no player w/in 30 yards of him? 

Here in Alabama we are taught to come in and keep plays boxed in.  If he did call this foul from the position he's in, he would be roundly criticized for being so far away from the play he called.

Also, maybe the Ump is supposed to be looking at the point of attack, but if he was, he was looking out of the corner of his eyes because it sure looks as though he's looking straight at the late hit.

[Jackhammer]

I think it's pretty hard to tell where the U is looking.

The point of attack generally follows the blockers more than the ball.  So in my keys I'd be reading the middle of the line then following the blockers.  The ball carrier goes out just short of the 30.  The late hit comes from a downfield receiver coming back just barely beyond the 30.  I  tend to think the U's field of vision goes from the line play to where the ball is going out of bounds and this hit behind him is going to be a hard one to pick up.

[Welpe]

I wouldn't call you crazy with that suggestion at all, but what's with him still on the sideline with no player w/in 30 yards of him? 

Here in Alabama we are taught to come in and keep plays boxed in.  If he did call this foul from the position he's in, he would be roundly criticized for being so far away from the play he called.

This is a regional thing.  I have always been taught to stay on or close to the sideline.

[jason]

Could the opposite wing pick this one up?

Call me crazy, but I like the look of the black pants with short sleeves.  That'd be ideal in Houston where we get some pretty wam rain that turns the field into a quagmire.

Considering the opposite wing is still on the sideline and a flag would have to come from a LONG way away, it seems like an unlikely flag from him (not sure what good he's doing so far away from the play).

But given that there are three receivers off the screen, and the BJ is ostensibly just as far away (if not more) as the HL, doesn't this make a flag from the BJ unlikely?  Maybe even ill-advised?

[RickKY]

The blind side hit should have been covered and flagged by the umpire.  He was in perfect position and shoulde be looking for hits away from or after the play.  The R was following the QB as he scrambled which is correct, but he could have looked past the runner to see this UR foul..  The BJ had 5 receivers downfield when the QB decided to run with the ball.  The umpire was coming toward the end o fthe play and should ahve had this flag.  The L on the far side had several players between him and the end of the run, and needed to look after those guys.

[Reedy]

As an Umpire, I hope that I'd be catching this.  Once the ball is dead in the SZ and the POA evaporates, I shift my focus from trailing the run and try to zoom out and be alert for this kind of action, which typically comes from downfield, rather than upfield in my experience.  It'd be nice to have downfield help from the BJ, but I feel like I'd be remiss if I missed it.

[GoGoGo]

Why is your focus on trialing the run?

[James]

I wouldn't call you crazy with that suggestion at all, but what's with him still on the sideline with no player w/in 30 yards of him? 

Here in Alabama we are taught to come in and keep plays boxed in.  If he did call this foul from the position he's in, he would be roundly criticized for being so far away from the play he called.

We would get dinged if we came in. We are supposed to stick to the sideline until the play is dead, then square in. I think he should have seen it. Other than 2 players beside the U there was nothing else for him to look at - but maybe he was TRYING for the crossfield spot (benefit of the doubt).