Minority Report..."After further review......"

[Ralph Damren]

While in agreement with a majority of your opinions, there are three that I don't and here's my rationale :

# 10 "Correct goofed up chains anytime during series" , you said yes  15-2. Thinking of situations where this might apply, I came up with the following play :
 (1) A, in a hurry-up offense, gains 1st down @ B-20; (2) Chains are set as A rushes up to LOS; (3) A snaps the ball BEFORE RFP; (4)  for DOG; (5) Ball moved to B-25, chains remain set @ 20; (6) a couple of plays later, @ 3rd & 3 @ B-13...the coach/ comes awake and realizes the stakes should have been reset to the 25 after the DOG per 5-3-1 ; (7) with this rule change it would now become 1st & 10; (8) without this rule change, the chains could be corrected - like any other misapplied rule - prior to the next live ball. I like our beloved game better the way it currently is.

# 19, you said yes 13-4 "Previous spot if A fouls behind LOS". I'm a strong supporter of the all-but-one principle. I'm of the belief that the offense doesn't need anymore help. I'm not a strong supporter of "exceptions"and even less of a supporter of "exceptions to exceptions" - IG & EZ fouls.

#1, you said no 2-16 "Flags aren't deactivated until off the field". This would give rule book support to new Case 1.1.8C. This is in several rule codes of other sports without any problems. this stemmed from a dueling occurrence in Maine on the same Friday night (musta' been a full moon ) : (1) player drilled an opponent while in the "handshake line"; (2) coach gave "middle finger salute" to officials....Both in view of officials leaving the field.  = ejection = disqualification from next game. When game ends, officials should start to leave, but should still have authority to .

Thanks for taking time to read this, and if you're not in agreement, I understand. If we all agreed on everything, it would be a very boring forum

          Oh, by the way.....

Any opinions on the upcoming Super Bowl ? 

[bama_stripes]

Here's why I'm in favor of being able to correct chains (and it's much more likely than your scenario):

Had this in a game two years ago:

A's ball 1/10 on the A-25.  A's QB gets dropped for a 10-yd sack, but B commits a PF FM on the tackle.  15-yd penalty from end-of-run, making it 1/5 from the A-30.  After the RFP but before the snap, I noticed the chain crew, believing it to be an automatic FD, had reset the chains to indicate a new 1/10.

We got it corrected, but if another play had run before we noticed it, I'd sure want to be able to correct that error.  After all, if we can correct obvious timing errors, why not a similar administrative issue?

[Ralph Damren]

I agree, 'Bama, with your desire to correct an error in setting the chains. IMHO, I feel that we need a "statute of limitations" on when  errors can be corrected. While 1-1-10 prohibits protests, it is generally accepted that any error can be corrected up to the next live ball or end of period. There are two exceptions to that rule:

  (1) Timing errors can be corrected up to the 2nd live ball. Rationale : you may not be able to determine if the error occurred before or after the ball was snapped...example - 8 : 35 on RFP, ball snapped, play ran, clock now reads 6 :24 ..did the 2 minute disappearance occur before  or after  the snap ? Abid, even if the screw-up preceded the snap, you've got until the 2nd dead ball.

 (2) An error in downs can be corrected any time during the series. Rationale : It may be impossible to determine when a down was skipped or and extra down added.

You guys did a great job of picking up the potential error before it became one and hopefully all of us would do the same. Morale of this : BE SURE THE CHAINS ARE CORRECT BEFORE THE RFP.

An example of a screw-up caught too late to correct : Sometime in the waining days of last century in Dexter,Maine (home of Dexter Shoes) the first half ended with a flag for a late hit...The  agreed that would be tacked on the ensuing kickoff....the chowed down  on a snack shack sampler.... the forgot to take the 15 against the kicking team .....the kickoff was returned to R's 35.... the umpire  now remembers the forgotten 15 ....the whitehat sez' "No prob" and moves the ball up the 50 .....the whitehat is no longer a football official but is my pastor........and now you know the rest of the story (as Paul Harvey used to say)
  ( XII days to  )

[Atlanta Blue]

I'm opposed to post game flags, as it doesn't match other sports.  See the slide from the latest baseball rules clinic (published by the NFHS).  If there is a post game incident, absolutely report it to the state office, but there are no post game ejections.  And short of an ejection, why would you even bother throwing a flag?

[Ralph Damren]

NFHS Baseball 10-1--2 : "Umpire jurisdiction begins upon the umpires arriving at the field (within the confines of the field) and end when the umpires LEAVE THE PLAYING FIELD at the conclusion of the game."
This is what the proposed football rule would state. I believe the illustration was to imply that the ump has no game authority while in the parking lot/ neighborhood bar / Micky D's/ where ever...however...they could always call the state association / 911 / local pest control / who ever....

  ( )

[AlUpstateNY]

Reporting (serious)  post game abuse or harassment through the appropriate league or governing body is an important responsibility all officials OWE to each other.  If these incidences produce ANY violence or property damage, they should ALWAYS be reported to police, who will make delayed "house calls" when properly requested. 

[bossman72]

I'm opposed to post game flags, as it doesn't match other sports.  See the slide from the latest baseball rules clinic (published by the NFHS).  If there is a post game incident, absolutely report it to the state office, but there are no post game ejections.  And short of an ejection, why would you even bother throwing a flag?

But in baseball, you can run someone after the game has ended and before you leave the field, correct?

[Atlanta Blue]

But in baseball, you can run someone after the game has ended and before you leave the field, correct?

By rule, probably.  But we have been specifically instructed that if the action comes after the game has ended, report it to the state, don't do post game ejections.

[bossman72]

By rule, probably.  But we have been specifically instructed that if the action comes after the game has ended, report it to the state, don't do post game ejections.

NCAA has this rule, correct?

[bama_stripes]

But in baseball, you can run someone after the game has ended and before you leave the field, correct?

That's correct.  And in states (such as ours) where ejectees are subject to monetary fines, it can be a significant action.

[VALJ]

I've heard of post-game ejections in MLB, too.

[FLAHL]

One example that supports the all-but-one for penalties behind the line by A.

In the Seattle vs GB game, one of the Seattle guys sacked Rodgers about 12 yards behind the LoS.  One of the Packer players hit the sacker and drew a flag.  I'm thinking it's going to be first and 35 or something like that, then they announce that the penalty is declined.  I can't figure out why they declined it, then I realized that the NFL rule would have enforced from the previous spot, so Seattle's choice would have been 1st and 25 or 2nd and about 22.  I know this is only one example, but in this case it allowed the Packer player to get a free shot on the Seattle player.  It would have been different if it had been ruled a dead ball foul, but it wasn't.

On another note, after all of the discussion about eligible and ineligible players, numbers, and positions, I am thankful for the simplicity of our numbering and eligibility rules, at least on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd downs.

[bkdow]

One example that supports the all-but-one for penalties behind the line by A.

In the Seattle vs GB game, one of the Seattle guys sacked Rodgers about 12 yards behind the LoS.  One of the Packer players hit the sacker and drew a flag.  I'm thinking it's going to be first and 35 or something like that, then they announce that the penalty is declined.  I can't figure out why they declined it, then I realized that the NFL rule would have enforced from the previous spot, so Seattle's choice would have been 1st and 25 or 2nd and about 22.  I know this is only one example, but in this case it allowed the Packer player to get a free shot on the Seattle player.  It would have been different if it had been ruled a dead ball foul, but it wasn't.

On another note, after all of the discussion about eligible and ineligible players, numbers, and positions, I am thankful for the simplicity of our numbering and eligibility rules, at least on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd downs.

  Let's just clarify this:  It was a Packer Player sacking the Seattle QB and the Seattle lineman "picked-off" the Packer player...so the Seattle player got a "free shot"

[Atlanta Blue]

  Let's just clarify this:  It was a Packer Player sacking the Seattle QB and the Seattle lineman "picked-off" the Packer player...so the Seattle player got a "free shot"

And let's further clarify this: the penalty was handled incorrectly.  That was a dead ball foul, by rule and philosophy (NFL book specifically says, "When in doubt between live and dead ball fouls, it's a dead ball foul.").  If it wasn't a dead ball foul, it wasn't a foul at all.

As a dead ball foul, the spot of enforcement was the end of the play.  Green Bay should have gotten the sack AND the penalty yards.

[FLAHL]

  Let's just clarify this:  It was a Packer Player sacking the Seattle QB and the Seattle lineman "picked-off" the Packer player...so the Seattle player got a "free shot"

Sorry, I didn't mean to point the finger in the wrong direction.  I live in Tampa, and we haven't had much experience with playoff games in the last decade or so.

[Ralph Damren]

I'm currently packing my grip with new rule proposals, your opinions, one deflated Patriot football and a 60 ring Churchill cigar with a Madro wrap (to light up after Super Bowl XLIX)  . After the meeting adjourns, I'll join my wife in sunny Florida to recharge by brain cells. Regrettably, Ole' Dell (my trusty computer) doesn't make the trip, so I won't be back on until the day after Ground Hog Day. The new rules will be announced via a press release from NFHS and I'm sworn to  until then, so please don't ask. Hope you all enjoy the Super Bowl and the debate on deflate-gate that I'm sure will be raging up until game time.
                                             Ralph

[Eastshire]

I'm opposed to post game flags, as it doesn't match other sports.  See the slide from the latest baseball rules clinic (published by the NFHS).  If there is a post game incident, absolutely report it to the state office, but there are no post game ejections.  And short of an ejection, why would you even bother throwing a flag?

In basketball, officials can issue technicals which may change the outcome of the game until they have left the visual confines of the court. In soccer, the referee can send off team personnel until they have left the field and its immediate vicinity.

From context, I'm assuming football is actually dissimilar from other sports in allowing an open season on disrespectful conduct by ending the officials' jurisdiction simply because the game has ended.

[AlUpstateNY]

From context, I'm assuming football is actually dissimilar from other sports in allowing an open season on disrespectful conduct by ending the officials' jurisdiction simply because the game has ended.

Thankfully, football doesn't seem to endure the level of, "open season on disrespectful conduct" at the conclusion of play as experienced by "other sports".  Those incidences that do occur, are most often handled, and ultimately addressed, away from the game venue through the appropriate supervisory channels.