RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: TXMike on February 07, 2015, 06:11:50 AM
-
This is a pretty good article covering the various items on their agenda. Hopefully they can make time between the discussions of iPads and iPhones to talk about some things like blocking below the waist & targeting in games without IR.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25060943/college-football-rules-face-looming-technology-question
-
Is coach-QB in helmet communication really an unstoppable force?
I don't think I want to see that
-
I think it would be great for the game. More plays per game I think.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
"Hopefully they can make time between the discussions of iPads and iPhones to talk about some things like blocking below the waist & targeting in games without IR."
TXMike, any word on possible changes to Targeting in games w/o IR?
-
I have heard nothing on that topic and am just hoping maybe there is an uproar from those schools that will lead to a change. If not then I will make my annual recommendation to UIL that we get an exception to the mandatory DQ. I get it that targeting is a serious danger but DQ is the most severe penalty in the game and to DQ for a targeting that turns out not to be one seems like overkill. I know a flagrant targeting when I see it and that should be a DQ. But I see hits that may technically violate the rule but which are not flagrant. Does not seem right to DQ and then look at film a few days later and see it was not targeting anyway
-
If they change the rules because of that, then we'll probably align with the new rule. Here we've decided to take the auto DQ out of our rulebook.
If we've had 5 TGT called all of last season I think we had too many. There's still no aiming high culture around here, thankfully
-
hits that may technically violate the rule but which are not flagrant
What is preventing you from calling such a foul a plain personal foul, 15 yards?
"Coach, I didn't have at least one of the elements of targeting there. Illegal, yes, which is why we threw the flag. Targeting? No." Just say it wasn't what you consider "forcible" contact, but since it was to the head or neck area, and unnecessary, so it is a foul.
I do not think I've had a single targeting call since they adopted the rule.
-
Because in the overwhelming number of situations, if it isn't targeting, it isn't anything. You can't call it a personal foul just because it looks bad.
-
2015 FOOTBALL RULES CHANGES--DRAFT
1. Eighth Official allowed (11-2-1).
2. Ineligible downfield: (7-3-10) Illegal beyond one yard rather than three yards for a player not engaged with an opponent. It is not a foul if the player engages an opponent within one yard and does not maintain the contact more than three yards (i.e., this change does not conflict with 7-3-8-b-1)
3. UNS for pulling/pushing player off the pile: (9-2-1-b)—add new item to list of automatics.
4. Helmet off defensive player: (3-3-9) Always set the play clock at 40 seconds, even when there is a 10-second runoff.
5. Game administration Interference: (9-2-5) Add official sideline warning before any foul is called.
6. Illegal Equipment: (1-4-8) To correct illegal equipment, a player will sent to sideline for one play, rather than charging a team timeout. The team may keep the player in the game by taking a time out to fix the equipment.
7. On-side kick: (12-3-4) Add as a reviewable play: blocking by the kicking team before they are eligible to touch the ball on an onside kick.
8. Pre-game warm-ups: (Rule 3, new article) Teams may have access to the field for up to 22 minutes before the opening kickoff. This may be altered by written mutual agreement of the teams before the game.
9. Timeout request: (12-3-5) Calling of a team timeout is reviewable throughout the game.
10. Play clock re-set: (3-2-4-b-3) Change “after 20 seconds into the count…” to “after 15 seconds into the count…”
11. Overbuilt facemask is illegal equipment (1-4-7).
Notes
Mechanics of the announcement for targeting fouls: the referee will not announce the disqualification until after the review.
The committee also extensively discussed the use of technology (tablets, computers, etc.) and decided not to make any changes at this time. A working group will be established to consider a wide range of technology issues.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
where did you get that from Sky?
-
It's on the CFO website.
-
got it
being new to this whole rule changing thing...
these are the only rules changes that will be discussed for 15 season or there might be some other changes coming from somewhere else?
-
I like the change about not announcing the DQ until after review on targeting. Better to announce it later than to announce it and have to take it back, IMHO.
-
got it
being new to this whole rule changing thing...
these are the only rules changes that will be discussed for 15 season or there might be some other changes coming from somewhere else?
Never say never.
-
2015 FOOTBALL RULES CHANGES--DRAFT
3. UNS for pulling/pushing player off the pile: (9-2-1-b)—add new item to list of automatics.
9. Timeout request: (12-3-5) Calling of a team timeout is reviewable throughout the game.
11. Overbuilt facemask is illegal equipment (1-4-7).
#3 - Hopefully this will be in the points of emphasis, and coaches will instruct their kids...if not, how many weeks into the season before teams adapt after getting dinged on this? Assuming the 2x UNS in a game still results in a DQ, this could be rough if a kid get a UNS for something else early in a game, and then gets 2nd UNS for trying to pull someone off a pile, and then has to sit the following week.
#9 - is this to allow IR to change the clock status to exactly the moment when a coach calls timeout? or when the official recognizes/grants the timeout?
Would suck to see games slowed down for replay to determine the exact amount of time on the clock for each timeout.
As a side note: Since I'm new to TX, how frequent is it for Texas high schools to have IR capabilities?
#11 - what defines "overbuilt"? Anything more than a QB? Only things as extreme as Justin Tuck's "samurai-style" facemask? What about "underbuilt" 1-bar punter facemasks? :sTiR:
-
No IR in TX HS football, yet. They are talking about it for the state championships.
-
No IR in TX HS football, yet. They are talking about it for the state championships.
That will be fun to see. They field crews whom cannot get a simple measurement done correctly.
-
This article helps explain the overbuilt facemask issue http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/7/1/5861316/nfl-facemask-overbuilt-rules-2014-chris-canty#4092115
I thought there could be a UIL exception since it is equipment related but since it is safety related they probably will not do one
-
It makes more sense now.
-
Because in the overwhelming number of situations, if it isn't targeting, it isn't anything.
Unnecessary contact to the head or neck area, even if not forcible, isn't a foul? Maybe in not all situations but certainly in many. Also, forcible contact to the head or neck area of a player who isn't, by definition, defenseless? Again, maybe not EVERY time, but certainly a flag is warranted in most occassion.
I do not believe the rules committee intended for us to ignore what would be illegal conduct but for a small element. And it has nothing to do with looking bad. Some of the worst hits are legal.
-
I am talking about the hits that , due to speed of action and angle of viewing it, may "look like" targeting but which, after slow-mo review are proven not to be. It is clear the rules committee realized the huge potential for error on this because they put in the provision that allows the foul call to be reviewed, one of only very few calls that can be reviewed.
-
But also at that level the game is much faster, thus the need for replay to assist. I think we still should err on the side of player safety, allow the ejection even if it is close. Perhaps we can train these kids not to go high.
-
#3 - Hopefully this will be in the points of emphasis, and coaches will instruct their kids...if not, how many weeks into the season before teams adapt after getting dinged on this? Assuming the 2x UNS in a game still results in a DQ, this could be rough if a kid get a UNS for something else early in a game, and then gets 2nd UNS for trying to pull someone off a pile, and then has to sit the following week.
Im thinking there will be some common sense allowed here. They're trying to do away with opponents throwing guys off piles that cause resentment that starts the chicken fighting which leads to big delays. I think if you have a fumble and a big pile, guy comes in and pulls a guy back with clearly no evil intention you will let that go.
-
I think if you have a fumble and a big pile, guy comes in and pulls a guy back with clearly no evil intention you will let that go.
IMO, he's sticking his nose where it doesn't belong.
-
IMO, he's sticking his nose where it doesn't belong.
Agreed. He may not have any evil intention, but the guy he is pulling on doesn't know that and retaliates and now we have a big mess.
-
@Rulesman
So are you saying under the 2015 changes, this action would be flag 100% of the time?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Agreed. He may not have any evil intention, but the guy he is pulling on doesn't know that and retaliates and now we have a big mess.
Bingo!