RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => National Federation Discussion => Topic started by: NVFOA_Ump on July 27, 2024, 08:21:43 AM
-
3rd and 10 from the 50 yard line. On the snap A23 sweeps right and takes a backward pass from A5. A75 is leading the play and on his initial lead block loses his helmet. A23 is tackled for a 2 yard loss at the A-48 yard line as A75 without his helmet throws a second block at the A-45 yard line. What do we have?
-
If B declines the penalty it is 4th & 12 at the 48.
Illegal participation is 15 yards. The basic spot for his type of illegal participation is the spot the foul, 10.4.4.b. A75's illegal participation started when, without his helmet, he started to chase someone. Maybe that was the 45, maybe not. I don't know. If it was the 45, if B accepts the penalty it is 3rd & 30 from the 30. Unless
-
So a similar play with a difference:
3rd and 10 from the 50 yard line. On the snap A23 sweeps right and takes a backward pass from A5. A75 is leading the play and on his initial lead block hits B73 at the A-42 where B73 loses his helmet when blocked. A23 is tackled for a 12 yard loss at the A-38 yard line by B73 who is continuing to play without his helmet. What do we have?
-
1st and 10 for A at B35. Game clock on the ready, play clock at 25
Gotta love NFHS “we don’t like exceptions” exceptions
-
3rd & 3 at B43.
B73 fouled when he continued to play after losing his helmet on the 42 yard line, not when he made the tackle on the 38 yard line. But if you want to call it on the 38 I won't argue.
The basic spot is the spot of the foul, 10.4.4.b.
-
1st and 10 for A at B35. Game clock on the ready, play clock at 25
Gotta love NFHS “we don’t like exceptions” exceptions
Penalty enforcement is a nightmare. I wonder if there is any official that has memorized the rule book's 8 different basic spots and the 20 subheadings, or does every official adapt the now defunct all-but-one principal to what the NF wants.
-
Penalty enforcement is a nightmare. I wonder if there is any official that has memorized the rule book's 8 different basic spots and the 20 subheadings, or does every official adapt the now defunct all-but-one principal to what the NF wants.
You're getting to my angst. Trying to teach and train new officials is hard enough without the absurd "exceptions" on enforcement rules the worst IMHO being this one. What happens when it's A 1st&10 at the A20 and linebacker B-45 realizes that he was supposed to be on the field and enters after the snap crossing the sideline at the B38 yard line while sprinting to get into the play? How do you enforce that one?
-
So a similar play with a difference:
3rd and 10 from the 50 yard line. On the snap A23 sweeps right and takes a backward pass from A5. A75 is leading the play and on his initial lead block hits B73 at the A-42 where B73 loses his helmet when blocked. A23 is tackled for a 12 yard loss at the A-38 yard line by B73 who is continuing to play without his helmet. What do we have?
This is a great question. This seems to be in conflict with what I have known to be the ruling, (a previous spot penalty). As written it would seem the enforcement spot is the where B73 continues to participate, (behind the line of scrimmage). I need someone smarter that me to explain this one.
-
Upon further review: Would not (by A) inserted in 10-4-4a&b solve this?
-
This is a great question. This seems to be in conflict with what I have known to be the ruling, (a previous spot penalty). As written it would seem the enforcement spot is the where B73 continues to participate, (behind the line of scrimmage). I need someone smarter that me to explain this one.
On the field, I might conveniently “forget” and penalize this from the previous spot. My thought process would be “Foul by B and the play ends behind the previous spot = PS enforcement”.
-
On the field, I might conveniently “forget” and penalize this from the previous spot. My thought process would be “Foul by B and the play ends behind the previous spot = PS enforcement”.
Seems logical to me. 9.6.G advises, "IP" occurs, ""when a player, whose helmet comes completely off during a down TO CONTINUE TO PRARTICIPATE BEYOND THE IMMEDIATE ACTION IN WHICH THE PLAYER IS ENGAGED".
We are given a FLAG, as a tool, to mark that spot ( the spot where the player CONTINUES TO PARTICIPATE).
10.4.1 advises, "the BASIC SPOT" is determined by the action that occurs DURING THE DOWN (D
-
So a similar play with a difference:
3rd and 10 from the 50 yard line. On the snap A23 sweeps right and takes a backward pass from A5. A75 is leading the play and on his initial lead block hits B73 at the A-42 where B73 loses his helmet when blocked. A23 is tackled for a 12 yard loss at the A-38 yard line by B73 who is continuing to play without his helmet. What do we have?
I think this is previous spot enforcement because related run ended behind the line of scrimmage. 1st and 10 from B35. If the foul was on the offense, it would be a spot foul even though related run ended behind the line of scrimmage.
-
This is a great question. This seems to be in conflict with what I have known to be the ruling, (a previous spot penalty). As written it would seem the enforcement spot is the where B73 continues to participate, (behind the line of scrimmage). I need someone smarter that me to explain this one.
Foul on B, related run ends behind line of scrimmage = previous spot enforcement. Table 10-4, part of 2023 rules change.
-
Foul on B, related run ends behind line of scrimmage = previous spot enforcement. Table 10-4, part of 2023 rules change.
Except that in the same rule change a new section 10-4-4 was added and in that subsection (all SPOT OF THE FOUL ENFORCEMENTS) is subsection b which lists "Illegal participation as in 9-6-4a and 9-6-4g". IMHO although "clear" it is 100% in conflict with the specific reason that rule 10 was changed being to prevent an absurd penalty with A holding in the backfield being the example given in the rules change memo. IP 9-6-4-a and 9-6-4g being a pure spot of the foul enforcements can result in some absolutely egregious results. As noted last year there are MULTIPLE places where the specific enforcement language is in direct conflict and that still has not been corrected. IMHO rule 10-4 is still deeply flawed and needs to be completely re-written.
-
Except that in the same rule change a new section 10-4-4 was added and in that subsection (all SPOT OF THE FOUL ENFORCEMENTS) is subsection b which lists "Illegal participation as in 9-6-4a and 9-6-4g". IMHO although "clear" it is 100% in conflict with the specific reason that rule 10 was changed being to prevent an absurd penalty with A holding in the backfield being the example given in the rules change memo. IP 9-6-4-a and 9-6-4g being a pure spot of the foul enforcements can result in some absolutely egregious results. As noted last year there are MULTIPLE places where the specific enforcement language is in direct conflict and that still has not been corrected. IMHO rule 10-4 is still deeply flawed and needs to be completely re-written.
I think everyone with common sense who works on the field agrees with you. It didn't have to be this way. All they had to do was to keep the all-but-one principle intact and make a notation that when the run ends behind the line of scrimmage, the spot of enforcement will be the previous spot. In all other cases, it's the same as always.. But no...
-
Foul on B, related run ends behind line of scrimmage = previous spot enforcement. Table 10-4, part of 2023 rules change.
10.4.2.d Foul by A or B when the run ends behind the LOS and no COP. The basic spot is the previous spot.
10.4.4.b Illegal participation as in 9.6.4g. The basic spot is the spot of the foul.
Which overrules the other?
Or am I seeing something incorrectly?
-
10.4.2.d Foul by A or B when the run ends behind the LOS and no COP. The basic spot is the previous spot.
10.4.4.b Illegal participation as in 9.6.4g. The basic spot is the spot of the foul.
Which overrules the other?
Or am I seeing something incorrectly?
Now you're getting it! NFHS has not fixed multiple direct conflicts in Rule 10.4 enforcement procedures. IMHO those 2 "exceptions" CANNOT be enforced as pure spot fouls without potential absurd results that are in DIRECT CONFLICT with the 2023 rules change memo rationale for changing 10-4 to begin with.
-
I think everyone with common sense who works on the field agrees with you. It didn't have to be this way. All they had to do was to keep the all-but-one principle intact and make a notation that when the run ends behind the line of scrimmage, the spot of enforcement will be the previous spot. In all other cases, it's the same as always.. But no...
K.I.S.S., but no...
I understand that there were time constrains in writing the rules last year, but this time they had a whole year.
It could have been a simple solution, instead they polished their turd with a few editorial changes and the problems persist.
-
Except that in the same rule change a new section 10-4-4 was added and in that subsection (all SPOT OF THE FOUL ENFORCEMENTS) is subsection b which lists "Illegal participation as in 9-6-4a and 9-6-4g". IMHO although "clear" it is 100% in conflict with the specific reason that rule 10 was changed being to prevent an absurd penalty with A holding in the backfield being the example given in the rules change memo. IP 9-6-4-a and 9-6-4g being a pure spot of the foul enforcements can result in some absolutely egregious results. As noted last year there are MULTIPLE places where the specific enforcement language is in direct conflict and that still has not been corrected. IMHO rule 10-4 is still deeply flawed and needs to be completely re-written.
I thought the change last year made Illegal Participation, Int. Grounding, Illeg Kicking, etc. were spot of foul if committed by A only, not B.. If committed by B, it's basic spot like in previous years.
-
I thought the change last year made Illegal Participation, Int. Grounding, Illeg Kicking, etc. were spot of foul if committed by A only, not B.. If committed by B, it's basic spot like in previous years.
Look at 10-4-4b which was new in 2023. It does not differentiate between A and B. It's very clear that the basic spot is the spot of the foul. That's simply wrong but it's there.
-
10.4.2.d Foul by A or B when the run ends behind the LOS and no COP. The basic spot is the previous spot.
10.4.4.b Illegal participation as in 9.6.4g. The basic spot is the spot of the foul.
9-6-4a and 9-6-4g both say 15 yards, live ball, basic spot.
and then 10-4-4 says Illegal Participation as in 9-6-4a and 9-6-4g, the basic spot is the spot of the foul.
LOL
-
Look at 10-4-4b which was new in 2023. It does not differentiate between A and B. It's very clear that the basic spot is the spot of the foul. That's simply wrong but it's there.
I agree completely. It's a clear sign that whoever murdered Rule 10 had no concept of spots and how important they are in understanding penalty enforcement.
-
Look at 10-4-4b which was new in 2023. It does not differentiate between A and B. It's very clear that the basic spot is the spot of the foul. That's simply wrong but it's there.
I think we were told not to use rule book for 10-4-4 last year because it was wrong. They distributed a chart (not the one printed in rule book Table 10-4, but a separate one that was supposed to clarify the change.
I don't have a visual of the chart, but it essentially says prior to change of possession if related run ends behind the LOS -OR- offense fouls behind the LOS, then it's previous spot enforcement. Except for fouls on offense for int. grounding, illeg forward pass, illeg kicking, illeg batting, illeg participation (helmet off, entering in down). Those exceptions are spot fouls.
-
illeg participation (helmet off, entering in down). Those exceptions are spot fouls.
This is precisely the point. While the spot of the foul is indeed where the illegal participation began, it can't (shouldn't) be the spot of enforcement.
Take the player entering during the down. If A has the ball on the A10, and after the snap A13 enters during the down at the B10, then by rule, this illegal participation foul is marked off from the basic spot, the spot of the foul, which is where he came onto the field and began to participate. The B10! That's a great way to gain an easy 75yds...
Same way with the helmet coming off. If B22 is covering a deep receiver and somehow loses his hat, but continues to participate, according to this malformed rule mess up, the spot of enforcement is the basic spot - where he began to participate after losing his helmet! Depending on where he is on the football field, that could be another huge gain for A..
Again, an easy fix.. Stick with the old all-but-one principle if the line of scrimmage is not involved. If it is, go to previous spot. If not, go to end of run unless the foul by A is behind the end of the run. In that case, go to the spot of the foul.
-
I think we were told not to use rule book for 10-4-4 last year because it was wrong. They distributed a chart (not the one printed in rule book Table 10-4, but a separate one that was supposed to clarify the change.
I don't have a visual of the chart, but it essentially says prior to change of possession if related run ends behind the LOS -OR- offense fouls behind the LOS, then it's previous spot enforcement. Except for fouls on offense for int. grounding, illeg forward pass, illeg kicking, illeg batting, illeg participation (helmet off, entering in down). Those exceptions are spot fouls.
Did NFHS "distribute a chart" last year? Not that I have seen and I save all of the football related memos that NFHS issues each year. If anyone has an "official" document correcting this we would all appreciate it being posted here if possible.
This problem was CLEARLY documented last year and the issue has apparently been ignored. I don't have my 2024 rule book yet but has anyone that actually has the new book seen a "correction" to any of this?
-
It's not an official NFHS publication. It was published by Kevin Boitmann who is on the state rules committee I believe. Below is a link to the training video. Pic of the chart is below also.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlP_gOTD0KQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlP_gOTD0KQ)
(https://i.imgur.com/LHnsT2V.jpg)
PS - I looked at the 2024 rule book and I don't see a correction. 10-4-4 and 9-6-4a,g are written same as 2023 book.
-
Did NFHS "distribute a chart" last year? Not that I have seen and I save all of the football related memos that NFHS issues each year. If anyone has an "official" document correcting this we would all appreciate it being posted here if possible.
This problem was CLEARLY documented last year and the issue has apparently been ignored. I don't have my 2024 rule book yet but has anyone that actually has the new book seen a "correction" to any of this?
NOPE
-
I really hate that the editorial committee doesn't know the difference between Basic Spot and Enforcement Spot when writing these rules.
-
Totally agree with Bossman re basic spot and enforcement spot.
I think that "basic spot" is no longer needed in the rules. Certainly the definition of "basic spot" is not at all helpful.
Just state where the enforcement spot is and don't ever utter the words "basic spot".
-
I really hate that the editorial committee doesn't know the difference between Basic Spot and Enforcement Spot when writing these rules.
What I hate even more is that they won't swallow their pride, admit it's a colossal failure, go back and fix the mess.