RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => National Federation Discussion => Topic started by: ncwingman on October 05, 2025, 07:11:32 PM
-
https://www.footballzebras.com/2025/10/high-school-officials-award-touchdown-after-a-player-re-enacts-the-1954-cotton-bowl/
Player comes off the bench to make a tackle after an interception that looked like it was going to be a Pick-6. Touchdown awarded.
One of those plays you kind of hope to never actually see, but one you'll definitely be telling around every round of beers for the next 50 years.
-
https://www.footballzebras.com/2025/10/high-school-officials-award-touchdown-after-a-player-re-enacts-the-1954-cotton-bowl/
Player comes off the bench to make a tackle after an interception that looked like it was going to be a Pick-6. Touchdown awarded.
One of those plays you kind of hope to never actually see, but one you'll definitely be telling around every round of beers for the next 50 years.
In NFHS, is it OK for a Team B player to grasp, twist and throw a Team A eligible player to the ground while the eligible player is attempting to run a pass pattern? And then intercept the legal forward pass and advance for a reasonably assured touchdown when a Team A squad member comes off the sideline while the ball is alive and tackle the Team B interceptor?
Any NFHS folks think the Team B player’s action on the Team A player is a problem?
-
In NFHS, is it OK for a Team B player to grasp, twist and throw a Team A eligible player to the ground while the eligible player is attempting to run a pass pattern? And then intercept the legal forward pass and advance for a reasonably assured touchdown when a Team A squad member comes off the sideline while the ball is alive and tackle the Team B interceptor?
Any NFHS folks think the Team B player’s action on the Team A player is a problem?
That was my first thought – how do we not have at least a defensive holding foul on B16 (or if there is one, I don’t see the flag for it)?
That being said I’m not sure if throwing the flag for B16’s actions would have done anything to prevent the team member from coming off the sideline.
-
That was my first thought – how do we not have at least a defensive holding foul on B16 (or if there is one, I don’t see the flag for it)?
That being said I’m not sure if throwing the flag for B16’s actions would have done anything to prevent the team member from coming off the sideline.
I certainly won’t argue against, or disagree, that a DOF call would not have prevented the UNS foul. But, it would have - SHOULD HAVE - offset the UNS, and prevented the award of an undeserved score.
-
I certainly won’t argue against, or disagree, that a DOF call would not have prevented the UNS foul. But, it would have - SHOULD HAVE - offset the UNS, and prevented the award of an undeserved score.
Agreed. One technicality – in FED, UNS is always enforced as a dead ball foul, so it would not offset the defensive holding. We’d go 10 yards from the previous spot (not an automatic first down) and then back 15 yards for the UNS.
-
tR:oLl
Agreed. One technicality – in FED, UNS is always enforced as a dead ball foul, so it would not offset the defensive holding. We’d go 10 yards from the previous spot (not an automatic first down) and then back 15 yards for the UNS.
Since this was on 3rd-and-6, the 10-yard penalty would give A a first down. Then enforce the UNS & set the chains. I’d also eject the tackler, since his action is definitely flagrant.
Not that it’s germaine to this discussion, but B won the game by 1.
-
Agree that B16’s action is flagrant and would result in disqualification.
-
Either an offset or order of occurrence works. Just as long as Team B doesn’t get an undeserved score, or even an undeserved possession series. But, it certainly appears that Team B was awarded a score, and they won by one point. Ouch.
-
In NF UNS is always a non-contact foul. Coming off the sideline to tackle the runner is illegal participation, a live ball foul. Both are 15 yards, but IP does not combine with a later UNS to DQ a player.
"Flagrant" has a specific definition, 2-16-2-c. NOTHING about A9's tackle suggests a flagrant foul.
B16's initial contact with the receiver appears to be legal, but the shove in the back to the ground when they are even is illegal use of the hands. Get that and we have a double foul, offset and repeat the down.
-
Either an offset or order of occurrence works. Just as long as Team B doesn’t get an undeserved score, or even an undeserved possession series. But, it certainly appears that Team B was awarded a score, and they won by one point. Ouch.
This needs to be a double foul.
-
This needs to be a double foul.
Yeah, I can’t speak to the correct administration of this for NFHS. I was just commenting that, whichever is proper for NFHS, either of those resolutions keeps Team B from getting an undeserved score/possession. And that is the most important thing.
-
IMHO, the covering official would need to rule that the A wing was not considered a blocker. Our rule of thumb is : If he's side-by-side or turned away from the D back, he's not.
IMHO, if a sub comes on the field during a live-ball , it becomes a live-ball IP. (9-6-4a...Penalty : 4a -IP live-ball). 9-1 sez' The referee can enforce any penalty he considers equitable including ^good.
IF ^flag came on the B player,too, we have 2 live ball fouls and as we Mainers might say....
BY GOLLY, 'SPECT WE GOT US A 'DO-OVER' ^flag ^flag
-
IMHO, the covering official would need to rule that the A wing was not considered a blocker. Our rule of thumb is : If he's side-by-side or turned away from the D back, he's not.
Those are valid ‘qualifying’ statements. In this specific instance, though, ain’t no way he can be considered a ‘blocker.’ The first move the split receiver (not a ‘wing’) made was a half-hearted ‘swim’ move with his right arm in a clear and obvious attempt to get around the defensive back to continue his pass pattern. But, the defensive back then grasps the receiver with both hands and pulls and twists the receiver, which causes the receiver to stumble slightly. Then the defensive back finishes off the receiver by shoving him to the ground with his left hand/arm. That was NOT an effort to ward off an opponent who was blocking/attempting to block him. The defensive back then looks back to the QB, and, lo and behold, the ball is thrown right toward the area where the receiver would have been, had he not been grasped, pulled, twisted and shoved to the ground. That, my friends, is a foul under anybody’s rules.
The ball was not in the air before the receiver was fouled, so this is defensive holding, rather than pass interference. But, a foul, nonetheless, which, as you say, would offset the live-ball illegal interference foul by the Team A squad member. (Same for NCAA, by the way.) In a crew of 5, the Back Judge must get this. In a crew of 7, the deep wing on the receiver’s side of the field must get this.
-
Wouldn't that be the wing on that side, in a five-man crew? They have the outermost receivers as keys (excuse me, areas of responsibility) especially when that focus area is pressed.
-
Wouldn't that be the wing on that side, in a five-man crew? They have the outermost receivers as keys (excuse me, areas of responsibility) especially when that focus area is pressed.
Yes. My error. The wing to that side would have that action, in a crew of 5.
-
He's absolutely a potential blocker at the point there was contact under every interp of the illegal contact rule I've ever seen. Also remember DPI restrictions don't start until the throw unlike OPI. You can maybe argue a hold, but if you are throwing holds on that you better pack a lunch for your 40 flag marathons.
Fine with awarding the score. Not sure this can be flagrant by definition? 2-16-c "FLAGRANT - a foul so severe or extreme that it places an opponent in danger of serious injury, and/or involves violations that are extremely or persistently vulgar or abusive conduct."
So what about this places him in danger of serious injury? Or is it extremely or persistently vulgar or abusive?
It clearly doesn't fit the actual meaning of flagrant in the rule book.
-
I've still got defensive holding then the IP. Both live ball, I'll go with do-over.
-
So, side question, let's say we get off-setting fouls here. Since they DQ'd the guy coming off the sideline (not getting into that debate), even if the fouls offset, can a player still be DQ'd?
Similar to a foul that resulted in DQ but the victimized team for whatever reason decides to decline the foul, can it still lead to a DQ?
-
So, side question, let's say we get off-setting fouls here. Since they DQ'd the guy coming off the sideline (not getting into that debate), even if the fouls offset, can a player still be DQ'd?
Similar to a foul that resulted in DQ but the victimized team for whatever reason decides to decline the foul, can it still lead to a DQ?
Yes, a player that commits an act that leads to disqualification is removed regardless of the yardage being enforced, declined or offset.
In a less controversial example, B56 hits A32 out of bounds and A32 responds by throwing a punch. Both teams are penalized and the yardage offsets, but A32 is disqualified for the action of throwing a punch.
-
So, side question, let's say we get off-setting fouls here. Since they DQ'd the guy coming off the sideline (not getting into that debate), even if the fouls offset, can a player still be DQ'd?
Similar to a foul that resulted in DQ but the victimized team for whatever reason decides to decline the foul, can it still lead to a DQ?
This is 1000% not that play but in a generic scenario yes offsetting penalties still an ejection. Classic example is a punch. You don't get to stay in the game if you are both boxing.
-
So, side question, let's say we get off-setting fouls here. Since they DQ'd the guy coming off the sideline (not getting into that debate), even if the fouls offset, can a player still be DQ'd?
Similar to a foul that resulted in DQ but the victimized team for whatever reason decides to decline the foul, can it still lead to a DQ?
Just for clarity and correct terminology you can't decline the foul, you can decline the penalty enforcement for the foul.
-
Just for clarity and correct terminology you can't decline the foul, you can decline the penalty enforcement for the foul.
To be even more precise, you can decline the yardage penalty. The disqualification is also a penalty that cannot be declined.
-
To be even more precise, you can decline the yardage penalty. The disqualification is also a penalty that cannot be declined.
:thumbup
-
So, side question, let's say we get off-setting fouls here. Since they DQ'd the guy coming off the sideline (not getting into that debate), even if the fouls offset, can a player still be DQ'd?
Similar to a foul that resulted in DQ but the victimized team for whatever reason decides to decline the foul, can it still lead to a DQ?
We call fouls. The penalty is the punishment for that foul. The penalty or yardage offsets, the foul still exists.
-
We call fouls. The penalty is the punishment for that foul. The penalty or yardage offsets, the foul still exists.
Good point, RefJeff, several years ago our crew got chewed out by a losing coach on our way off the field....
"YOU NEVER CALLED A PENALTY AGINST THEM :puke: "
OUR RESPONSE : WHILE WE DON'T COUNT, WE CALLED SEVERAL FOULS AGAINST THEM..YOU JUST DIDN'T WANT TO TURN THEM INTO PENALTIES 8] "