RefStripes.com

Football Officiating => National Federation Discussion => Topic started by: jason on October 08, 2010, 12:31:22 PM

Title: Back Side Coverage
Post by: jason on October 08, 2010, 12:31:22 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1zg2FA31tE (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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: cincybearcat on October 08, 2010, 01:34:42 PM
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
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: Mike L on October 08, 2010, 01:46:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: Reff54 on October 08, 2010, 01:56:30 PM
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....
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: AlUpstateNY on October 08, 2010, 02:44:48 PM
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?
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: Pivo Ref on October 08, 2010, 02:53:35 PM
Was it raining? Black pants can be worn in rain.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: JugglingReferee on October 08, 2010, 10:40:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: 110 on October 09, 2010, 07:56:37 AM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: JugglingReferee on October 09, 2010, 07:57:53 AM
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.  ;)
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: 110 on October 09, 2010, 09:29:49 AM
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!
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: WingOfficial on October 09, 2010, 02:13:42 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1zg2FA31tE (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!   ^flag
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: LarryW60 on October 10, 2010, 11:59:03 PM
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?
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: MrFbOfficial on October 11, 2010, 08:38:40 AM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: Jackhammer on October 11, 2010, 12:01:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: jason on October 11, 2010, 03:53:56 PM
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?

Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: Welpe on October 11, 2010, 04:01:28 PM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: VALJ on October 11, 2010, 09:06:29 PM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: NAUmp on October 11, 2010, 11:06:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: Jackhammer on October 12, 2010, 09:59:39 AM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: Welpe on October 12, 2010, 10:46:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: jason on October 12, 2010, 01:13:10 PM
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?
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: RickKY on October 12, 2010, 02:47:02 PM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: Reedy on October 14, 2010, 04:33:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: GoGoGo on October 15, 2010, 06:01:51 AM
Why is your focus on trialing the run?
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: James on October 19, 2010, 04:23:51 AM
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).
Title: Re: Back Side Coverage
Post by: RickKY on October 20, 2010, 08:53:42 AM
Why is your focus on trialing the run?

I watch for players following the play who may still be trying to catch the runner, or may be giving up on the play.  This is where blocks in the back and unnecessary hits usually happen.  Once the play is over, look for cheap hits around the pile.   I think having a wider field of vision helps you in these cases.  Don't work too hard to stay up with the runner.  Let them go by, then keep an eye on the pack trailing the play.  Also, as the umpire I generally watch the middle of the field into the play if it's in the side zone.  Wings and BJ have everything else covered.  If I move down field the R is still behind me cleaning up.

In 5-man, if the play is in the side zone, the wing, U. R and BJ should have the end of the play traingulated.  The opposite wing has back side.