RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: boydmarq on December 30, 2010, 10:28:25 PM
-
NC vs. Tennessee. North Carolina starts the first overtime at the 12 1/2 yard line due to a roughing a kicker the penalty as time expires in regulation.
Can anyone point me to the page in the rulebook that addresses this?
-
The penalty was for uns conduct not roughing the kicker. FR134
-
The penalty was for uns conduct not roughing the kicker. FR134
thanks to the talking heads the world thought it was RTK.
-
Ok... that makes sense... when NC snapped the ball and spiked the ball, why was it a 5 yd foul for substitution? There seemed to be more than 11 on the field when the ball was snapped.
-
the extras were running off That is a simple illegal substitution foul 5 yard penalty
-
I must of miss counted I had 12 on the field
-
I just looked at it There were 12 in the formation
-
[yt=425,350]ZJm2g2OpWhg[/yt]
-
I just looked at it There were 12 in the formation
...and at least 5 more trying to get off the field. Talk about a cluster!
-
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20101231/SPORTS0601/12310352/Bowl+loss+leaves+bad+taste+for+Vols
Vols defensive end Gerald Williams threw down his helmet after the tying field goal — a penalty that was assessed in the first overtime.
-
One other thing I noticed when they ran the replay series in the intermission. The play clock was set to :40, never ran, then reset to :25 and never ran either. It was Charlie Foxtrot all the way around.
UT deserved to lose it though. All the had to do was get a first down.
-
...UT deserved to lose it though....
...couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch! nAnA
-
12 or more on the field after the snap why didn't any one think about ill. participation? Would this not be the correct penalty for this situation? 15 yds as opposed to 5?
-
12 or more on the field after the snap why didn't any one think about ill. participation? Would this not be the correct penalty for this situation? 15 yds as opposed to 5?
Tennessee fan? ;)
-
I dont care for Tenn. Just care about calling the game correctly.
-
given that at least one sub (maybe more) rushed to the LOS without a huddle, should we have gone into the "holding pattern" with the U over the ball allowing the defense to "match up"? If so, they game would have ended without a snap.
Your thoughts?
-
This situation exposed a big problem with the NCAA rules IMHO. Essentially, as long as the snapper and QB can get together and make an exchange and get the ball spiked nothing else matters. You can have an ill formation, everyone moving, some still downfield beyond the line, some coming in and some going out and all the offense will suffer is a five yard loss. I would like to see the NCAA address this situation as the NFL has and assess a required time runoff so the offense cannot take advantage of this situation. At the very least in this situation I would have given them the harshest penalty I could under the rules which would have been 15 for illegal participation.
And I do agree that with the mass substitution that was attempted that the Umpire should have held the snap.
-
I also agree with the U over the ball. And I agree with the harshest penalty. This I'm sure will be a topic of discussion in the off season.
-
The "experts" in the chatroom last night agreed:
1 - the best thing would have been for the U to come up on the ball. Time would have expired and we would not be talking about this.
2 - There were 12 in the formation and this appears to fit the definition of illegal participation so should have been 15 yards not 5. (and IR could have helped with this but failed to)
3 - We need a rule change. (But we on this board have known that for some time. We have discussed situations just like this on this board several times. Team A is able to deliberately foul and gain significant advantage with the clock)
-
missed you guys last was at buffalo wild wings watching game but sound was on the sa/dall game but i agree with you guys.
-
williebe - I'm just messing with you. I hope you saw through that. And yes, I agree we want the game called right.
99 - agree 100%.
Big 10 crew (I think) - no doubt have all called games bigger than any I've worked. But personally, I thought they had the deer-in-the-headlights look for the final 31 seconds. JMO.
Bankerref - agree 100% and that same thought crossed my mind live and in real time.
TXMike - the only thing I could add to what you said is to pose a question to #2 - is this reviewable?
-
Reviewable 12-3-5-a
This was a fine example of 2 less than stellar teams making mistakes that drug the crew down with them. How many times does it happen that we "play down" to the level of the teams. Seems that may have happened here.
These guys had a "Waterloo" moment. I suspect they learned from it. I hope all of us who had the luxury of sitting back, far from the public eye and the chaos of the environment, learned as well.
And while we will likely never be privy to it, I suspect their overall grade will be very good. They made some great calls and non-calls in the game.
-
No problem Rulesman, Have A Happy New Year.
Couldnt agree with you more TxMike.
-
One other thing I noticed when they ran the replay series in the intermission. The play clock was set to :40, never ran, then reset to :25 and never ran either. It was Charlie Foxtrot all the way around.
In the video earlier in this thread, it appears there are two clocks counting down, which appear to represent the game clock on the left and play clock on the right. During the last running play, the clock on the left (game clock) is ~half sec ahead of the one on the right. If that is the case and those images are valid for the clocks, the play clock should have been turned off at the end of that down. Instead, when the right clock gets to 8 sec, it stops and resets to 40. Perhaps the play clock operator realized his error. But I think he should have reset to 00. Maybe he couldn't do that.
-
Couple observations:
A) Announcers were calling for a UR on a defender who was blocked onto a tackler. Can't these guys take a level I clinic to get a clue?
B) I think Tennessee screwed up the options on the coin toss. They elected defence, which put the ball into the opposition hands at the 12.5 yard line. Had they taken offence, they woulda been at the 40, but the opposition at the 25 on the following play.
C) I thought once a play happened, the previous play couldn't be reviewed?
-
Couple observations:
A) Announcers were calling for a UR on a defender who was blocked onto a tackler. Can't these guys take a level I clinic to get a clue?
B) I think Tennessee screwed up the options on the coin toss. They elected defence, which put the ball into the opposition hands at the 12.5 yard line. Had they taken offence, they woulda been at the 40, but the opposition at the 25 on the following play.
C) I thought once a play happened, the previous play couldn't be reviewed?
Even announcers know about being blocked into. I just think they were not seeing it
Tenn was in trouble any way they went on the toss. Start from the 40 and you might not even get a FG which makes it easier for your opponent
The crew was apparently buzzed before the snap and could not prevent it from getting off. That does happen from time to time Does not matter when they get it stopped just when they were buzzed
-
A) Announcers were calling for a UR on a defender who was blocked onto a tackler. Can't these guys take a level I clinic to get a clue?
After the game was over and they were replaying the final sequences in regulation, one of the announcers kept griping about the "late hit". One of the other announcers, very subtly, said the Tennessee player was helped by #?? from NC. It was almost like he didn't want to bring it up and challenge the other announcer, but it needed to be said and reiterated.
-
Reviewable 12-3-5-a
Got it, Mike. Thx. Reading 12-3-5a literally, let's take this comedy of errors a step farther. I think the call on the field was ILS. That said, replay got the clock right, but missed the 12 on the field. The ILS should have been overruled and made into ILP. Looks to me like the deer-in-the-headlights look extended into the replay booth.
-
There may be some confusion here. Apparently at least 1 conference IT guide says that if Illeg Sub is called IR cannot be called to determine if it should have been illegal participation.
-
I just read Dave Parry's comments on the issue. You are right. Confusion reigns galore! That's why I asked if it was reviewable. I didn't think so, but wasn't certain.
And since when do the conferences determine what is reviewable and what is not? Hmmm...........
-
Not surprisingly, the Tenn coach wanted the U to get over the ball during the mass confusion play. And then admits he was not going to sub anyway!!!!
http://www.govolsxtra.com/news/2010/dec/31/head-official-backs-refs-for-music-city/ (http://www.govolsxtra.com/news/2010/dec/31/head-official-backs-refs-for-music-city/)
Head official backs refs for Music City
By Andrew Gribble
NASHVILLE - By the book, Thursday night's Music City Bowl officials got all the controversial calls at the end of regulation right, national coordinator of officials David Parry said Friday.
The book, however, may be reworked as soon as February when the NCAA rules committee convenes for its annual meetings. The illegal substitution penalty that ultimately aided North Carolina and crushed Tennessee in the waning moments of regulation in the Tar Heels' 30-27, double-overtime win at LP Field likely will be a hot topic and could provide potential grounds for the NCAA to take a page out of the NFL's rulebook, Parry said.
"That play will be shown and discussed," Parry, a former Big Ten official, said in a phone interview with the News Sentinel.
"It seems a little awkward that a team can commit a foul and really they gained an advantage."
Tar Heels quarterback T.J. Yates would not have spiked the ball in time if he waited for a mixture of extra offensive players and special teamers to get off the field in the frantic moments following Shaun Draughn's 7-yard run, which left 13 seconds on the clock. He ignored the flurry of players, including a kicker and holder positioned behind him, and downed the ball with one second to spare, prompting a 5-yard penalty for illegal substitution but not signaling the end of the game.
In the NFL, 10 seconds are run off the clock when the offense commits a penalty in the game's final two minutes as a means to prevent teams from doing what North Carolina did Thursday: gain an extra timeout by stopping the clock with its own infraction.
The college game, as Tar Heels coach Butch Davis said Thursday, has a number of different rules than the NFL, and that just so happened to be one of them.
"The play, as it was officiated, was officiated correctly," Parry said.
That play, of course, required a second look.
Referee Dennis Lipski, the head official of the Big Ten crew selected for the game, originally announced the game was over because the clock initially hit zero after Yates' spike. A replay booth review, which Lipski announced would be undertaken after UT players and coaches had already streamed onto the field, correctly concluded that one second remained when the ball hit the ground, allowing the Tar Heels to run one more play.
According to Section 1, Article 3B in the 2009-10 NCAA book of rules and interpretations, the game is ended and the score is final when the referee so declares.
Lipski's words, Parry said, weren't an end-all, be-all declaration. It was nothing more than lip service.
"Just the fact that he waves his arm and the game is over usually means the game is over," Parry said. "But there can be extenuating circumstances usually that come through replay that can correct that."
Determining whether North Carolina committed an illegal substitution penalty, which merits a 5-yard loss, or an illegal participation penalty, which sets the guilty team 15 yards back from the previous line of scrimmage, also was properly officiated, Parry said.
The difference between the two penalties centers on if the extra players were attempting to leave the field rather than actually participating in the play, Parry said.
When UT had 13 players on the field in the final moments of its equally heartbreaking loss at LSU in October, it was flagged for illegal participation.
Much like after the LSU game, UT coach Derek Dooley expressed disappointment over his defense not receiving ample time to respond to the offense's substitutions.
"When they ran guys on the field, the field-goal unit, the rule states that the umpire should step over the ball and allow a substitution to happen," Dooley said. "I don't know. I guess there wasn't enough time to do that."
Dooley said UT did not plan to respond with substitutes because "we had our call ready. We were ready to play."
Parry said that an umpire will typically move away from the ball if the center is ready to snap and the defense indicates it's not going to adjust its on-field personnel.
In an e-mail, Big Ten Assistant Commissioner of Communications Scott Chipman said the conference "does not comment on judgment calls," which has been standard protocol for it over the years.
"What I saw," Parry said, "was done correctly."
-
..."What I saw," Parry said, "was done correctly."
...although completely ignoring the fact there were 12 in the formation at the snap. Guess he did not see the whole play.