Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10
1
National Federation Discussion / Re: AND THE NEW RULES ARE......
« Last post by GA Umpire on Today at 04:12:03 PM »
 
I'M NOW INTERESTED IN WATCHING THE U-MAINE BLACK BEARS AT THE BIG DANCE. AS OUR WOMEN TAKE ON NC STATE tR:oLl

ESPN II @ 1:30 EDT. PREDICTION : Game will be tied at starting jump and will be 0-0 before it starts :P.

Men's Big Dance has 2 states that have never sent a team. Who can name 'em ??? :puke:


Don't go too far out on a limb, Ralph.  Unfortunately, I see they lost.

STATES:
Alaska and Wyoming?  ???
2
National Federation Discussion / Re: AND THE NEW RULES ARE......
« Last post by Ralph Damren on Today at 11:32:22 AM »
Fantastic.  I always like to know the "why" behind the rules so that we can understand the rules better.
 
There have been many rule changes that were prompted by wild occurrences. Here are some from just the past 10 years :

YEAR     RULE     CHANGE AND WHY........
____    ______   __________________________________________________________

2015    5-1-1b    Added authority for R to correct down ONLY during that series - became a big problem in a championship game.
2014    2-24-9    Status of ball unchanged after IK- B player kick airborne forward pass..once grounded was it a fumble?
2010    3-7-1     Replaced player has 3" to leave - some were flagging if he didn't start to move off when incoming sub arrived.
2009    2-14-2   New definition of scrimmage kick....Alpha XI....need I say more ?
2008    3-5-1     Unused TOs gone in OT...2nd OT..K for FG try...R uses 4 unused TOs to spook K...KICK WAS GOOD!

I've many more, if you guys are interested.....

I'M NOW INTERESTED IN WATCHING THE U-MAINE BLACK BEARS AT THE BIG DANCE. AS OUR WOMEN TAKE ON NC STATE tR:oLl

ESPN II @ 1:30 EDT. PREDICTION : Game will be tied at starting jump and will be 0-0 before it starts :P.

Men's Big Dance has 2 states that have never sent a team. Who can name 'em ??? :puke:
   
3
National Federation Discussion / Re: AND THE NEW RULES ARE......
« Last post by Ralph Damren on Today at 11:03:43 AM »
Hey Ralph, was there any discussion this year about allowing the passer to spike the ball from the shotgun formation?  What do you think that this adoption will EVER be made?
It once again made it to a floor vote. It once again failed. IMHO, there were three strikes against it :

(1) Gives passer a wider range of vision of possible receivers;
(2) a bad airborne snap could be spiked to prevent snap;
(3) NFL feels the same and restricts a snap under snapper to spike.

When we put 7-5-2d EXP in back in 1995, #1 & 2 was our main concern. It still is. This proposed rule lost some steam a couple of years age when word from NFL came that they had same concerns.
4
NCAA Discussion / Re: Keep our minds working...
« Last post by NVFOA_Ump on Yesterday at 07:49:55 PM »
What needs to happen is to not have bulletins from any year other than the current year. The sec-ed needs to go through all currently available bulletins and determine which are still valid and which are not. The ones that are still valid need to then be added to the A.R. section of the rule book. Then each year as rules and interpretations changes, the sec-ed can determine which ARs to remove. If a bulletin is issued during the season, it either gets added as an AR the next year or gets disregarded. That way officials only need a current rule book and the current yearís bulletins.

That's close to what we've been told actually happens. The bulletins' priority "clarification(s)" (rules changes and AR edits) are added/edited into the existing rules when a new book is issued and only the current ones ( 1 or 2 years of bulletins) still apply.  Those "go away" when the next printed book is officially issued.  We do not and can not reasonably maintain our own training level and train new officials based in part on an endless supply of bulletins, some of which change previous ones.  That being said, for us high school officials here in MA, it's a bit of a moot point.
5
National Federation Discussion / Re: AND THE NEW RULES ARE......
« Last post by bossman72 on Yesterday at 07:30:59 PM »
Let's hope NOT.  Doing so would likely seriously reduce the timing clarity ("immediately") of the NFHS 7-5-2-e Exception 

Only for people without common sense...
6
NCAA Discussion / Re: Keep our minds working...
« Last post by ElvisLives on Yesterday at 06:07:02 PM »
What needs to happen is to not have bulletins from any year other than the current year. The sec-ed needs to go through all currently available bulletins and determine which are still valid and which are not. The ones that are still valid need to then be added to the A.R. section of the rule book. Then each year as rules and interpretations changes, the sec-ed can determine which ARs to remove. If a bulletin is issued during the season, it either gets added as an AR the next year or gets disregarded. That way officials only need a current rule book and the current yearís bulletins.

Concur.  (Think itíll happen? 🙂)
7
National Federation Discussion / Re: AND THE NEW RULES ARE......
« Last post by AlUpstateNY on Yesterday at 02:40:26 PM »
Hey Ralph, was there any discussion this year about allowing the passer to spike the ball from the shotgun formation?  What do you think that this adoption will EVER be made?

Let's hope NOT.  Doing so would likely seriously reduce the timing clarity ("immediately") of the NFHS 7-5-2-e Exception 
8
National Federation Discussion / Re: AND THE NEW RULES ARE......
« Last post by Curious on Yesterday at 01:34:49 PM »
Hey Ralph, was there any discussion this year about allowing the passer to spike the ball from the shotgun formation?  What do you think that this adoption will EVER be made?
9
NCAA Discussion / Re: Keep our minds working...
« Last post by Legacy Zebra on Yesterday at 12:34:32 PM »
What needs to happen is to not have bulletins from any year other than the current year. The sec-ed needs to go through all currently available bulletins and determine which are still valid and which are not. The ones that are still valid need to then be added to the A.R. section of the rule book. Then each year as rules and interpretations changes, the sec-ed can determine which ARs to remove. If a bulletin is issued during the season, it either gets added as an AR the next year or gets disregarded. That way officials only need a current rule book and the current yearís bulletins.
10
NCAA Discussion / Re: Keep our minds working...
« Last post by ElvisLives on Yesterday at 11:37:24 AM »
I agree that it's to say the least non-intuitive to treat striding players as "airborne." That is not what most English speakers familiar with football would assume. Based on the common connotation of the word "airborne" and the way ball carriers typically play football, almost everyone's most likely guess would be that "airborne" means a player who is diving or jumping as opposed to running on his feet.

So rather than awkwardly define "airborne" to include "striding" in an eight-year-old bulletin, wouldn't it be easier to define forward progress in terms of "airborne OR striding" players, and spell it out in 4-2-4-d explicitly?

Yeah, probably a number of ways to skin that cat, but it is a cat that needs skinning.

Robert

PS  If I didn't have a day job, I'd weed through the bulletins since around 2000 and try to figure out which ones, or which parts of each them, are, indeed, superseded or have become null & void.  But that's a task.  Maybe even something the Sec-Ed should do on an annual basis.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10