Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10
51
Texas Topics / TASO Officiating Philosophies and NCAA Officiating Standards
« Last post by ElvisLives on June 17, 2026, 11:16:33 PM »
In chatting with some fellow TASO officials, it became clear that they were unsure if, for Texas High School Football, they are supposed to follow the TASO Officiating Philosophies; if they are supposed to follow the NCAA Officiating Standards; or if they are supposed follow both.
The big problem came about when the NCAA extracted their Standards from the CCA Manuals, and inserted them into the Rules Book. While this action was intended to expose coaches to the Standards directly (since very few also had CCA Manuals), it also placed two separate documents directly in the hands of TASO officials, both of which address many common topics; each address some unique topics; and each offer expanded guidelines on selected topics. This has led to the confusion I mentioned above.
Let me try to clear this up.
TASO’s official position is that the TASO Philosophies take precedence over the NCAA Standards. For any conflicts between the two, the TASO Philosophies govern for Texas High School Football. If the TASO Philosophies don’t explicitly cover a situation, then using the NCAA Standards would not draw criticism from TASO, and an official doing so would be supported by TASO.
So, the short answer is that TASO officials are to follow the TASO Officiating Philosophies, and where the Philosophies don’t offer any guidance on a topic, the NCAA Standards may be used. Where the two documents are in conflict, the TASO Officiating Philosophies are to govern. Where one document may offer expanded guidelines on a topic, those guidelines - where not in conflict with the other document, may be used.
It is very important to understand that the Philosophies and the Standards are guidelines - not hard and fast rules - which may be used to assist in making rulings on the field. These guidelines should be used as, and when, appropriate for the level of contest being played. The higher the talent and skill level of the players, the more tightly these guidelines should be used. In contests with lesser skilled players, the limits of these philosophies/standards should be adjusted (increased/decreased) to allow for smooth game play, while always maintaining player safety.
I hope this helps.
52
National Federation Discussion / Re: 3-4-7 play
« Last post by NVFOA_Ump on June 16, 2026, 08:12:16 PM »
Each designated representative should be given the option if neither one wants to delay the clock then we are going on the ready.


We've ALWAYS been instructed that when an option is obvious do not let a team make a mistake.  IMHO this one is 100% obvious, on the snap, no offering of options needed.
53
National Federation Discussion / Re: 3-4-7 play
« Last post by sczeebra on June 16, 2026, 03:47:59 PM »
Each designated representative should be given the option if neither one wants to delay the clock then we are going on the ready.
54
National Federation Discussion / Re: 3-4-7 play
« Last post by NVFOA_Ump on June 16, 2026, 11:25:45 AM »
I’ll give it a try: A 1/10 @ B-22.  Play clock = :25.  Game clock 1:49, starts on snap if B so chooses, otherwise on RFP.


Agree in part.  A 1st and 10 @ B-22, play clock @ 25 but no options on game clock.  It's on the snap.
55
Texas Topics / Re: Proposal coming for home playoff games
« Last post by dammitbobby on June 16, 2026, 08:59:09 AM »
Unless you have some information not readily available on the web, I think you mixed up what the proposal might be with what you'd like it to be.  All we know at this point is the Standing Committee on Athletics passed a proposal in concept and instructed UIL staff to draft appropriate language changes regarding home field advantage for football (4A and below), volleyball, basketball and soccer. No where does the proposal mention any conditions using the home chapter that I could find in documents.

What you might also be more concerned about was a written proposal submitted by the public that got no action by the Athletic Committee was "to allow districts to utilize non-chapter officials for regular season varsity contests."

No additional info here - I was just opining that this would be a good opportunity for TASO to try to get officials who support that location the rest of the year, for it to be expected/required that they cover that first round game. Even without TASO leadership, if enough chapters had the spine to agree to this, (meaning they wouldn't agree to take any games outside their home servicing area for the first round) then it would benefit everyone.
56
National Federation Discussion / Re: 3-4-7 play
« Last post by bama_stripes on June 15, 2026, 06:51:26 AM »
I’ll give it a try: A 1/10 @ B-22.  Play clock = :25.  Game clock 1:49, starts on snap if B so chooses, otherwise on RFP.
57
National Federation Discussion / 3-4-7 play
« Last post by sj on June 14, 2026, 08:14:33 PM »
Here's one: A 3/4 @ B16. 4th quarter. Under two minutes. Team B trails by 2 points. Running back A31 is tackled inbounds at the B14. During the play, B93 is flagged for a major facemask foul at the line of scrimmage. After the play is over, A64 is flagged when he gets off of the ground and overtly shoves B93. The game clock is stopped at 1:49. No timeouts remain for either team. Include the game clock status options.   
58
National Federation Discussion / Re: Crazy scenario
« Last post by riffraft on June 13, 2026, 07:16:34 PM »
Look at Table 8-1. 1 point safety is listed as a successful try.

Teach me to assume.  One of the reason, I love this forum, always something to learn.
59
National Federation Discussion / Re: Crazy scenario
« Last post by SCline on June 12, 2026, 09:44:50 PM »
Look at Table 8-1. 1 point safety is listed as a successful try.
60
Texas Topics / Re: Proposal coming for home playoff games
« Last post by TxJim on June 12, 2026, 11:57:26 AM »
This is potentially good news for officials - UIL is going to have a proposal for home field advantage (4A and below) for playoffs at the next UIL Legislative Council meeting. Ideally, the proposal would require officials to be from the chapter that services the home team, same as in the regular season.

Unless you have some information not readily available on the web, I think you mixed up what the proposal might be with what you'd like it to be.  All we know at this point is the Standing Committee on Athletics passed a proposal in concept and instructed UIL staff to draft appropriate language changes regarding home field advantage for football (4A and below), volleyball, basketball and soccer. No where does the proposal mention any conditions using the home chapter that I could find in documents.

What you might also be more concerned about was a written proposal submitted by the public that got no action by the Athletic Committee was "to allow districts to utilize non-chapter officials for regular season varsity contests."
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10