Recent Posts

91

National Federation Discussion / Re: Subtle Change in Manual

« Last post by hef333 on July 01, 2026, 02:45:48 PM »

OK, been an umpire 30+ years, don't chime in here often but read it alot.....here are my .02 from PA

Umpire under the post on 4 man and 5 man within 15 yard line has been a no brainier for years...you can easily see the snapper from there (if I can at 60+, you can too)  ...and makes it far easier to have the sidelines covered without a massive fire drill....

Now we do have some very good kickers in our league, and tries from 40+ have happened during the season....I personally don't know how I will be able to see that, especially if the coaches catch on and place LB's in a spot where the snapper is blocked.....I think the change should include a yard line distance.

On kickoffs I have no issue moving to the 50...that's what is done in 7 man mechanics during playoffs anyway....BUT...in a 5 man game putting 1 official on the 50 and 3 on the Goal Line.....is ...to put it mildly...difficult    ....that leaves massive amount of non coverage for the much used in recent years "pooch kicks"....and trying to cover that on the run from the goal line to the 20-40 yard line will be very difficult....

92

Texas Topics / Re: Ok, silly but..

« Last post by GA Umpire on June 30, 2026, 10:44:38 PM »

Saw on the NFHS side of the house the discussion on FCK restraining line for Team B when the FC occurred inside the B-10.
Holes in the rule or just another sport where the referee has to carry a can of Vanishing Spray to mark the 10 yards the defense must retreat from for the free [fair catch] kick? 

You set the chains.

93

Texas Topics / Ok, silly but..

« Last post by TxJim on June 30, 2026, 10:08:22 PM »

Saw on the NFHS side of the house the discussion on FCK restraining line for Team B when the FC occurred inside the B-10.
Holes in the rule or just another sport where the referee has to carry a can of Vanishing Spray to mark the 10 yards the defense must retreat from for the free [fair catch] kick? 

94

NCAA Discussion / Re: OFFENSIVE FACEMASK

« Last post by ElvisLives on June 30, 2026, 05:15:05 PM »

THANK YOU GENTILEMEN

You are welcome. That’s why we are here.

95

NCAA Discussion / Re: OFFENSIVE FACEMASK

« Last post by Navcom on June 30, 2026, 04:07:06 PM »

THANK YOU GENTILEMEN

96

National Federation Discussion / Re: Fair catch free kick and restraining lines.

« Last post by NVFOA_Ump on June 30, 2026, 01:29:22 PM »

Unfortunately, early in my career, I called several varsity games on fields like that.

I had 2 games on field ("natural grass") like that last year.

97

NCAA Discussion / Re: Clock and Play clock question

« Last post by ElvisLives on June 29, 2026, 07:50:40 PM »

Well, in situations with a penalty administration and a helmet off, there is ambiguity between 3-2-4-c-1, and 3-3-10-b-1.
But, all my sources tell me that Shaw’s intent is that the defensive helmet off/injury governs, and the play clock is set to 40.
I’m OK with that, but fix the rules to say that, for goodness sake. It ain’t that difficult.

98

NCAA Discussion / Re: Clock and Play clock question

« Last post by Whodatboy18 on June 29, 2026, 06:56:41 PM »

From all of the AR I have seen, the precedent is that if the defense has an injury or helmet off at the end of the play, the play clock will default to 40 seconds. Nothing supersedes that except for a team timeout or two minute timeout.

99

National Federation Discussion / Re: Fair catch free kick and restraining lines.

« Last post by bama_stripes on June 29, 2026, 03:57:38 PM »

Have you ever seen/played on a field that only has lines every 10 yards? I've been on plenty that don't have hash marks every yard, but those are officially optional.

I'd imagine you'd only really see missing 5 yard lines at some pee-wee field where you're probably lucky they have any lines at all, and there's no hope of any of them actually being straight.

Unfortunately, early in my career, I called several varsity games on fields like that.

100

Texas Topics / Re: Raise your hand….

« Last post by dammitbobby on June 29, 2026, 03:16:30 PM »

Pereira was unable to attend, someone else filled in (can't recall his name), and he was an excellent motivational speaker.

Only other comments I have, are that I was super disappointed that there was no six-man breakout session at all (along with not a single six-man specific question on the test), and for the massive amount of cash TASO is now getting by making everyone pay for their 'share' of the annual meeting through the price increase, there was zero evidence that any of those funds went into improving the state meeting experience. Don't get me wrong, I thought it was put together very well, and didn't see anything notable to be critical about (minus the now-defunct six-man breakout), but I did expect them to put at least some of their newly found piggy bank funds back into the state meeting. Instead, it looks like those funds will be used for... other things.