NFHS 2013 Rule Update 7-26-13

[Sumstine]

2013 Football Rules Interpretations
Friday, July 26, 2013


See below post for the strike out version. I have removed my post to avoid further confusion.

[bama_stripes]

Page 83, Rule 5-2-1:
5-2-1: The offensive team shall be awarded a new series of downs when any one of the following occurs:
a. Penalty for defensive pass interference is accepted.

When do the clarifications to the clarifications come out?

[Magician]

When do the clarifications to the clarifications come out?

You aren't seeing the formatting in this post. That line has been removed.

[Atlanta Blue]

Without the formatting, this gets very confusing.  Here is a link to the original:

http://www.nfhs.org/content.aspx?id=9418

[bama_stripes]

You aren't seeing the formatting in this post. That line has been removed.

"I see", said the blind man.     

"Page 41, Rule 3-4 -Clarification: When an airborne receiver is carried out of bounds, the clock shall stop unless the receiver is carried out backwards and his forward progress was stopped inbounds."

Why does this not say "backwards or sidewards"?  That's what the PowerPoint shows.

[TampaSteve]

"second half choices" - wasnt this removed a few years ago?
Now, it's back in?

[HLinNC]

No, as stated earlier, the strike throughs and underlines don't show in the post.  Just go to the original link.

Mods, it might be best to remove Matt's text and just put the link in there.

[maven]

2013 NFHS Football Rules Book Clarifications
(Underlining shows additions; strikethrough shows deletions.)
Page 41, Rule 3-4 -Clarification:  When an airborne receiver is carried out of bounds, the clock shall stop unless the receiver is carried out backwards and his forward progress was stopped inbounds.
Page 53, Rule 6-1-8a:
ART. 8 . . . A free kick shall not be kicked out of bounds between the goal lines untouched inbounds by R. If it is, R has the following choices:
a.  Accept a 5-yard penalty from the previous spot and have K rekick unless Rule 6-5-4 has been invoked.
b.  Put the ball in play at the inbounds spot 25 yards beyond the previous spot.
c.  Decline the penalty and put the ball in play at the inbounds spot.
Page 73, Rule 9-8-1:
ART. 1 . . . No coach, substitute, athletic trainer or other team attendant shall act in an unsportsmanlike manner once the game officials assume authority for the contest. Examples are, but not limited to:
m.  Failure to properly wear legal or required player equipment during a down. See Rule 3-6-2d for failure to properly wear legal or required player equipment when the ball is about to become live.
PENALTY:  Nonplayer foul (Art. 1m) – (S27, S23) – 5 yards.
Page 75, RULES 10-1-6, 7:
ART. 6 . . . The following fouls by A include loss of the right to replay a down:
a.  Illegally handing the ball forward.
b.  Illegal forward pass.
c.  Forward pass interference.
c.  d. Illegal touching of forward pass by an ineligible.
ART. 7 . . . The following fouls by B give A an automatic first down:
a.  Roughing the kicker or holder.
b.  Roughing the passer.
c.  Roughing the snapper.
d.  Forward pass interference.
Page 83, Rule 5-2-1:
5-2-1: The offensive team shall be awarded a new series of downs when any one of the following occurs:
a.  Penalty for defensive pass interference is accepted.
a.  b. Offensive team recovers a scrimmage kick (field-goal attempt) between the goal lines after it has been touched first by the defensive team beyond the neutral zone.
b.  c. Defensive team is guilty of roughing the kicker, place-kick holder, snapper or passer.
Page 84, 3.1.1 SITUATION P:
3.1.1 SITUATION P: In overtime play with fourth and goal from B’s 24-yard line, B1 interferes during a legal forward pass. RULING: Fourth First down and goal for A on the 12-yard line if the penalty is accepted.
2013 NFHS High School Football Rules Simplified and Illustrated
(Underlining shows additions; strikethrough shows deletions.)
Page 19, 6-5-6 Penalty:
K commits kick-catching interference (MechaniGram A). If R accepts the foul for kick-catching interference, the 15-yard penalty may be enforced from the spot of the foul. chooses an awarded fair catch, the 15-yard penalty may be enforced from the spot of the awarded fair catch. R may then choose a free kick (MechaniGram B).
Page 90, 3-3-4b:
In the MechaniGram – QUARTER NOT EXTENDED FOR UNTIMED DOWN.
In the paragraph – 3-3-4b  ….The period will not be extended with an untimed down if the penalty is accepted. An unsportsmanlike ….
Page 128, 6-5-6:
6-5-6 …. R may choose an awarded fair catch at the spot of the foul with no a 15-yard distance penalty or have the distance penalty enforced from the previous spot and rekick.

2012 and 2013 NFHS Football Game Officials Manual Clarifications
(Underlining shows additions; strikethrough shows deletions.)
Page 14, II. UMPIRE:
B.  Second-half choices:
     1.  On signal from referee, escort captain(s) to center of field.
     2.  Remain with referee and captains and check on options given teams to ensure accuracy.
Page 14, III. LINESMAN, LINE JUDGE AND BACK JUDGE: 
A.  Pregame: and start of second half:
Page 14, IV. ALL GAME OFFICIALS:
B.  Second-half choices:
     1.  Use same mechanic as used for pregame.
     1.  The game official – escorting the team with the second-half choice – obtains from that  team’s head coach its second-half choice and communicates same to the referee.
     2.  The referee then obtains the opposing team’s response to the second-half choice team’s choice from the game official escorting that team.
     3.  2.  After choices are completed, come together at center of field for any final instructions.
     4.  3.  Hustle to kickoff positions. Linesman, umpire and judge(s) clear sidelines before going to kickoff position.
     5.  Following the mandatory three-minute warm-up period after the halftime intermission expires, both teams assume their respective free-kick formations.

[VALJ]

SITUATION 2 (9.4.3): B54’s helmet comes completely off while trying to legally tackle runner A32, who continues running after breaking free from B54’s grasp. After disengaging, B54 puts his helmet back on, then resumes his pursuit of runner A32. B54 is then contacted (blocked) by A76. RULING: B54 should be flagged for an “illegal participation” foul as soon as he resumes his pursuit of the runner, or otherwise participates in the play.

B54 puts the helmet back on and starts chasing the runner at the 50, and then tackles he runner at the B35.  Is B54 illegally participating in multiple spots?  Seems like it to me, but that "or" makes me wonder...

[Curious]

More "hemetless" player questions unasked/unanswered (in my mind) by 7/26 interpretations:

A1 loses his helmet/no foul by opponent:

Situation: COP occurs. A1 runs down B player running for TD and makes tackle.
•   Where is penalty enforced?
•   Do/can we award TD?
•   What if, during helmet-less A1’s pursuit of the B player, he is blocked (above the waist and from the front) by B2?  Foul?  Can you “foul” a player who is ineligible to participate? Do B players have just A1 tackle their player?

Eligible A1 loses his helmet/no foul by opponent and stops participating:

Situation: QB A2, throws him the ball.
•   Since A1 is helmetless (ineligible to participate), does this make the pass illegal (7-5-2 Table (c) throwing to a location not occupied by an eligible receiver)?
•   Does he remain “eligible” throughout the down (7-6-d)?
•   If, behind the LOS, A1 does not attempt to catch the pass (just lets it hit him in the chest), is IT ignored as with any other lineman? 
•   If, behind the LOS, A1 does not attempt to catch the pass (just lets it hit him in the chest), is IP ignored? 
•   If A1 is beyond the LOS when QB A2 throws the ball towards another eligible receiver, is A1 illegally downfield?
 •   If A1 is beyond the LOS when QB A2 throws the ball towards him, and he makes no attempt to catch the ball, is IP ignored?
•   If A1 catches the ball and starts running, is the play dead (4-2-2k)?  Technically, his helmet came off BEFORE he came into possession of the ball…
•   If The play is NOT automatically dead, and A1 catches the ball and starts running for a TD, and B1 tackles him, is B1 guilty of a personal foul?  Does B just let A score?   

[JKinGA29]

Good questions!  My two cents...

With regard to your first scenario:
- Although there still isn't a clear response from NFHS as far as whether you can have multiple fouls for participation by the same player, the definition of Participation in 2-30 suggests to me that separate acts are separate instances of Participation.  Since he definitely participated by making the tackle, I would enforce the penalty from the end of the run.
- I assume you're referring to the authority granted in 9-9-1.  I would be hard-pressed to apply that to this situation since that rule specifically applies to situations where there is no specific rule coverage, and there is specific rules coverage for this scenario.
- This is a foul.  Rule 9-4-3l doesn't delineate between players participating legally and those who aren't.  Hitting a helmetless player is a foul.

With regard to your second scenario, remember that a player whose helmet comes off commits a foul by participating.  This does not make him an ineligible receiver for the purposes of rule 7-5.  If he's eligible at the start of the down, he's eligible throughout the down.  It is only a foul if he participates.

If he has run his route when his helmet comes off and freezes, then he has not committed a foul.  If his helmet comes off and then he continues running his route, then he is committing Illegal Participation.

If he freezes downfield and the ball is thrown to him and he doesn't make an attempt to catch it, there is no foul.  If he makes an attempt to bat or catch the ball, then he is committing Illegal Participation.  If a B player hits him, he has technically committed Pass Interference and a Personal Foul, but I would just be inclined to call it the latter since the fouls are the same and explaining the DPI call to Team B's coach could get interesting.

If he possesses the ball as a helmetless player, I'm calling it dead.  You are technically correct that 4-2-2k is worded poorly, but let common sense prevail and follow the intent of the rule which is to not have a player in possession of a live ball without a helmet.

[Atlanta Blue]

Good questions!  My two cents...

With regard to your first scenario:
- Although there still isn't a clear response from NFHS as far as whether you can have multiple fouls for participation by the same player, the definition of Participation in 2-30 suggests to me that separate acts are separate instances of Participation.  Since he definitely participated by making the tackle, I would enforce the penalty from the end of the run.
- I assume you're referring to the authority granted in 9-9-1.  I would be hard-pressed to apply that to this situation since that rule specifically applies to situations where there is no specific rule coverage, and there is specific rules coverage for this scenario.
- This is a foul.  Rule 9-4-3l doesn't delineate between players participating legally and those who aren't.  Hitting a helmetless player is a foul.

With regard to your second scenario, remember that a player whose helmet comes off commits a foul by participating.  This does not make him an ineligible receiver for the purposes of rule 7-5.  If he's eligible at the start of the down, he's eligible throughout the down.  It is only a foul if he participates.

If he has run his route when his helmet comes off and freezes, then he has not committed a foul.  If his helmet comes off and then he continues running his route, then he is committing Illegal Participation.

If he freezes downfield and the ball is thrown to him and he doesn't make an attempt to catch it, there is no foul.  If he makes an attempt to bat or catch the ball, then he is committing Illegal Participation.  If a B player hits him, he has technically committed Pass Interference and a Personal Foul, but I would just be inclined to call it the latter since the fouls are the same and explaining the DPI call to Team B's coach could get interesting.

If he possesses the ball as a helmetless player, I'm calling it dead.  You are technically correct that 4-2-2k is worded poorly, but let common sense prevail and follow the intent of the rule which is to not have a player in possession of a live ball without a helmet.

Well done, I agree (almost) completely!  If a player who's helmet came off has a pass thrown to him, and he puts up his hands to protect himself from getting hit with the ball, I would lean to that not being "participating", even though he is batting it down.  Now, if he intentionally bats it down to keep the defense from playing on it, that's a different story.

[ODJ]

If helmetless B54 stops his action, A22 then fumbles, and B54 recovers the ball (either by the ball landing in his hands or he drops to the ground and recovers), we BUTTS an IP on B54 and A retains possession?

[Penalty assessed from end of related run.]

[bama_stripes]

If helmetless B54 stops his action, A22 then fumbles, and B54 recovers the ball (either by the ball landing in his hands or he drops to the ground and recovers), we BUTTS an IP on B54 and A retains possession?
[Penalty assessed from end of related run.]

In looking at the Aloha video section on new rules, this seems to fall into the "immediate area" category, since B54 didn't move to participate.

Matt?

[Sumstine]

I based my video production on opinions formed after two years of working with this same rule at the NCAA level. It appears that the NFHS through the memo distributed four days ago is attempting to remove instinct from a player who loses his helmet. I understand and applaud the desire to protect the players but do not believe that you can allow a player to continue his immediate action and not allow him to fall on a ball rolling at his feet or reach out and grab a runner who is moving past him and the person blocking him.

The plays in the Aloha Clinic videos were shown to a number of NCAA supervisors and they supported the opinion expressed. That being said, the NFHS sets the rules for the states that operate under their direction. If the NFHS stands by this interpretation then the rule should be changed to read that if a player loses a helmet, he/she is required to immediately disengage and either fall to the ground or move away from any action in the area.

All new rules take time to process and a period of adjustment. What a text interpretation does not show you is the time element. Video is the key to learning how to judge these situations and it is impossible to get a room full of officials/coaches/administrators to agree on all plays situations. As I have said in the past, the Aloha Clinic videos are designed to create discussion and are narrated using opinions based on what is available at the time of production. The interpretation document produced four days ago was not available at the time of the video production and if it had been I would have likely left these plays off of the video. Use all the information you have, protect the players and time will sort out the rest.

[Rulesman]

+1, Matt!

[Curious]

JK and AB (In Georgia, doesn't anyone use anything but initials?).

A happen to agree with both of you on all counts; just trying to get discussion going...

To ODJ, 9.6.4 in the 7/26 interpretations, the FED is leaving this to the discretion of the covering official. We must "decide whether the (helmetless) player disregarded his immediate action of trying to tackle the opponent to that of a separate act of recovering the fumble if so, IP; if judged he fell on the ball by chance, legal recovery".

Need more folks to weigh in...

AB, I listened to and met Ralph Swearngin at a meeting here in Michigan of Saturday.  Quite a good guy and VERY knowledgeable.  Quite and advocate of and for officials (although he says the GHSA "fines the hell out of officials when they screw up").  What about coaches?

[Atlanta Blue]

AB, I listened to and met Ralph Swearngin at a meeting here in Michigan of Saturday.  Quite a good guy and VERY knowledgeable.  Quite and advocate of and for officials (although he says the GHSA "fines the HECK out of officials when they screw up").  What about coaches?

Dr Ralph is a friend of mine, although he would never know me as Atlanta Blue!

And yes, coaches are fined for ejections ($250, and a suspension).   Coaches are also fined for not completing the rules clinic ($100).  Not sure about any other fines for coaches.  Schools are fined for administrative issues (i.e., not having proper paperwork on a player, missing filing deadlines, etc). GHSA budget for this year has a line item of $120,000 revenue from fines.

[Rulesman]

Just out of curiosity AB, is that $120k budget figure a number that has been escalating over the years, or decreasing?

[Atlanta Blue]

Just out of curiosity AB, is that $120k budget figure a number that has been escalating over the years, or decreasing?

I know the budgets, don't know the actual received:
2011 - $100k
2012 - $100k
2013 - $150k (fines for ejections were raised in this year)
2014 - $120k

[Curious]

Dr Ralph is a friend of mine, although he would never know me as Atlanta Blue!

He might not know you by AB; but, based on my description from what I've gleaned from this forum, he thinks he does.  He mentioned a school system in a city starting with a "W"; but it all happened so fast, I can't remember it.  Was he right?  What city is that (if you choose to divulge it)?

[Atlanta Blue]

Actually, I coach at a private school that starts with a W, and yes, it's in Atlanta.  He might have it figured out!  I'll have to ask him.