Author Topic: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes  (Read 47758 times)

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2697
  • FAN REACTION: +328/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #25 on: February 05, 2015, 10:03:55 AM »
 I just returned this Monday to the frozen tundra after a week in sunny Florida. Not to bore you guys with the mundane occurrences such as : three days of debating proposed football rules, cheering on the Pats during a Super bowl party at our condo where I was the youngest by far, or just enjoying the sun; I would like to share my three highlights....
            (1) Meeting Magician at a watering hole in windy Indy.
            (2) Meeting FLAHL at our condo in St. Pete Beach
            (3) My attempt at Karaoke within stumbling distance of our condo.....

My wife's a big fan of Karaoke, I'm a big fan of partaking of adult beverage during karaoke, I was sporting a spiffy old Boston Patriots cap while flippig a deflated Patriots Nerf ball. Many patrons  offered friendly banter. I offered them  this ( to the tune of Tom Dooley /Kinston Trio/circa 1958) :

  "Many songs have been written about the internal rectangle, this one is about a Mr. Kraft , a Coach B, some deflated footballs and a quarterback named Brady...Come this Sunday, Tom Brady will shine......

    Hold up your head, Tom Brady,
       hold up your head and sigh.   Hold up your head , Brady,
       as the Seahawks ain't gonna' fly....

   This time on Sunday,
      Recon where I'll be. Bledsoe hadn't been injured,
   I might have been traded to Tennessee.....

      (chorus)

  This time on Sunday,
     recon where I'll be, Down in Tombstone Valley,
  Earning another MVP!!!"
        :patrioticon: aWaRd aWaRd aWaRd aWaRd :patrioticon: (only two days left)

When my officiating days are gone, songwriting may be my next hobby :).  Those that offered friendly banter, now offered to buy me my next beer. eAt& I accepted. Cheer up, guys, the new rules will be out shortly. I hope to meet more of you over the coming years and I promise not to sing! tiphat:
« Last Edit: February 05, 2015, 10:15:09 AM by Ralph Damren »

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 344
  • FAN REACTION: +82/-39
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #26 on: February 07, 2015, 07:09:54 PM »
I know you do, as do a few others that I know.  But without the proposals being public, you can only do so in general terms.

Suppose I am the head coach of a significant high school program that just won the state championship.  Don't you think as a state rep, I might be interested in the opinion of a coach like that?  Or how about asking the official that runs your official's training camps each summer what he thinks about proposal #32?

But with the curtain of secrecy drawn, people like this coach or this official don't even know what's being proposed.  The NCAA publishes what's on the agenda before their meetings.  We all know what Congress is going to vote on today.  We even know what cases the Supreme Court will hear.  But what changes that MIGHT be considered for high school football is a bigger secret than any of those, and I can't for the life of me understand why.

Curtain of secrecy?   Come on AB get with the program. I believe the correct/revised more modern term is "The Cone of Silence". A term coined by the late great Maxwell Smart.
In all seriousness, my Chrystal ball indicates the new changes should be posted prior to Friday the 13th.  Then we can discuss them until the cows come home...
« Last Edit: February 07, 2015, 07:12:03 PM by KWH »

Offline Curious

  • *
  • Posts: 1234
  • FAN REACTION: +28/-44
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #27 on: February 08, 2015, 11:34:59 AM »
Curtain of secrecy?   Come on AB get with the program. I believe the correct/revised more modern term is "The Cone of Silence". A term coined by the late great Maxwell Smart.
In all seriousness, my Chrystal ball indicates the new changes should be posted prior to Friday the 13th.  Then we can discuss them until the cows come home...

Perfect date for it!!!! :sTiR:

Offline CEngel

  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • FAN REACTION: +2/-1
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #28 on: February 13, 2015, 07:48:54 AM »
As assigner for my association, I have gotten to look at the proposed changes and a number of them are good.  I witnessed one of them happen in the 2A State Championship Game.  It will be great if the change goes through and the offended team is not penalized by accepting the penalty.

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2697
  • FAN REACTION: +328/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #29 on: February 13, 2015, 07:52:09 AM »
Welcome to the forum, CEngl, I hope you find it both enjoyable and informative.

younggun

  • Guest
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #30 on: February 13, 2015, 08:20:38 AM »
In its ongoing effort to minimize the risk of injury in high school football, the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) Football Rules Committee expanded the provisions of unnecessary roughness to include contact with a defenseless player.

This revision in Rule 9-4-3g was one of six rules changes recommended by the Football Rules Committee at its January 23-25 meeting in Indianapolis. These changes were subsequently approved by the NFHS Board of Directors.

The revised rule now reads, “No player or non-player shall make any contact with an opponent, including a defenseless player, which is deemed unnecessary or excessive and which incites roughness.”

Bob Colgate, director of sports and sports medicine at the NFHS and editor of the NFHS football rules, noted that an example would be when a defensive player who is not in the vicinity of the ball is “blindsided” by a blocker on the offensive team.

Another change with a focus on risk minimization is a revision of the spearing rule – one of several examples of illegal helmet contact listed in Rule 2-20. Spearing is now defined as “an act by any player who initiates contact against an opponent at the shoulders or below with the crown (top portion) of his helmet.”

With “targeting” now defined as contact to an opponent above the shoulders, the committee more clearly defined “spearing” as contact to an opponent at the shoulders or below. Colgate said the implementation of the first spearing rule in 1971 has played a significant role in reducing injury in high school football.

“The committee spent considerable time discussing and clarifying expectations related to contact involving any player that is deemed excessive or unnecessary – including spearing – that may occur during play,” said Brad Garrett, chair of the NFHS Football Rules Committee and assistant executive director of the Oregon School Activities Association.  “Minimizing risks to players involved in these situations must remain at the forefront of the game.”

In other changes, the rules committee revised the 2014 rule change regarding free-kick formations. A new Rule 6-1-4 was added to state that the timing of the foul for not having at least four players on each side of the kicker now occurs when the ball is kicked.

A change also was made in the listing of penalties in Rule 9-4, Illegal Personal Contact. Beginning next season, an automatic first down will not be awarded for a 5-yard incidental face mask penalty against the passer. Previously, this violation was included in the penalty for roughing the passer, which calls for a 15-yard penalty and an automatic first down.

The rules committee also approved new language in Rule 10-2-5 regarding the enforcement of dead-ball fouls. The distance penalty for unsportsmanlike, non-player or dead-ball personal fouls committed by teams can offset. Equal numbers of 15-yard penalties by both teams will cancel and remaining penalties may be enforced.

The final change approved by the Football Rules Committee related to a series of downs. A new Rule 5-1-1b will read as follows: “The referee shall have authority to correct the number of the next down prior to a new series of downs being awarded.”

A complete listing of all rules changes is available on the NFHS website at www.nfhs.org. Click on “Activities & Sports” at the top of the home page, and select “Football.”

According to the 2013-14 NFHS High School Athletics Participation Survey, football is the most popular sport for boys at the high school level with 1,093,234 participants in 11-player football. Another 28,790 boys participated in 6-, 8- and 9-player football. In addition, 1,828 girls participated in football during the 2013-14 season.

Offline CEngel

  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • FAN REACTION: +2/-1
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #31 on: February 13, 2015, 09:06:46 AM »
I was disappointed to see that the rule regarding changing the enforcement spot for a foul by the defense occurring behind the line of scrimmage from a spot foul to a previous spot foul did not make it.  I saw this happen at the MPSSAA 2A State Championship game where a  team lost yardage when they had to accept a penalty on fourth down.  As I recall the play, it was 4th and goal from the 4 yardline, the QB dropped back and had his facemask grasped at the 11 yardline and then subsequently tackled.  Following the enforcement of the 5 yard penalty, the team was left with 4th and goal from the 6 yardline.  I was hoping to see this situation rectified.

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2697
  • FAN REACTION: +328/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #32 on: February 13, 2015, 09:40:57 AM »
Defensive fouls on plays that ended behind the LOS was on the docket last year, but not this. My recollection was that it was evenly split, but not near a super majority (67%) needed to pass. Offensive fouls behind the LOS, with the basic spot becoming previous spot was on the docket but didn't make it out of committee for a floor vote. Deterrents : (1) Exception to ABO principle; (2) Both benefit the offense in balance of offense/defense; (3) A-fouls would require exceptions for IG & fouls in own EZ. I supported /will support fouls by B =previous spot if play ends behind LOS; but do not support fouls by A. My rationale : The foul could have enabled A's gain, and an exception to ABO (which I feel is usually quite fair & easy to teach) which would require, at least, at least a couple of more exceptions would not help the game.

Offline Rulesman

  • The Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +332/-243
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #33 on: February 13, 2015, 09:41:32 AM »
"A new Rule 6-1-4 was added to state that the timing of the foul for not having at least four players on each side of the kicker now occurs when the ball is kicked."

I'm good with that but fear this is still a dead ball foul.

Ralph?
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2697
  • FAN REACTION: +328/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #34 on: February 13, 2015, 09:51:26 AM »
We now need 4 players on each side of the ball & it's not a foul until it's kicked BUT it's a dead ball foul when it is. There was very little support for keeping the kick alive ,with the potential for a re kick. IMHO, the proposed NCAA "tack-on" rule would have solved this, but it never made it out of committee.

younggun

  • Guest
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #35 on: February 13, 2015, 10:10:38 AM »
Did they change the signal for the 'New' Kick Rules too?

Offline Rulesman

  • The Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +332/-243
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #36 on: February 13, 2015, 11:07:56 AM »
...IMHO, the proposed NCAA "tack-on" rule would have solved this, but it never made it out of committee.
I agree 100% with that assessment. That said, I believe we all need to chip in and treat that committee to a few adult beverages on the night before they meet next year. That way they just might come out of that meeting with a different perspective.  ;D

I'll also wager if the "tack-on" rule were added to the next survey the sentiment would want the rule changed, too. As it is now, one way or the other you'll be kicking it more than once.

Progress... one baby step at a time.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2015, 12:42:36 PM by Rulesman »
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline VALJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2219
  • FAN REACTION: +81/-12
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #37 on: February 13, 2015, 11:08:17 AM »
Love the change to 4 on either side of the kicker at the time of the kick.  They can lineup however the want when we blow the RFP and we don't have to play the guessing game of who the kicker will be.  I don't see anything else that did change that I have an issue with, really.   Like that the 5 yard FM penalty doesn't escalate to RTP now, too.  And the umpires among us will be happy with the DB penalties cancelling one for one - less walking, and more time for  sNiCkErS.

Still wish we'd get rid of the darn free blocking zone - with all the focus (rightly) on injury prevention and risk management, kids' knees need protection too. 

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2697
  • FAN REACTION: +328/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #38 on: February 13, 2015, 12:39:52 PM »
Did they change the signal for the 'New' Kick Rules too?
That would have been an Editorial Committee decision, but not to my knowledge. The rationale of the encroachment signal is that portrays a dead ball foul and foul for not being in the right spot. I don't have a problem with that.

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2697
  • FAN REACTION: +328/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #39 on: February 13, 2015, 12:52:13 PM »
IMHO, the biggest change is 9-4-3g : "...which is deemed unnecessary OR EXCESSIVE...." for this may include subjective calls such as a vicious blindside sack of the QB being  ^flag. IMHO, there will be much discussion around this addition.

Offline Magician

  • *
  • Posts: 525
  • FAN REACTION: +108/-4
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #40 on: February 13, 2015, 12:55:21 PM »
IMHO, the biggest change is 9-4-3g : "...which is deemed unnecessary OR EXCESSIVE...." for this may include subjective calls such as a vicious blindside sack of the QB being  ^flag. IMHO, there will be much discussion around this addition.

I don't see where this changes anything. If someone excessively hit a QB from behind it was very likely RTP already. The blindside hit on a defender away from the ball was already a foul for hitting a player out of the play. This may give the call a little more emphasis and maybe expand it a little, but I don't see this as much of a change.

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2697
  • FAN REACTION: +328/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #41 on: February 13, 2015, 01:14:00 PM »
I don't see where this changes anything. If someone excessively hit a QB from behind it was very likely RTP already. The blindside hit on a defender away from the ball was already a foul for hitting a player out of the play. This may give the call a little more emphasis and maybe expand it a little, but I don't see this as much of a change.
During the discussions, it was suggested that a flag could be thrown if the QB was violently SACKED from the blindside along with violent (but legal) blindside blocks made in vicinity of the runner. IMHO, this would be a major change in a subjective call.

Offline Rich

  • *
  • Posts: 29
  • FAN REACTION: +5/-4
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #42 on: February 13, 2015, 01:40:31 PM »
I think I've finally realized that some of the major changes I've been hoping for will simply never happen without serious turnover on the committee. 

Since that's not going to happen, I'll always feel that the outcome of this process is a huge swing-and-a-miss.

Offline VALJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2219
  • FAN REACTION: +81/-12
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #43 on: February 13, 2015, 02:04:28 PM »
During the discussions, it was suggested that a flag could be thrown if the QB was violently SACKED from the blindside along with violent (but legal) blindside blocks made in vicinity of the runner. IMHO, this would be a major change in a subjective call.

We all know football - it's a violent game.  There are going to be violent hits that occur during the course of the game that are perfectly legal, like that blindside QB sack - that's still a football play.  That violent block near the ball carrier is still a football play.  It seems to me that what we should all be trying to eliminate - rules committee and officials both - are the violent excessive hits that are intended strictly to punish an opposing player.

Offline FLAHL

  • *
  • Posts: 750
  • FAN REACTION: +44/-9
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #44 on: February 13, 2015, 03:01:05 PM »
I think this has the potential to cause us problems with consistency.  Some will argue that football is a violent sport, and this is part of the game.  Others will argue that "safety first" is a legitimate reason for this rule change.  If we can't agree as an association, we won't enforce consistently.  And if we're inconsistent, coaches have a right to complain.

Offline bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 2287
  • FAN REACTION: +70/-25
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #45 on: February 14, 2015, 09:33:41 AM »
During the discussions, it was suggested that a flag could be thrown if the QB was violently SACKED from the blindside ....

Oh, no!  The QB is a runner.

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1280
  • FAN REACTION: +65/-22
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #46 on: February 14, 2015, 09:42:00 AM »
Hey Ralph, good job getting this one passed!!!!  This one I'm excited about.

Quote
The rules committee also approved new language in Rule 10-2-5 regarding the enforcement of dead-ball fouls. The distance penalty for unsportsmanlike, non-player or dead-ball personal fouls committed by teams can offset. Equal numbers of 15-yard penalties by both teams will cancel and remaining penalties may be enforced.

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1280
  • FAN REACTION: +65/-22
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #47 on: February 14, 2015, 09:42:58 AM »
Ralph, what exactly was changed by this rule.  So any hard hits are flags now?

Quote
The revised rule now reads, “No player or non-player shall make any contact with an opponent, including a defenseless player, which is deemed unnecessary or excessive and which incites roughness.”

Offline Tdjr

  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-1
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #48 on: February 14, 2015, 11:03:54 AM »
I don't understand why the definition of spearing was changed. Targeting, by definition, requires the player to "...take aim...".

With the change to the spearing definition, a player who now initiates contact to an opponent's head with their helmet, but doesn't "take aim", is guilty of neither targeting, nor spearing.

What am I missing?

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3437
  • FAN REACTION: +260/-501
Re: 2015 NFHS Rule Changes
« Reply #49 on: February 14, 2015, 11:29:30 AM »
First reading of these new rules and adjustments seems pretty rational and reasonable, although it seems some amateur Supreme Court Justices are bound and determined to find potential problems.  In a general sense it seems leaving some important decisions to the logic and common sense of the calling official has withstood the effort to try and spell everything out, down to the most minute detail (which rarely works as well as intended).

There's still no definition of a "Cheap shot", which is likely a good idea because anyone doing what we do needs to understand that meaning and be able to recognize it as "violent", "excessive" or "unnecessary" which provides the flexibility to deal with it as necessary.

The off-setting of DB fouls is a good idea, and referencing it applies to 15 yard fouls, should avoid any serious confusion (Supreme Court Justices aside).

As for the Free Kick adjustment, I hope they intend it to be a DB foul, and the subsequent mechanic will be to STOP everything (like we do on a False Start/Encroachment) situation, eliminating action that doesn't count, where in the case of Kick Offs will likely eliminate a lot of opportunities for some serious (and unnecessary) collisions.

As VALJ points out above, "It seems to me that what we should all be trying to eliminate - rules committee and officials both - are the violent excessive hits that are intended strictly to punish an opposing player", which we presently have absolute and total ability to effectively deal with under the existing rules, by simply exercising appropriate judgment and common sense.

Football is a contact sport, which are sometimes violent in nature, and all of the rational people associated with the sport are serious about "safety first".  As is, and has always been, important factors in dealing with both of those conflicting elements, the common sense and judgment of game officials, to be able to recognize when these elements conflict and the courage to act upon those observations and conclusionsis is what's really important.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2015, 11:33:19 AM by AlUpstateNY »