Author Topic: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....  (Read 3956 times)

Offline Rulesman

  • The Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 3835
  • FAN REACTION: +310/-238
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #25 on: July 28, 2017, 10:46:25 AM »
Further proof another rule change that was not completely thought out.
"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 SCline

  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-1
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #26 on: July 28, 2017, 12:48:33 PM »
^why do you think that? The offended team has one decision only. Whether a clock that was going to start on the ready will start on the snap. They don't get to decide that a clock that would start on the snap would start on the ready.

I like the rule change because it brings fairness in close end of half timing situations while allowing the clock to run (as it should) during the rest of the half.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3270
  • FAN REACTION: +252/-472
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #27 on: July 28, 2017, 03:19:18 PM »
This discussion seems to support the contention; If you pick at even the smallest scab long enough and hard enough you can make it bleed and possibly cause an infection.

Football plays and situations are supposed to conform to the rules. as they exist.   NFHS 1-1-6 suggests, for things that are not specifically covered by rule, fall back is the judgment and common sense of the Referee, which has served the game really well for over 100 years.

Offline SCline

  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-1
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #28 on: July 28, 2017, 03:55:58 PM »
It’s pretty obvious that in a non-offsetting foul situation where penalties have been accepted by both teams even if they result in the ball not moving both teams will have the option to stop the clock until the snap. It doesn’t matter which order the teams get asked because if either team says stop until snap, then the other team’s decision is useless

Offline bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 2202
  • FAN REACTION: +69/-24
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #29 on: July 28, 2017, 05:44:20 PM »
IMHO, no. In this situation , only the offended team of the live ball foul would have that choice.

Are you sure about that, Ralph?  Seems like neither team would have the option if they both foul.

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 285
  • FAN REACTION: +57/-37
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #30 on: July 30, 2017, 12:44:52 PM »
IMHO, no. In this situation , only the offended team of the live ball foul would have that choice. If the only foul on the play was a dead ball foul (encroachment, false start, etc) that choice would be available.

I have sent this on to the NFHS but with all do respect to my friend from the down east coast...
However, in my Left Coast opinion
In non-offsetting situations say live ball/dead ball and the clock by rule will start on the RFP,
1) The offended team of the accepted live ball foul may choose to leave the clock starting on the RFP or move it to the snap. Then,
2) The offended team of the accepted dead ball foul may or may not have the 3-4-7 choice as, quite simply if the other team chose "Snap" then the 3-4-7 option no longer exists. Restated, if the 1st team chose not to accept the 3-4-7 option, then it is remains available to the 2nd choosing team.

I hope what I just wrote makes sense.

Again, this is my interpretation and it HAS NOT been officially endorsed by the NFHS .

Offline bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 2202
  • FAN REACTION: +69/-24
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #31 on: July 30, 2017, 02:22:09 PM »
That's way too complicated.

"Coach, both teams fouled.  Neither one of you gets the option."

Offline prab

  • *
  • Posts: 529
  • FAN REACTION: +33/-35
  • Wherever you go, there you are!
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #32 on: July 30, 2017, 04:41:41 PM »
I have sent this on to the NFHS but with all do respect to my friend from the down east coast...
However, in my Left Coast opinion
In non-offsetting situations say live ball/dead ball and the clock by rule will start on the RFP,
1) The offended team of the accepted live ball foul may choose to leave the clock starting on the RFP or move it to the snap. Then,
2) The offended team of the accepted dead ball foul may or may not have the 3-4-7 choice as, quite simply if the other team chose "Snap" then the 3-4-7 option no longer exists. Restated, if the 1st team chose not to accept the 3-4-7 option, then it is remains available to the 2nd choosing team.

I hope what I just wrote makes sense.

Again, this is my interpretation and it HAS NOT been officially endorsed by the NFHS .

Your explanation makes perfect sense.  Unfortunately, that may not be enough to get it adopted NFHS wide.

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2466
  • FAN REACTION: +294/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #33 on: July 31, 2017, 12:00:36 PM »
3-4-7 states “when a penalty is accepted with less than  two minutes remaining in either half, the offended team will have the option to start the game clock on the snap.”

If both a dead ball and live ball foul penalty are accepted by opposite teams, both teams would have the option to start the clock on the snap

With a clearer head, here is what I now believe.... In such a situation, the offended team of the live ball foul could choose to start on the snap. If they chose so, so be it. If they were happy to keep it on the ready, the team that committed the live ball foul and then was offended by the dead ball foul could then choose to start on the snap.

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 285
  • FAN REACTION: +57/-37
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #34 on: August 01, 2017, 03:36:25 PM »
3-4-7 states “when a penalty is accepted with less than  two minutes remaining in either half, the offended team will have the option to start the game clock on the snap.”

If both a dead ball and live ball foul penalty are accepted by opposite teams, both teams would have the option to start the clock on the snap

I think some are making too much of this rule, lets keep it simple.

In the case of a live ball foul followed by a dead ball foul AND the clock will start on the RFP.
The live ball foul is administered first. If the offended team of the live ball foul chooses the 3-4-7 option,  then 3-4-7 option no longer exists and is not offered  to the offended team of the dead ball foul.
If the offended team of the live ball foul declines the 3-4-7 option, then the 3-4-7 option SHALL BE offered for the offended team of the dead ball foul.

I hope that makes sense.

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1161
  • FAN REACTION: +52/-21
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #35 on: August 01, 2017, 03:41:35 PM »
I think some are making too much of this rule, lets keep it simple.

In the case of a live ball foul followed by a dead ball foul AND the clock will start on the RFP.
The live ball foul is administered first. If the offended team of the live ball foul chooses the 3-4-7 option,  then 3-4-7 option no longer exists and is not offered  to the offended team of the dead ball foul.
If the offended team of the live ball foul declines the 3-4-7 option, then the 3-4-7 option SHALL BE offered for the offended team of the dead ball foul.

I hope that makes sense.

Good summary!

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3270
  • FAN REACTION: +252/-472
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #36 on: August 01, 2017, 07:04:51 PM »
Simple is good.  The "option" is NOT a choice BETWEEN starting the clock on the snap, or the ready, it is an option (choice) to start the clock on the snap, when the game situation called for the clock to start otherwise.

If the game situation calls for the clock to start on the snap, THERE IS NO OPTION.  If one team elects the option to start on the snap, there is no other option - once a decision is made to start on the snap (either by game situation or by exercising the option), there are no other options,  it will start on the snap.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2017, 09:37:18 AM by AlUpstateNY »

Offline IA Linesman

  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-1
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #37 on: August 03, 2017, 01:30:44 PM »
Just watched the Iowa rules meeting.  In the event of a live ball and dead ball foul only the offended team of the live ball foul shall be given the option.  The reasoning given was that the clock status is not effected by the dead ball foul.

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 285
  • FAN REACTION: +57/-37
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #38 on: August 08, 2017, 12:31:46 PM »
Just watched the Iowa rules meeting.  In the event of a live ball and dead ball foul only the offended team of the live ball foul shall be given the option.  The reasoning given was that the clock status is not effected by the dead ball foul.

If that's what was actually stated in IOWA, you need to follow your state SRI's interpretation.

That being said, the key wording in rule, 3-4-7 remainss: When the penalty is accepted...the offended team will have the option...  I read nothing in the rule regarding clock status, dead ball fouls, or live ball fouls.
What is missing is the fact that the clock must be scheduled to start on the RFP for 3-4-7 to EVER be applicable! And, if/when the clock is scheduled to start on the snap, 3-4-7 is NEVER applicable.
While some feel this should have been included in the wording of 3-4-7, others conclude common sense dictates it without being specified in the wording.


« Last Edit: August 08, 2017, 02:39:30 PM by KWH »

Offline Jackhammer

  • *
  • Posts: 237
  • FAN REACTION: +13/-5
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #39 on: August 15, 2017, 07:25:39 AM »
Just watched the Iowa rules meeting.  In the event of a live ball and dead ball foul only the offended team of the live ball foul shall be given the option.  The reasoning given was that the clock status is not effected by the dead ball foul.

Never underestimate the power of a group of officials to complicate things.  This muddies the waters.

All due respect to the good folks of Iowa but this introduces an exception to the rule.  And it's the worst kind of exception; an exception without rule or case book support, it's based on an interpretation.

Now I have to figure out which dead ball fouls I should apply as part of 3-4-7. 

Take away the live ball foul that preceded the dead ball foul.  If all you had was the dead ball foul, would you provide the 3-4-7 snap option?

If your answer is no, I would ask why not and what other dead ball fouls do not apply?

If your answer is yes, I would ask then why is this particular stand alone dead ball foul different than the one that was committed following a live ball foul?

"The only whistle that kills a play is an inadvertent one"

"The only thing black and white in officiating is the uniform"

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 285
  • FAN REACTION: +57/-37
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #40 on: August 15, 2017, 05:51:06 PM »
I believe I can safely say;
JACKHAMMER's last post just hit the nail on the head!    aWaRd

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2466
  • FAN REACTION: +294/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #41 on: August 17, 2017, 08:34:31 AM »
IMHO, the more common application of this rule will probably occur on dead ball fouls such as encroachment and false starts. Examples :

30 sec. left in game - A 7 , B6 - clock running when....

(1) A's Big ole' Bubba tips over into neutral zone.

(2) A's Big ole' Bubba (OT) breaks 3-point to stand and wave to prom queen.

B would certainly want to apply 3-4-7 and start on snap.

IMHO, this new rule accomplishes two things :

(1) virtually removes the need for white hat judgment on applying 3-4-6 on such plays.

(2) Removes the concern of some officials on a timing change in the last two minutes of a half as this has a major conceived drawback to the adoption of a NCAA-type rule on OOB plays.

IMHO, our New England Red Sox have won 9 games this season with "walk-off" hits. Pennant Fever has engulfed many  aWaRd.

IMHO, these are only my opinions, and not those of any other person, place or thing.

 :puke: tR:oLl :puke: (this may become my favorite :P)

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 285
  • FAN REACTION: +57/-37
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #42 on: August 18, 2017, 11:04:18 AM »
IMHO, the more common application of this rule will probably occur on dead ball fouls such as encroachment and false starts. Examples :

30 sec. left in game - A 7 , B6 - clock running when....

(1) A's Big ole' Bubba tips over into neutral zone.

(2) A's Big ole' Bubba (OT) breaks 3-point to stand and wave to prom queen.

B would certainly want to apply 3-4-7 and start on snap.

IMHO, this new rule accomplishes two things :

(1) virtually removes the need for white hat judgment on applying 3-4-6 on such plays.

(2) Removes the concern of some officials on a timing change in the last two minutes of a half as this has a major conceived drawback to the adoption of a NCAA-type rule on OOB plays.

IMHO, our New England Red Sox have won 9 games this season with "walk-off" hits. Pennant Fever has engulfed many  aWaRd.

IMHO, these are only my opinions, and not those of any other person, place or thing.

 :puke: tR:oLl :puke: (this may become my favorite :P)

I disagree with my right coast friend Ralph on one issue and that is:
99.2% of the time Ralph's opinion and my opinion are identical.
Examples include but are not limited to:
The Forty Second Play Clock in NFHS Play = :puke::puke:

Offline KWH

  • *
  • Posts: 285
  • FAN REACTION: +57/-37
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #43 on: August 20, 2017, 11:21:38 PM »
Your explanation makes perfect sense.  Unfortunately, that may not be enough to get it adopted NFHS wide.

Fortunately Prab, that interpretation is from the NFHS.

Offline The Roamin' Umpire

  • *
  • Posts: 347
  • FAN REACTION: +30/-16
Re: From the NFHS Interpreters Meeting.....
« Reply #44 on: August 21, 2017, 08:02:41 AM »
Further proof another rule change that was not completely thought out.

Sadly, the ones that are well-thought-out seem to be the rare exceptions...