Author Topic: mechanics question  (Read 985 times)

Offline fudilligas

  • *
  • Posts: 79
  • FAN REACTION: +5/-0
mechanics question
« on: April 26, 2018, 10:30:58 PM »
During a mechanics discussion between 2 officials who don't see eye to eye  ^talk this was discussed:

     Receiver steps on the end line of the end zone, jumps in the air, catches the ball and lands in the end zone.
     First referee says to signal the touchdown  ^good and then proceed to the penalty administration
     The other referee says to immediately signal incomplete ^no. Not sure if wanted to administer penalty

Would the penalty be Illegal Participation for returning to the field after stepping OB

A third official on the scene had to step in between the two before the argument became physical, as I mentioned, they are not friends

Is there a difference between this play and one in which a receiver steps OB on the 50, catches the ball in the air, lands inbounds and proceeds to score a TD

Offline Stinterp

  • *
  • Posts: 88
  • FAN REACTION: +3/-5
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2018, 07:14:49 AM »
If the covering official was the same official who had the flag, he would just use the stop the clock signal, then proceed to the Referee.
The foul is IP and would be previous spot enforcement.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3382
  • FAN REACTION: +258/-493
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2018, 09:02:36 AM »
If the covering official was the same official who had the flag, he would just use the stop the clock signal, then proceed to the Referee.
The foul is IP and would be previous spot enforcement.

First, the receiver did NOT score a touchdown, so that signal is incorrect (and unnecessarily confusing).  Don't have a problem with signalling "incomplete", as a legal forward pass was not legally completed (however, as the pass was evidently caught, declaring it incomplete would agian be unnecessarily confusing).

As suggested, stopping the clock and reporting to the referee, seems the clearest way to "signal" there's a problem, additional clarification will be forthcoming from the referee.

As for the discussions between the two officials, the penalty decision to be applied is the responsibility of the Referee.  Any discussion to clarify different perspectives (which cannot be immediately agreed upon by the covering officials) should be presented, discretely, to the Referee for his decision.  When there is a conflict by the covering officials, NO preliminary signal should be given, allowing the Referee to consider options before giving a "determining" signal (to avoid unnecessary confusion.

The IP foul happened during a loose ball play, so previous spot enforcement would be appropriate.

Offline FLAHL

  • *
  • Posts: 704
  • FAN REACTION: +43/-9
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #3 on: April 27, 2018, 09:55:25 AM »
Sorry - posting error.   hEaDbAnG
« Last Edit: April 27, 2018, 01:18:33 PM by FLAHL »

Offline VA Official

  • *
  • Posts: 173
  • FAN REACTION: +4/-5
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #4 on: April 27, 2018, 11:41:47 AM »
First, the receiver did NOT score a touchdown

While I completely agree with you that stopping the clock is the correct mechanic here to avoid any unnecessary confusion, the result of the play is technically a TD and if the penalty were declined the score would stand (since NFHS doesn't define airborne player status). Just giving credence to the other side of the argument, even though we agree on the proper mechanic.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3382
  • FAN REACTION: +258/-493
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #5 on: April 27, 2018, 04:48:35 PM »
"the result of the play is technically a TD" 

Although, ""the result of the play (satisfies the requirements necessary to constitute a TD, and may well be) is technically a TD", does it actually "score" a TD when the play includes a live ball foul, until the adjudication of the penalty and the effect that decision may have on the play, determine whether a TD will be "scored", or not?

An official NOT observing the actual penalty, may signal TD based on his observation of the scoring action, but the official observing, and calling, the violation would be aware that the legitimacy of the score is in doubt, until the penalty decision is concluded, and as suggested simply terminating the action until a final conclusion is determined, by a TO signal, seems best to minimize any subsequent confusion.

When circumstances create conflicting signals discussions between officials, which may or may not , involve the Referee seems best to avoid confusion, until a confirming, single signal from the Referee clarifies the conclusion.

Offline refjeff

  • *
  • Posts: 61
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-17
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #6 on: April 28, 2018, 03:16:47 PM »
It's a catch in the endzone.  That meets the requirements of a touchdown,    ^good  and makes it very clear to the defense that they will want to accept the penalty.

But it's definitely not an incomplete pass.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 500
  • FAN REACTION: +13/-20
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
mechanics question
« Reply #7 on: April 29, 2018, 10:03:23 AM »
I have no problem with the signal.  Happens all the time. Examples include a pass play into the end zone with holding at the los. Covering official doesn’t have a clue so he signals td. Depending on outcome, WH can recommunicate actual result after the enforcement/declination of the penalty.  I’m also ok with no signal. If covering official has knowledge of the foul, it’s perfectly acceptable IMO, to simply stop the clock with no td signal and go to WH for enforcement. Certainly nothing to fall out with a fellow official over.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Offline ncwingman

  • *
  • Posts: 536
  • FAN REACTION: +30/-2
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #8 on: April 29, 2018, 04:13:33 PM »
I'm fairly sure that what I want to be the rule in this case isn't actually the case, but if I'm reading the rules right, a player who is airborne is not "out of bounds" as he is not in contact with anything that is out of bounds (i.e., the ground).

I would love for the NFL's "reestablishment clause" to take effect for situations like these, therefore the receiver who jumps from an out of bounds position is still out of bounds until he lands in bounds. If the ball touches the out of bounds player then the ball is out of bounds and the pass is incomplete (possession has no meaning).

The airborne player can still be flagged for IP for going out of bounds and then influencing play, but declining the penalty in this case would result in an incomplete pass.

However, that's just a pipe dream of mine...


Offline VA Official

  • *
  • Posts: 173
  • FAN REACTION: +4/-5
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2018, 08:33:55 AM »
I'm fairly sure that what I want to be the rule in this case isn't actually the case, but if I'm reading the rules right, a player who is airborne is not "out of bounds" as he is not in contact with anything that is out of bounds (i.e., the ground).

I would love for the NFL's "reestablishment clause" to take effect for situations like these, therefore the receiver who jumps from an out of bounds position is still out of bounds until he lands in bounds. If the ball touches the out of bounds player then the ball is out of bounds and the pass is incomplete (possession has no meaning).

The airborne player can still be flagged for IP for going out of bounds and then influencing play, but declining the penalty in this case would result in an incomplete pass.

However, that's just a pipe dream of mine...

Or in NCAA where an out of bounds player's definition covers airborne players that last touched out of bounds aren't inbounds until they touch the ground completely inbounds. Would be a great addition to Rule 2 for NFHS. It would eliminate a few IP flags and turn them into incomplete passes, and would remove the foul on the "receiver's foot skims the pylon on his way up to catch the ball in the EZ" play  ::) (even though it would still be incomplete)
« Last Edit: April 30, 2018, 08:35:26 AM by VA Official »

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1248
  • FAN REACTION: +63/-22
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2018, 09:24:28 AM »
That would eliminate several goofy IP out of bounds fouls and basically nullify that dumb "while out of bounds otherwise participates" rule.

Offline blandis

  • *
  • Posts: 128
  • FAN REACTION: +1/-1
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #11 on: July 06, 2018, 06:25:14 AM »
Signal Touchdown and then go report your foul for Illegal Participation. It's the same of you report OPI on a pass caught by A in the end zone. You signal touchdown, then report your foul the same as any other play. Do you not signal Touchdown when A hold at the B5-yardline and the ball carrier enters the end zone? of course not!

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3382
  • FAN REACTION: +258/-493
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #12 on: July 06, 2018, 09:33:42 AM »
Do you not signal Touchdown when A hold at the B5-yardline and the ball carrier enters the end zone? of course not!

Actually, "Not always, as it depends on whether YOU threw the (score cancelling) flag.  If it's YOUR flag, signalling TO, reporting to the Referee what you saw, and allowing him to confer with the offended team to determine their choice of enforcement will resolve whether, OR NOT, a TD has been SCORED, which the Referee can indicate by signalling.

If it's NOT YOUR flag, (and YOU have no way of knowing what the infraction might b, or how it affected the play) and YOU'VE observed a player satisfying the requirements of a TD, signalling TD seems appropriate.

Offline js in sc

  • *
  • Posts: 52
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-2
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #13 on: July 06, 2018, 11:27:17 AM »
Since I only do NFHS games (no NCAA), I am limited to their rules for decisions which makes it much easier.  IMHO, even if I threw the flag or saw the foul, rules dictate we continue to officiate the play following a live ball foul until the ball becomes dead.  If that includes a touchdown, then signal the score.  Discuss your observations with the Referee and allow the offended team to decide whether to accept the penalty or take the results of the play.  To not signal touchdown during the live ball period does not seem to be a proper mechanic, as it looks like you have stopped officiating with the flag.  ^good

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3382
  • FAN REACTION: +258/-493
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #14 on: July 06, 2018, 12:20:47 PM »
To not signal touchdown during the live ball period does not seem to be a proper mechanic, as it looks like you have stopped officiating with the flag. 

Looks to "who"?  To ANYONE, even slightly familiar with the game,  seeing a player in possession of the ball, in the opponents End Zone, followed by an official stopping the clock and reporting to the Referee (with no other signal given) should understand, there's a problem, that needs to be addressed, that the Referee will ultimately clarify.

If YOUR local mechanics accept/recommend the sequence you suggest, you should follow your locally approved mechanics, but there are NO NFHS rules that dictate signalling a score when a score negating foul is KNOWN to have been committed by the scoring team during the down, prior to that issue being resolved, and the offended team exercising their option.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 500
  • FAN REACTION: +13/-20
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #15 on: July 07, 2018, 07:45:12 AM »
After careful consideration, it appears both sides have merit, and it's basically "no harm, no foul" either way. However, it seems logical to me to signal the result of the play first, because any foul can be declined, and in the HIGHLY UNLIKELY event B chooses to decline this particular foul, all parties need to know how the play turned out. So, if I have to choose, I'm going with the "signal TD" side..

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2602
  • FAN REACTION: +320/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: mechanics question
« Reply #16 on: July 10, 2018, 01:19:21 PM »
IMHO, I would prefer my crew to just give signal #3 (TO) if they see a flag on the ground during a scoring play - EXPECIALLY if it's theirs against the scoring team.
IMHO, it's much easier to give a late  ^good after a crew discussion than to wave off a score with the penalty announcement.