Jumping over the guard

[CalhounLJ]

The purpose of hurdling is to eliminate the attempt at jumping over an upright player.  The wording of the rule excepting the fact that some other body part beside one or both feet is factoring in a prone or nearly prone player and is clear intent the Federation is well aware of what they deem a foul.  The Fed has had ample time to revise their definition or adjust the rule in the 25 years I've been calling but has not done so.

I understand the safety issue but given that they have made no attempt to revise the wording of the rule, I agree with those that say this is not a foul as described.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bbeagle]

A few years back, when the Patriots were a good team , on Monday night game; the loyal opposition lined up for a field goal when:

(1) A defender ,with a running start, hurdled the snapper and blocked the kick- it was later learned that said player also a high-hurdle champ at some level;

(2) I believe the NFL has since outlawed such an act;

The NFL has outlawed hurdling an offensive lineman to block a kick (they call it leaping). Other hurdling is still legal - see the Bills Josh Allen's hurdle vs. Vikings week 2.

[prab]

I would agree 100%.   The implication that one or both feet are on the ground is that the player may be able to stand up and either hurt the hurdler or himself.  The possibility of injury outweighs the literal following of the rule.  It will be much easier to explain to the coaches why I called the foul and did not follow the literal interpretation of the rule, than it would be to explain not calling the foul to an injured player's family or a jury.

I am not an attorney and do not presume to be providing legal advice.  However, I have been on the witness stand on numerous occasions and have been asked questions that made me glad that I had followed the rules as they were written and not as I thought they should have been written.  I think that if you intend to intentionally misapply a rule, you should not put your thoughts in writing.  If another situation, unrelated to hurdling, arises in one of your games and a player is seriously injured, an attorney may be asking you, "Since you have stated in writing that you are willing to misapply the hurdling rule, how can the jury conclude that you were not also intentionally misapplying the rule that is associated with my client's injury?"

[CalhounLJ]

Well, you could apply that straw man argument to virtually any situation. Take the play just posted as an example. “Did you see the player celebrate?” Yes. “You do realize celebration is a foul?” Yes. “Why didn’t you throw your flag?” No harm, no foul. “Do you routinely ignore the rules?”

In my opinion, if any of us ever make it to the witness stand in this situation, it’s gonna be bad. In fact, not calling it could even be worse.
“Do you understand the intent of the hurdling foul?” Yes, to prevent knee head injury. “Why didn’t you call hurdling?” Because the player had his hand in the ground. “Do you think that lessened the danger?” No. “Then why did you not penalize this safety issue?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[prab]

Well, you could apply that straw man argument to virtually any situation. Take the play just posted as an example. “Did you see the player celebrate?” Yes. “You do realize celebration is a foul?” Yes. “Why didn’t you throw your flag?” No harm, no foul. “Do you routinely ignore the rules?”

In my opinion, if any of us ever make it to the witness stand in this situation, it’s gonna be bad. In fact, not calling it could even be worse.
“Do you understand the intent of the hurdling foul?” Yes, to prevent knee head injury. “Why didn’t you call hurdling?” Because the player had his hand in the ground. “Do you think that lessened the danger?” No. “Then why did you not penalize this safety issue?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I stand by my theory that you don't gain anything by putting your intent to misapply a rule into writing.  It can come back to bite you, and I can not imagine any way that it can help you!

[CalhounLJ]

I agree with that. Nobody has ever been in trouble for something they didn’t say.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[riffraft]

I am not an attorney and do not presume to be providing legal advice.  However, I have been on the witness stand on numerous occasions and have been asked questions that made me glad that I had followed the rules as they were written and not as I thought they should have been written.  I think that if you intend to intentionally misapply a rule, you should not put your thoughts in writing.  If another situation, unrelated to hurdling, arises in one of your games and a player is seriously injured, an attorney may be asking you, "Since you have stated in writing that you are willing to misapply the hurdling rule, how can the jury conclude that you were not also intentionally misapplying the rule that is associated with my client's injury?"

Ok, maybe I am being naive, but I think the whole lawsuit issue is a red herring. Has an official been sued in court and lost?  I have been unable to find any cases.

[UTchad]

Ok, maybe I am being naive, but I think the whole lawsuit issue is a red herring. Has an official been sued in court and lost?  I have been unable to find any cases.

Possible most of these cases involve children so perhaps they are sealed. I do know that officials in our association mention that the state was sued because a team was late coming out at half time and they were not granted a full 3 minutes to warm up. QB was hurt in the game, and parents said that if he was given his 3 minutes to warm up they he wouldn't have been hurt. This happened YEARS ago, my understanding is this was settled before trial. In our state it is an emphasis every year to always grant a 3 minute warm up period. If we have long stoppage time for injury for example we also grant a 3 minute warm up.

[refjeff]

Possible most of these cases involve children so perhaps they are sealed.

  That is not possible

[Ralph Damren]

Let me soften my approach on this. Unless the guard has fallen asleep with his eyes open ,he is going to be reacting to the charging hurdler. To do that he would be coming out of his 3/4 point stance. The quickness of the play may make it improbable that we can tell for sure. Unlike the "when if doubt" suggestions that are listed in the Officials Manual, this is a safety issue and should be treated like the 5 or 15 face mask or roughing/running into the kicker. 

[bossman72]

This is no less a safety issue than hurdling a player who is standing upright.  The “no part...” exception is mainly to allow a ball carrier to jump over a prone (or almost prone) player without penalty.

 

+1 - This is the spirit of the rule.  I don't think the rules makers want people hurdling blockers at any time.

[CalhounLJ]

Agreed. I’m also sure they never envisioned a lineman remaining in a three point stance at the snap either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NoVaBJ]

B's linebacker is offside. Period.

Period.

[prab]

B's linebacker is offside. Period.

Period.

WOW!

[prab]

Ok, maybe I am being naive, but I think the whole lawsuit issue is a red herring. Has an official been sued in court and lost?  I have been unable to find any cases.

Although not exactly on point for this thread, it might change your mind if you review the discussion regarding  Law Suit Targets Pop Warner, found on page 7, with last post on 11/01/2017.   Ralph's comments on making up rules is spot on as far as I am concerned. 

[riffraft]

Although not exactly on point for this thread, it might change your mind if you review the discussion regarding  Law Suit Targets Pop Warner, found on page 7, with last post on 11/01/2017.   Ralph's comments on making up rules is spot on as far as I am concerned.

I understand the point, but still doesn't go against my questions. Has an official every been sued and lost? Neither of those cases involved an official being sued.

[backjudge79]

Good grief folks, are we actually arguing that jumping over a lineman is not a foul when it is at every other level? It is hurdling and if you don't like that one file it as "unfair acts" category. Use some common sense before someone gets hurt.

[AlUpstateNY]

Good grief folks, are we actually arguing that jumping over a lineman is not a foul when it is at every other level? It is hurdling and if you don't like that one file it as "unfair acts" category. Use some common sense before someone gets hurt

I thought I read somewhere that the ONLY opening on the US Supreme Court had recently been filled, so perhaps we can focus back on determining, "How may angels can dance on the head of a pin"

[CalhounLJ]

Depends on the size of the pin.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk