Is this legal in NFHS???

[TXMike]

https://youtu.be/owTqHgau2Cc

[GA Umpire]

https://youtu.be/owTqHgau2Cc

No.

[bama_stripes]

Nope.  9-6-4d  Illegal Participation — Using a pretended substitution to deceive.

[HLinNC]

Nope.

I still show this Michigan 2013 game to the group every year.

[dammitbobby]

From a mechanics perspective, would the wing on the offensive side hold iron cross until he is sure there is nothing hinky going on?  Would that help identify/detect deceptive acts like this?

I know I hold it until I am reasonably confident that they've had time to do a fair exchange of players, just not sure what the correct mechanic is for this specifically, if there even is one - or, do we just do iron cross as normal, and just pay closer attention to the players on the field?

[AlUpstateNY]

From a mechanics perspective, would the wing on the offensive side hold iron cross until he is sure there is nothing hinky going on?  Would that help identify/detect deceptive acts like this?

I know I hold it until I am reasonably confident that they've had time to do a fair exchange of players, just not sure what the correct mechanic is for this specifically, if there even is one - or, do we just do iron cross as normal, and just pay closer attention to the players on the field?

As necessary key, to this nonsense working, is the faking player NOT LEAVING the field, common practice calls for stopping play when there is an injured player ON THE FIELD, so stopping EVERYTHING, so that injured player could be safely removed FROM the field, seems like a remedy for both safety, as well as stupidity prevention.

[CalhounLJ]

From a mechanics perspective, would the wing on the offensive side hold iron cross until he is sure there is nothing hinky going on?  Would that help identify/detect deceptive acts like this?

I know I hold it until I am reasonably confident that they've had time to do a fair exchange of players, just not sure what the correct mechanic is for this specifically, if there even is one - or, do we just do iron cross as normal, and just pay closer attention to the players on the field?

NFHS doesn’t have the iron cross. If I’m on that side I’m throwing a flag at the snap for IP.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Snapper]

From a mechanics perspective, would the wing on the offensive side hold iron cross until he is sure there is nothing hinky going on?  Would that help identify/detect deceptive acts like this?

I know I hold it until I am reasonably confident that they've had time to do a fair exchange of players, just not sure what the correct mechanic is for this specifically, if there even is one - or, do we just do iron cross as normal, and just pay closer attention to the players on the field?

Federation doesn't use the "iron cross" mechanic because they are not required to let the defense match up.  Under NCAA rules, I wouldn't keep holding up a cross, because at some point, the offense isn't substituting anymore.  They have 11 out there and no one is going anywhere.

Mechanically, the H should be getting back off the field and into the white.  And under both rule sets, A has fouled by running that hideout play.  It's a straightforward BS play.

I hadn't seen that game online before, so I did a bit of research on it.  According to the high school association's own write up about their finals games that year, the team that ran the hideout had told the officials about it before the game.  So that's not good, obviously.  We need to nip that in the bud.  https://secondhalf.mhsaa.com/topics/football/falcons-soar-brink-d5-peak

The nice thing about video nowadays, and this forum as well, is that we can all learn without the pain of actually being involved in a particular game.

[Snapper]

As necessary key, to this nonsense working, is the faking player NOT LEAVING the field, common practice calls for stopping play when there is an injured player ON THE FIELD, so stopping EVERYTHING, so that injured player could be safely removed FROM the field, seems like a remedy for both safety, as well as stupidity prevention.

Why make an injury up?  There's a simple remedy in the rules.  It's a 15 yd foul.  Just call that.

[ncwingman]

Why make an injury up?  There's a simple remedy in the rules.  It's a 15 yd foul.  Just call that.

In the video, the player coming off his holding his arm as if it's injured. A little bit of preventive officiating to "believe" the ruse to stop them from making a dumb mistake.

[CalhounLJ]

To be fair, I’m sure the covering official thought the “injury” issue was being solved by the substitution. Until it wasn’t. There’s no way to anticipate this was going to be a trick play until the moment it happened.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[refjeff]

In the video, the player coming off his holding his arm as if it's injured. A little bit of preventive officiating to "believe" the ruse to stop them from making a dumb mistake.

1.  I'm not stopping the game clock for a player who can get off the field under his own power.

2.  No one made a dumb mistake.  They deliberately cheated.

[ncwingman]

I'm not defending the play at all, but I'm more of the mindset that if you have the chance to shut down an illegal trick play before it happens, you should. Maybe in this situation, by the time you realize what they were doing the ball was already snapped and therefore you couldn't shut it down and then you've got to flag it.

If you can stop somebody before they commit a major foul, preventative officiating says you should. If you can't stop it, then you have no choice but to call it.

There should have been a flag on this play, but more importantly there should have been a discussion beforehand to stop the play from being called in the first place.

[Ralph Damren]

IMHO, Case 9.9.1b would cover this as it was certainly an unfair act. I was the author of this case back in 2001 when I was a member or the Editorial Committee. The strong consensus was that this play should be shut down before the snap, if possible, or as soon as the act was recognized. USC on head coach and put a few seconds back on the clock if the play had gotten off.

I agree wholeheartedly with Ncwingman that this could/should be nipped in the bud if possible. In our pregame meeting, the coach should reveal this as a 'trick or unusual play' and then be advised as it being illegal.

[HLinNC]

Ralph, I'd be reluctant to use 9-9-1 when 9-6-4d specifically identifies the pretended substitution as a form of IP.
Case play 9.9.1b involves verbiage with a player on the field.

[Ralph Damren]

Ralph, I'd be reluctant to use 9-9-1 when 9-6-4d specifically identifies the pretended substitution as a form of IP.
Case play 9.9.1b involves verbiage with a player on the field.

The intent of 9.9.1b was that any action or verbiage would be considered illegal . "...However, ACTIONS or verbiage designed to confuse the defense into believing there is a problem and a snap isn't imminent is beyond the scope of sportsmanship and is illegal." I think that faking an injury is crossing the line without yelling "OUCH  ".

[AlUpstateNY]

The intent of 9.9.1b was that any action or verbiage would be considered illegal . "...However, ACTIONS or verbiage designed to confuse the defense into believing there is a problem and a snap isn't imminent is beyond the scope of sportsmanship and is illegal." I think that faking an injury is crossing the line without yelling "OUCH  ".

I agree with your solution Ralph.  What this play represents is a deliberate UNSPORTSMANLIKE effort and should be recognized as such (to avoid any other similar "bright" ideas).  IP is a mistake, subject to similar penalty without appropriate condemnation.

[CalhounLJ]

This doesn’t sound like a “mistake.”

ART. 4 ... It is illegal participation:

d. To use a player, replaced player, substitute, coach, athletic trainer or other attendant in a substitution or pretended substitution to deceive opponents at or immediately before the snap or free kick.

Sounds like an intentional act to deceive. Also sounds exactly like what happened in the video I watched.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[CalhounLJ]

The problem I have with invoking 9-9-1 is that it specifically refers to situations that have no rules coverage

ART. 1 ... A player or nonplayer or person(s) not subject to the rules shall not hinder play by an unfair act which has no specific rule coverage.

This play has a specific rule coverage. So I say use the rule to which the foul applies.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[KWH]

Faking an injury has no specific rules coverage and this was clearly a designed play by the Head Coach.

9-9-5...Neither team shall commit and act which, in the opinion of the referee, tends to make a travesty of the game.

As soon as the ball is snapped and you recognize what just happened, shut the play down and issue a UNS to the head coach!

Now, that being said, I agree with Ralph, in the pregame when you ask "Coach do you have any trick or unusual plays" if he tells ut it down and hand him a UNS!  Hopefully he is smart enough not to overreact to the first UNS as should he, he shall receive a lovely parting gift.

[bama_stripes]

Suppose the head coach had already earned one USC prior to this play.  Invoking 9-9-1 now causes his ejection.

It’s my belief that, in our state, the officials would be sanctioned for misapplication of the rules due to the language of 9-6-4d, and any fine or suspension levied on the coach would be vacated.

[CalhounLJ]

Faking an injury has no specific rules coverage and this was clearly a designed play by the Head Coach.

9-9-5...Neither team shall commit and act which, in the opinion of the referee, tends to make a travesty of the game.

As soon as the ball is snapped and you recognize what just happened, shut the play down and issue a UNS to the head coach!

Now, that being said, I agree with Ralph, in the pregame when you ask "Coach do you have any trick or unusual plays" if he tells ut it down and hand him a UNS!  Hopefully he is smart enough not to overreact to the first UNS as should he, he shall receive a lovely parting gift.

So answer me this: A is running tempo, B is gassed. B17 fakes an injury by falling down and grabbing his calf. Are you gonna invoke 9-9-1?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Grant - AR]

So answer me this: A is running tempo, B is gassed. B17 fakes an injury by falling down and grabbing his calf. Are you gonna invoke 9-9-1?

How do you know B17 faked an injury by falling down and grabbing his calf?

I think there's a difference in what B17 did and what was in the original video.  Faking an injury is unethical no matter how or when it happens, but we aren't able to determine whether or not a player has an injury when he falls down.  I don't think anyone wants officials to start trying to determine whether or not a player is really injured...I know I don't.  We all assumed the player in the video had an injury the first time we watched it and he was coming off the field holding his arm.  Once it was determined that player was faking because he stayed in the game and was trying to use the substitution process to deceive, then we can throw the flag and give a UNS.

I haven't worked under NFHS rules in a long time so if this is wrong, please correct me.  I think I would drop the flag and let the play go.  Have the R announce, "UNS for using the substitution process to deceive.  This penalty is charged to the head coach."  If the coach has already gotten another UNS earlier in the game, well, he shouldn't have run this play. 

On a similar subject, I've never understood why coaches won't ask about plays they come up with before ever trying to implement them.  For instance, a local high school team practiced a "wrong tee" play many years ago.  At the time, there were several teachers in the school district who were also football officials.  Why wouldn't the head coach call one or two of those officials and ask, "Hey Bob.  Is this play legal?" 

[CalhounLJ]

How do you know B17 faked an injury by falling down and grabbing his calf?

I think there's a difference in what B17 did and what was in the original video.  Faking an injury is unethical no matter how or when it happens, but we aren't able to determine whether or not a player has an injury when he falls down.  I don't think anyone wants officials to start trying to determine whether or not a player is really injured...I know I don't.  We all assumed the player in the video had an injury the first time we watched it and he was coming off the field holding his arm.  Once it was determined that player was faking because he stayed in the game and was trying to use the substitution process to deceive, then we can throw the flag and give a UNS.

I haven't worked under NFHS rules in a long time so if this is wrong, please correct me.  I think I would drop the flag and let the play go.  Have the R announce, "UNS for using the substitution process to deceive.  This penalty is charged to the head coach."  If the coach has already gotten another UNS earlier in the game, well, he shouldn't have run this play. 

On a similar subject, I've never understood why coaches won't ask about plays they come up with before ever trying to implement them.  For instance, a local high school team practiced a "wrong tee" play many years ago.  At the time, there were several teachers in the school district who were also football officials.  Why wouldn't the head coach call one or two of those officials and ask, "Hey Bob.  Is this play legal?"

I agree we can’t and don’t need to get into the realm of trying to decipher real vs fake injuries. That’s my point. If the only reason we can apply 9-9-1 to this situation is the fake injury, then it doesn’t apply because we don’t know for certain the injury is fake. He may have really had a cramp in his pinkie that got better at the snap.

Taking the injury out of the equation, we have specific rules coverage for this situation. You suggested as much in your proposed solution. “UNS for using the substitution process to deceive.”  The only problem with  your solution is that’s not the penalty for using the substitution process to deceive. The proper penalty is IP. While some may feel a UNS to be warranted, we can’t make one up just because we don’t like the action.   We can’t just hit the coach with an unsportsmanlike conduct foul whenever we want.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[AlUpstateNY]

I agree we can’t and don’t need to get into the realm of trying to decipher real vs fake injuries. That’s my point. If the only reason we can apply 9-9-1 to this situation is the fake injury, then it doesn’t apply because we don’t know for certain the injury is fake. He may have really had a cramp in his pinkie that got better at the snap.

Taking the injury out of the equation, we have specific rules coverage for this situation. You suggested as much in your proposed solution. “UNS for using the substitution process to deceive.”  The only problem with  your solution is that’s not the penalty for using the substitution process to deceive. The proper penalty is IP. While some may feel a UNS to be warranted, we can’t make one up just because we don’t like the action.   We can’t just hit the coach with an unsportsmanlike conduct foul whenever we want.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This is another example PROVING, "One size NEVER fits all".  As suggested, there are multiple bullets to fire available.  The covering official decides which bullet to shoot, based on what is SEEN, what is BELIEVED to be the case in this ONE, UNIQUE situation in this ONE, UNIQUE game. 

If the conclusion is someone (player/coach) made a dumb MISTAKE and simply did/allowed something prohibited by rule, IP might well be the chosen bullet fired.  If, however the official's conclusion (in this unique case) was a deliberate intent to deceive, that may require a different bullet.  The choice of which bullet to fire rests with the calling official (EXCLUSIVELY).  Keep in mind, however the R is empowered to review and, RARELY, WHEN NECESSARY, modify that decision.

As for a coach, who has already been cited for UNS.  Big mistake he can ponder on his way OFF the field, knowing his behavior will be a major portion of the game report, he will likely have to answer for. The two most important factors officials are designed to protect are Player Safety & Sportsmanship, and the rules are designed to promote BOTH.