Author Topic: Would you have charged a time-out?  (Read 13261 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

younggun

  • Guest
Would you have charged a time-out?
« on: September 17, 2010, 01:04:07 PM »
Last night during a varcity game... Team A received a first down, we were moving the chains, when I looked over to blow the ready for play, the whole A team was over at the sideline with three coaches out on the field having a coference. I blew the RFP. There may have been more than the 11 in the group over by the sideline, it sure looked that way. So, I made Team A take a timeout even though they did not call one. Needless to say the coach was not happy with my decision. I told him he could either take a substitution infraction, a delay of game or take a timeout. He still didn't think he deserved any of those. Looking back I think I should have gave them a Sub-Infraction. Team B was happy by the timeout rather then the yardage. Team B just needed a break, but I didnt think about that until after the fact, it had no bearing on me giving team A a timeout.

What whould you have done?

Thanks

Offline Etref

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2371
  • FAN REACTION: +87/-29
  • " I don't make the rules coach!"
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2010, 01:15:12 PM »
I would not have gone the timeout route. Instead I would have marked the RTP and let him either hurry up, call time on his own or take a delay of game penalty.


" I don't make the rules coach!"

younggun

  • Guest
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #2 on: September 17, 2010, 01:17:23 PM »
Thats what I was going to do, but I felt it put team B at a disadvantage because they did not know what personnel team A was going to come out with since all 11+ were gathered by the sideline.

Offline Jackhammer

  • *
  • Posts: 250
  • FAN REACTION: +14/-5
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #3 on: September 17, 2010, 01:58:28 PM »
My question would be by what rule did you apply/enforce any of these things?

Timeout- your job to grant timeouts not call them
Sub infraction - maybe, did a sub report and the replaced player not leave within 3 s., probably not if there's some chaos
DOG - No DOG until the 25 s clock runs off
Coach on the field - maybe if you've enforced strictly to that point
All A players momentarily between the nines...you didn't give 'em that chance.

I'm probably gonna pass on this.  I'd blow the RFP as soon as the chains are set, at the normal pace the game has been worked, and then judge it from there.
"The only whistle that kills a play is an inadvertent one"

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

110

  • Guest
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #4 on: September 17, 2010, 02:34:22 PM »
I would not have gone the timeout route. Instead I would have marked the RTP and let him either hurry up, call time on his own or take a delay of game penalty.

I'm with this.

younggun

  • Guest
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #5 on: September 17, 2010, 02:51:19 PM »
Thanks for all the input.. I just reacted to them clearly trying to circumvent the rules. 2 plus coachs on the field, 11+ players on the field near the sideline in a huddle all talking to the coachs, leaving the team B not knowing what was going on, they did not know if they needed to sub players or not, was it a time out??? I should have just let them go and possibly get the DOG.

Online lawdog

  • *
  • Posts: 269
  • FAN REACTION: +10/-35
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #6 on: September 17, 2010, 03:39:26 PM »
I don't think you can just let this go, but I don't know that T.O. is the right call either.

You have possibilities, sideline warning, substitution, Coach on the field, unauthorized conference, or if you judge it was done to decieve as to who was in, unfair act USC. 

Absolutely don't believe you can let them get away with it.

tow

  • Guest
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #7 on: September 18, 2010, 09:23:21 AM »
Why not just go with an unathorized conference?

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4838
  • FAN REACTION: +344/-972
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #8 on: September 18, 2010, 10:10:22 AM »
Young gun, you were confronted by a situation, that you rightfully concluded provided, intentionally or unintentionally, an unfair advantage to Team A, at Team B's disadvantage.  You analyzed a number of possible alternatives and selected a reasonable solution.  Sounds a lot like you complied with the exact purpose of NF: 1-1-6  (The referee has the authority to rule promptly, and in the spirit of good sportsmanship, on any situation not specifically covered in the rules......".

The Team A coach may have been unhappy, but that was because he was wrong, and although what he allowed may have seemed like a really great idea at the time, and may have been totally unintentional, it did place his opponent at a possible disadvantage, which you promptly and effectively eliminated.  

You selected one of several possibilities, and the one causing the least consequence.  That's your job, nice work.

tow

  • Guest
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #9 on: September 18, 2010, 11:13:18 AM »
An unathorized conference is specifacly covered by the rules.

Offline With_Two_Flakes

  • *
  • Posts: 439
  • FAN REACTION: +5/-2
  • British American Football Referees Association
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #10 on: September 18, 2010, 02:40:10 PM »
Do the NFHS Rules not have an equivalent of the NCAA's "gotta give Team B a chance to make subs in response to team A's subs" rule?
Sorry Death, you lose! It was Professor Plum....

Offline Welpe

  • *
  • Posts: 1860
  • FAN REACTION: +28/-11
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #11 on: September 18, 2010, 02:43:50 PM »
Two flakes, no it doesn't.

jaxpk

  • Guest
Blue, you don't understand?!
« Reply #12 on: September 18, 2010, 06:55:51 PM »
I was the back judge in a close game.  The visiting team ran a touchdown in from approximately 40 yards.  While preparing for the PAT, the defense (home team) is jawing with the visiting sideline.  I turn my attention to the sideline and see a lone gentleman from the visiting team jawing with the home team defense.  When I inquired of what the issue was, he responded "you do not understand", of which I stated, "what do I not understand, your team just scored a touchdown, please help me."  The gentleman then stated "They (the home team) is threatening my team on facebook!)."  I had to take a second and ask him if he was serious and he said "yes!".  I responded with a flag for a sideline warning.  Our Linesman and Referee then tried to calm down the man, who was the visiting team's principal!

Note: we were advised that in the future, in addition to monitoring the :25 second clock, the back judge will have a hand held PC and will need to call unsportsmanlike penalties while monitoring the social websites!  PLEASE TELL ME IT ISN'T TRUE!

Can you imagine, whistle - we have unsportsmanlike on the offense due to verbal abuse on twitter.   LOL

110

  • Guest
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #13 on: September 19, 2010, 04:54:46 PM »
Had an eerily similar play today. Bantam game ... visitors call time out. I'm R ... give obligatory 10-second warning... players don't move from sideline conference. Blow RFP ... team wanders back to the LOS idly. Way too idly.

 ^flag


txmustang68

  • Guest
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #14 on: September 19, 2010, 10:07:22 PM »
As U, I would have stood over the ball until the D had time to adjust to the subs.

Offline Welpe

  • *
  • Posts: 1860
  • FAN REACTION: +28/-11
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #15 on: September 20, 2010, 12:20:54 AM »
As U, I would have stood over the ball until the D had time to adjust to the subs.

Works great in NCAA but not in Federation.

Offline The Roamin' Umpire

  • *
  • Posts: 353
  • FAN REACTION: +31/-16
Re: Would you have charged a time-out?
« Reply #16 on: September 20, 2010, 11:49:29 AM »
I think you did the right thing. 2-6 defines an authorized conference; the team's actions clearly meet the definition in 2-6-2a. 3-5-8 says "An authorized conference may be held during a charged time-out or an official's time-out (7h, 7l, and 7m only)." This is not one of the valid official's time-outs for a conference (first down is 7b), so by their actions, the team has indicated they want a time-out.

If the coaches are not on the field, then you're on much shakier ground - they're merely choosing to huddle near the sideline. In that case, just blow the RFP and watch like a hawk for substitution infractions.