When do you stop officiating at 100%?

[jaxpk]

I would like to think I am as professional on the field as off.  However, I have heard mixed comments with regard to when we, as high school officials, should just let the game roll as is due to an overwhelming score. 

Tell me what your opinion is to officiating professionally, consistently and at 100% from the time you walk onto the field to the 0:00 time on the scoreboard following the fourth quarter.  Do you become lax in making certain calls in consideration of a weaker team, because they are losing by such a great margin that they will probably not recover from?  Do you remain consistent on the winning team with all calls, ie :25 second clock, encroachment, yet give the losing team >1 minute to start a play or let them commit false starts?  How much grief from the winning coach do you allow your crew to be the recipients of, just because he wants to go home in the middle of the third quarter, when he is winning >35 points?  How much cursing do you tolerate from your sidelines?

I look forward to your comments.

[Jackhammer]

I think we're all better some days than others, but I don't stop officiating 100%. 

As for how you officiate during a blowout situation is a philosophical approach in which I'm sure there will be plenty of opinions.  I think every game has its own "vibe", if you will, that calls for an official to judge and apply the appropriate technique to the appropriate situation.

We have many jobs as an official and sometimes the "purity" of the rules may be sacrificed for some other consideration.  That doesn't mean we've stopped officiating at 100%.

[AlUpstateNY]

We have many jobs as an official and sometimes the "purity" of the rules may be sacrificed for some other consideration.  That doesn't mean we've stopped officiating at 100%.

I absolutely agree, infact I would submit that often as games get lopsided the requirement for intensity in officiating escalates above 100%.  Unlike most other sports, football is a game of extreme physical contact that requires participants to continue competing after the results of the contest have been decided. 

At the HS level, the participants are at an age where frustration and judgment are both factors still being developed while hormones are being applied.....unevenly.  Far more important than actual rule knowledge or precise mechanics execution is the officials ability to understand how and when to adapt that knowledge to best fit the situation he has been presented with.

Absolute and strict adherence to all rules, despite circumstances, is analogous to responding to a wolf attack by grabbing on to the wolf's ears.

[jaxpk]

And I thought I was a lone wolf thinking we play football while the clock is running.  I have yet hear that the officials shift into our cruising gear now that the outcome is inevitable.  Safety should always be a concern while we have game management control.

[RMR]

And I thought I was a lone wolf thinking we play football while the clock is running.  I have yet hear that the officials shift into our cruising gear now that the outcome is inevitable.  Safety should always be a concern while we have game management control.

I worked with a whitehat for several years who would always say that when the game became a blowout, that was where we really earned our money, becuase that is then someone is really going to do something stupid.  The blowouts are the tough ones.  Close games tend to take care of themselves because the kids are more worried about winning the game than doing something dumb.

[With_Two_Flakes]

Blowouts have more opportunities for trouble, so you have to stay with 100% focus on the game. Player safety stuff and trash talking need your total attention in these type of games. A tied game going into the 4th quarter is a breeze by comparison. Both teams know that a 15 yarder might put the opposition just within FG range for the win.

Subconciously, I may well be more likely to pass on a close holding call against the team who have already lost the game. I've never really thought about it that much.

We are "lucky" over here in Europe that we almost never have visible clocks (game or 25) at our fields, so as White Hat I can certainly let the losing team in a blowout take a few extra seconds to snap the ball. After all they are the ones behind in the score, so it's their own time they're wasting.

[110]

And I thought I was a lone wolf thinking we play football while the clock is running.  I have yet hear that the officials shift into our cruising gear now that the outcome is inevitable.  Safety should always be a concern while we have game management control.

If anything, I shift my focus and engage in more dead-ball officiating during a blowout.

Like other said, that's when we earn our keep. That's when trash-talking, f-bombs, late shoves, piling on ... tends to happen.

[bama_stripes]

1)  Safety fouls - ALWAYS
2)  Counts (downs, # of players) - ALWAYS
3)  Sportsmanship - ALWAYS
4)  OBVIOUS False Starts, OBVIOUS holds at point of attack, OBVIOUS BIBs - ALWAYS

Otherwise, we adopt a "let 'em play" philosophy.  If the offense is preparing to snap when the play clock hits 0, we let it go.  Formation fouls & motion fouls that might be called in a competetive game are usually ignored.  In bounds/out of bounds decisions are always "in bounds".  No measurements.  Quick wind on first downs. Etc, etc.

[Diablo]

1)  Safety fouls - ALWAYS
2)  Counts (downs, # of players) - ALWAYS
3)  Sportsmanship - ALWAYS
4)  OBVIOUS False Starts, OBVIOUS holds at point of attack, OBVIOUS BIBs - ALWAYS

Otherwise, we adopt a "let 'em play" philosophy.  If the offense is preparing to snap when the play clock hits 0, we let it go.  Formation fouls & motion fouls that might be called in a competetive game are usually ignored.  In bounds/out of bounds decisions are always "in bounds".  No measurements.  Quick wind on first downs. Etc, etc.

I agree with cutting the losing team some slack when it comes to flagging their administrative fouls.  But, if the players are behaving themselves, why deliberately run time of the clock?

Participation fees are hard to swallow as is.  Many Mamas & Papas pay good money to see their kids play.  Players low on the depth chart relish the chance to play.  Why short change them? 

Running the clock outside of the rules does more to create ill will from fans, parents, ADs, coaches, & players than any other discretion officials employ.  And don't think they don't notice.

If they are playing the game, "let 'em play".

[KB]

If conditions lead us to apply rules in a less stringent manner, that does not mean we stop officiating at 100%.

It's just that every decision is guided by the special situation we're in, after we have made the conscious decision that the state of the current game requires this.

In a blowout (eg), we won't be enforcing procedural rules like we would in a close game, but we still have to maintain our focus so the occasional safety-related or UNC does not slip through.

OTOH, a team that's being thoroughly beaten may want to play on, if they show that the fight ist still in them, let them go on.
Once you perceive that the losing team is simply giving up, there is no sense in extending the torture for all involved. Beating up on an opponent who is inferior and has quit doesn't do all that good for the winner, either. Let it be over quickly.

[LarryW60]

We're told to treat each game as if it was the State Finals.  For us it's just another game, but there is probably some family in the stands who will only get to see their kid play this one time and it's for the people like that that we owe them our best effort.  So fouls will still be called.  There's no "phoning in" the second half of a blowout.

[lawdog]

I agree you can't stop officiating at less than 100% and I don't believe that's what the question is getting at.  Really its a question of basic officiating philosophy. In a lopsided game where a team has no chance, are they "gaining an advantage" if we let a low level penalty go uncalled?  I doubt it seriously.  On the other hand, you have to keep the game under control and I agree 100% that blowouts are ripe for problems and you need to nip them right away and remain very vigilant at all times for that. 

[VALJ]

We're told to treat each game as if it was the State Finals.  For us it's just another game, but there is probably some family in the stands who will only get to see their kid play this one time and it's for the people like that that we owe them our best effort.  So fouls will still be called.  There's no "phoning in" the second half of a blowout.

I may be a bit more inclined give a bit more of the "benefit of the doubt" when it comes to strictly technical violations in a blowout - in a 35 point game, does it really make a difference if the wideout might be a step too close to the line of scrimmage?  Anything safety related is still going to get called quickly.  And anything that's even close to taunting, cheap shots, etc. will have a stop put it right quick.

As far as "forward progress stopped in the field of play" and the like, I think that's become a lot less of an issue in my area since Virginia adopted the 35-point mercy rule.  At any time in the second half that the lead is 35 points or more, the clock only stops for charged, injury, and officials' timeouts, and when a score takes place.  At that point, the clock always starts on the RFP.  The only thing I'm worried about more in a blowout game than preventing someone from doing something stupid is somebody getting hurt seriously.

[LarryW60]

We usually try to mark the backs in the backfield if we can during ANY game. If their line is just too messed up to be able to guess who's back and who's not, then we'll mark the iffy players "up" and watch for a covered player going out on a pass play.  Usually that kind of sloppiness appears right at the beginning of the game, though, not after a blowout ensues.