Author Topic: Interesting Scenario  (Read 19971 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline TampaSteve

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1534
  • FAN REACTION: +24/-13
Interesting Scenario
« on: December 14, 2011, 10:41:56 AM »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVk5g4kVBEQ&feature=related
Just thinking.
Unless I'm missing something, the player in the white seems to be on the field, on his side of the ball.  Nothing is prohibiting him from being where he is. - right? 
Doesn't seem to be a timeout & even if there was still don't think anything would prohibit player in white if he's on his side of the ball...

Offline SanDiegoStryker

  • *
  • Posts: 100
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-0
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2011, 11:03:32 AM »
So the foul they called was unsportsmanlike conduct on the coach of the blue team for the push? Is that an incorrect foul? Doesn't unsportsmanlike conduct have to be non-contact foul?

Offline TampaSteve

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1534
  • FAN REACTION: +24/-13
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #2 on: December 14, 2011, 11:15:55 AM »
Seemingly, yes, that was the call.  Yep USC is non-contact.

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #3 on: December 14, 2011, 11:58:13 AM »
This was discussed ad naseum on another board.

1.  A good official would have gotten the kid out of there.  Call it preventive officiating.
2.  What the coach did was not anywhere near the level of a USC flag.

Offline TampaSteve

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1534
  • FAN REACTION: +24/-13
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #4 on: December 14, 2011, 12:14:36 PM »
which other board? - the one you now have to be a 'member' of?
I've dropped that one.

Agree w/ both points Atl makes.

Offline Curious

  • *
  • Posts: 1314
  • FAN REACTION: +36/-50
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #5 on: December 14, 2011, 02:26:44 PM »
This was discussed ad naseum on another board.

1.  A good official would have gotten the kid out of there.  Call it preventive officiating.
2.  What the coach did was not anywhere near the level of a USC flag.

I certainly agree that the coach's action did not warrant an USC foul; nor do I know of any rule-based restriction against the player in white's position on the field.  My concern going forward would be how this might escalate if either or both teams decided they would take this action during every huddle or time out.

Is it an "unfair act" by the player in white?  Does it make a "travesty of the game"?  Better that the officials get it stopped right away.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4833
  • FAN REACTION: +344/-935
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #6 on: December 14, 2011, 02:44:11 PM »
This was discussed ad naseum on another board.

1.  A good official would have gotten the kid out of there.  Call it preventive officiating.
2.  What the coach did was not anywhere near the level of a USC flag.

A smart/good coach would have called the attention of the nearest official to the presence of an opponent in their gathering and allowed the official to address the matter himself avoiding any perception of unsportsmanlike conduct or any necessity to make contact with an opposing player.

Taking matters into your own hands, rather than involving appropriate authorities, often provides unnecessary consequences in a lot more things than football.

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #7 on: December 14, 2011, 03:09:21 PM »
A smart/good coach would have called the attention of the nearest official to the presence of an opponent in their gathering and allowed the official to address the matter himself avoiding any perception of unsportsmanlike conduct or any necessity to make contact with an opposing player.

Yes, that would be a better response provided the officials did their job.  Of course, had they been doing their job to begin with, the entire situation would have been avoided.

Quote
Taking matters into your own hands, rather than involving appropriate authorities, often provides unnecessary consequences in a lot more things than football.

True, as evidenced here. It allows poorly trained authorities to show they are "in charge" rather than using good judgment. 

 >:D

Offline TampaSteve

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1534
  • FAN REACTION: +24/-13
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2011, 03:15:27 PM »
I certainly agree that the coach's action did not warrant an USC foul; nor do I know of any rule-based restriction against the player in white's position on the field.  My concern going forward would be how this might escalate if either or both teams decided they would take this action during every huddle or time out.

Is it an "unfair act" by the player in white?  Does it make a "travesty of the game"?  Better that the officials get it stopped right away.
To preface, I'm not being combatative with anyone. - just tossing out 'what if's'
Doesn't white have every right to be on his side of the ball on the field? - & it wasn't a charged timeout, was it?
Atl, what if you were white's coach & he was asked to move?
Blue could just as well move completely off the field.

Interesting though, WHAT IF it was during a timeout?
Blue has option of either on the field behind LOS or on their sideline & between the 25's.
A white player can still come over if between the 25's & on his LOS though, can't he?


Offline Curious

  • *
  • Posts: 1314
  • FAN REACTION: +36/-50
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #9 on: December 14, 2011, 03:20:34 PM »
To preface, I'm not being combatative with anyone.


Go ahead Tampa...be combative.  It usually starts a good dialog!

Offline TampaSteve

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1534
  • FAN REACTION: +24/-13
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #10 on: December 14, 2011, 03:20:54 PM »
Still thinking...
What if it was the proverbial, "coach has QB run over to sideline every play to get the play in" - type offense?
white can stand wherever he wants on his LOS. - it's not his fault the blue coach can't sub or signal to get a play in.

Offline TampaSteve

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1534
  • FAN REACTION: +24/-13
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #11 on: December 14, 2011, 03:21:55 PM »
Go ahead Tampa...be combative.  It usually starts a good dialog!
nah, come on... I don't butt heads just to butt heads.
Unless it's butt blocking.

Offline jg-me

  • *
  • Posts: 416
  • FAN REACTION: +22/-4
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #12 on: December 14, 2011, 04:13:15 PM »
I don't have a rule book with me and no longer work NF but I seem to recall that the definition of an authorized conference includes some reference to it consisting of a player or players of the team holding the conference. Presuming this is true, that should give you enough rule basis to apply some common sense and cordially seperate any opponents from an authorized conference being held by the other team.

Offline Curious

  • *
  • Posts: 1314
  • FAN REACTION: +36/-50
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #13 on: December 14, 2011, 10:25:09 PM »
I don't have a rule book with me and no longer work NF but I seem to recall that the definition of an authorized conference includes some reference to it consisting of a player or players of the team holding the conference. Presuming this is true, that should give you enough rule basis to apply some common sense and cordially seperate any opponents from an authorized conference being held by the other team.

Good thought (and memory) jg...

The two types of (team) conferences are defined as a) "one or more team members" (although it doesn't really designate which team); and b) "No more than 11 players of HIS (the coaches) team".

This COULD serve as a rules-based reason to chase the white team player....   

Offline TampaSteve

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1534
  • FAN REACTION: +24/-13
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #14 on: December 15, 2011, 08:28:12 AM »
ART. 8 . . . Authorized conferences
a. An authorized conference may be held during:
1. a charged time-out;
2. an official’s time-out
3. if granted by the referee in 3-5-10.

This incident was the interim between the kick & 1/10 for A - 'officials' timeout. 
What's prohibiting B from being on the Field on his side of the ball?  A can hold the conference off the field, right?
 :sTiR:
Again, not stirring the pot, just tossing something on the table for discussion.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2011, 08:32:05 AM by TampaSteve »

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4833
  • FAN REACTION: +344/-935
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #15 on: December 15, 2011, 09:12:55 AM »
Yes, that would be a better response provided the officials did their job.  Of course, had they been doing their job to begin with, the entire situation would have been avoided. 
True, as evidenced here. It allows poorly trained authorities to show they are "in charge" rather than using good judgment.   >:D

A perfect example of why coaches are excluded from input on judgment calls, their job requires they are too involved with their team.  Unless you were at this game, or personally know these officials, suggesting the officials weren't doing their job, based on this clip, is a silly, purely defensive reaction and there's no bus near enough to effectively deflect blame by trying to throw the officials under.

I couldn't tell whether the player, in white, injected himself into his opponents gathering, or the opponents, for whatever reason, decided to gather where the player in white was standing.  I also couldn't tell what else may have been going on, otherwise on the field

Not that it matters, but based on this clip alone, I wouldn't have flagged the situation, but I wasn't at the game and have no idea how that particular coach was behaving up to that point.  Absent any previous problems, I would have considered this incident not deserving of a flag, but worthy of a quiet comment and suggestion the coach catch his breath.

There are few things in life that bring out the beast in someone as quick as a trying teenager, that anyone having lived through multiple puberties (the first being your own) can attest to. 

Offline bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 3145
  • FAN REACTION: +124/-29
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #16 on: December 15, 2011, 12:35:01 PM »
There may not be specific rules language prohibiting the White player's action, but I'd still "nip it in the bud".

You KNOW what's going to happen if we don't -- retaliation by the opponents, which could lead to an all-out brawl.

Mike L

  • Guest
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #17 on: December 15, 2011, 03:27:52 PM »
Really? We need a specific rule to keep opposing players out of each others conferences/huddles? You have got to be kidding me. How about just exercising some game management techniques and get him out of there rather than letting him stay in a potential problem causing situation for about 15 seconds. I mean, is getting the ball off to the wrong side of the field THAT important?

110

  • Guest
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #18 on: December 15, 2011, 04:38:02 PM »
This was discussed ad naseum on another board.

1.  A good official would have gotten the kid out of there.  Call it preventive officiating.
2.  What the coach did was not anywhere near the level of a USC flag.

Bingo, and Bingo.

jjseikel

  • Guest
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #19 on: December 19, 2011, 12:38:50 PM »
Alert officials and preventative officiating would be the best course of action but...

... the white player can legally be where he is and the blue coaches can't legally be where they are. UNS on the coach for being on the field. Get his IDIOT off the field.

If blue is afraid that white will steal their deepest secrets they could move their huddle to the offensive side of the LOS... no wait, they can't because they are already outside the 25. Better yet, git er dun in practice so you don't need these little gatherings.

Offline mpmorris

  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-0
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #20 on: December 22, 2011, 01:25:57 PM »
Preventive officiate first......after that, I would have thrown a flag on the white team for USC, that would fix the situation. The coach pushing the kid warranted nothing in this case. Remember, keep the game fair for both teams.

jjseikel

  • Guest
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #21 on: December 23, 2011, 12:17:59 PM »
......after that, I would have thrown a flag on the white team for USC,

For what rule violation?

jjseikel

  • Guest
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #22 on: December 23, 2011, 12:22:07 PM »
The coach pushing the kid warranted nothing in this case.

Oh? Why is he even on the field? So a coach pushing an opposing player is an approved technique?

Offline NoVaBJ

  • *
  • Posts: 128
  • FAN REACTION: +11/-8
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #23 on: December 25, 2011, 08:58:18 PM »
The sideline management by this crew is criminally attrocious.  Witness the hordes of people in the restricted zone on the kickoff, and the unauthorized conference by blue's coaching staff afterwards.

By failing to flag blue's coaches for being on the field, the crew brings the rest of it on itself.  Serves them right.

Offline Rulesman

  • Past Keeper of the Keys
  • Refstripes Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3839
  • FAN REACTION: +65535/-2
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: Interesting Scenario
« Reply #24 on: December 26, 2011, 10:25:05 AM »
Since so many coaches these days seem to think they have a need to be on the field, maybe we should promote a rule change that requires them to be in helmets and pads.  :sTiR:
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi