Author Topic: HCT/Penalty Declined (Read 4378 times)

JDM · « **on:** January 01, 2021, 08:09:17 PM »

Video:

https://youtu.be/FZ4uX6kzSKc

ElvisLives · « **Reply #1 on:** January 01, 2021, 09:15:39 PM »

Old school. No Facebook here. What’s the issue?

JDM · « **Reply #2 on:** January 01, 2021, 10:18:33 PM »

Quote from: ElvisLives on January 01, 2021, 09:15:39 PM

Old school. No Facebook here. What’s the issue?

Revised.

JasonTX · « **Reply #3 on:** January 01, 2021, 10:34:57 PM »

A personal foul during a play that ends in TD. This is a pretty basic enforcement. Penalize on the Try or Kickoff in this play. Had they not scored then add it to the end of the last run.

ElvisLives · « **Reply #4 on:** January 02, 2021, 07:30:49 AM »

Besides the missed penalty enforcement, equally disturbing is that the R stopped officiating after he tossed his flag. He was walking toward the area of the foul as the BC is running in the other direction. Admire your work on video - finish the down!

copedaddy · « **Reply #5 on:** January 02, 2021, 10:45:02 AM »

Quite a discussion about having a HCT foul when the QB is not down by rule. Which according to a play bulletin from 2012(?) it is possible.
On a side note, anyone know what chapter is working the Westlake v Steele game today.

ElvisLives · « **Reply #6 on:** January 02, 2021, 02:11:08 PM »

Quote from: copedaddy on January 02, 2021, 10:45:02 AM

Quite a discussion about having a HCT foul when the QB is not down by rule. Which according to a play bulletin from 2012(?) it is possible.
On a side note, anyone know what chapter is working the Westlake v Steele game today.

I could have overlooked it, but I looked through all the bulletins between 2008 (inception of the rule) and now, and didn’t find anything like that. If you have it, please share. I believe we’ve been directed that a HCT foul doesn’t require that the BC get pulled to the ground, but he does need to get pulled down enough to buckle the legs.

IMHO, it was probably good that they ‘declined’ the penalty, because there wasn’t enough there to call a HCT, anyway. No real pull down and buckling of the legs.

JasonTX · « **Reply #7 on:** January 02, 2021, 02:51:28 PM »

I remember either a bulletin or a video from NCAA that the runner does not need to be taken all the way to the ground with the ball becoming dead. If you have the buckling of knees the directive was it would still be a foul. I'm pretty sure there was discussion in the past on this topic on here.

Edit: Found this.

http://www.refstripes.com/forum/index.php?topic=10907.0

"This was put out in late 2012

From: Walt Anderson, Ken Rivera, and Byron Boston – Officiating Coordinators
Date: November 14, 2012

Horsecollar Rule

Just so we are clear on this rule, and we have confirmed this with Rogers Redding, the rule only requires that the player immediately pull the ball carrier “down”. This does not mean that he has to go all the way to the ground or be declared down by rule. A runner can catch himself, land on another player, or otherwise not be down by rule and continue running and still be pulled down in a manner that the intent of the rule is designed to prevent. Serious injury can occur from a runner being pulled down or to the side with this type of tackling action, so if the grab by the back or side of the collar creates an immediate downward pull of the runner, especially if there is any buckling effect of the knees or legs, that is the action that causes the injury and therefore must be called. It is NOT a requirement that this illegal action results in the runner being tackled although that commonly is the result."

ElvisLives · « **Reply #8 on:** January 02, 2021, 03:58:16 PM »

Yeah, that confirms the direction we had been given, and I certainly accept that. The only trouble is that it came from the CFO West (I.e., Walt Anderson), and wasn’t issued by Redding. Yes, they reference that the directive was coordinated with Redding, and I completely believe that. Unfortunately, it may not have been distributed outside the CFO West, so not everybody working NCAA rules would have necessarily received the directive. I was still in FBS - but no longer a part of the CFO West - at the time. But our coordinator had direct ties with the CFO West (since we had been an original member conference) and we almost always got what they got, so, I certainly remember this directive. I probably had that directive in print at one time, but canned a lot of that stuff when I retired. Thankfully, I kept all official communications from CFO / Redding.
Bottom line, it doesn’t require a full pull-down to the ground for a HCT foul, but it does take a pull-down. I didn’t see a pull-down in the action of the subject down.

Clear Lake ref · « **Reply #9 on:** January 03, 2021, 10:56:04 AM »

I’ve heard it both ways from high school and college. TASO president for 2021 indicated he had to be tackled.

This really does need a proper ruling from the highest level.

dammitbobby · « **Reply #10 on:** January 03, 2021, 11:06:25 AM »

Just out of curiosity, when there are competing interpretations between persons of authority on a topic, which one should we follow? (I'm also making an assumption here that the 2021 Preident is not the official TASO rules interpreter or whatever that position is called)

JasonTX · « **Reply #11 on:** January 03, 2021, 02:06:15 PM »

It would be nice if Steve Shaw would provide an interpretation. I sent a play to him 2 weeks ago for his interpretation and I haven't received a reply. Maybe someone here has a closer connection and can get something.

Timer · « **Reply #12 on:** January 04, 2021, 08:27:28 AM »

Quote from: JasonTX on January 03, 2021, 02:06:15 PM

It would be nice if Steve Shaw would provide an interpretation. I sent a play to him 2 weeks ago for his interpretation and I haven't received a reply. Maybe someone here has a closer connection and can get something.

Good luck.

CosmoKramer · « **Reply #13 on:** January 04, 2021, 03:15:15 PM »

Quote from: ElvisLives on January 02, 2021, 07:30:49 AM

Besides the missed penalty enforcement, equally disturbing is that the R stopped officiating after he tossed his flag. He was walking toward the area of the foul as the BC is running in the other direction. Admire your work on video - finish the down!

I agree with this statement 100%. Regardless if the call was right or not, it's EXTREMELY disappointing to see a crew working at this level and not know such basic penalty enforcement. This is the kind of mistake a rookie makes, but not one working a regional final. Might as well mark off 5 yards for offensive holding as that's pretty much in line with not knowing penalty enforcements.

clearwall · « **Reply #14 on:** January 05, 2021, 09:54:37 AM »

Quote from: CosmoKramer on January 04, 2021, 03:15:15 PM

I agree with this statement 100%. Regardless if the call was right or not, it's EXTREMELY disappointing to see a crew working at this level and not know such basic penalty enforcement. This is the kind of mistake a rookie makes, but not one working a regional final. Might as well mark off 5 yards for offensive holding as that's pretty much in line with not knowing penalty enforcements.

Oh you're still someone who thinks the BEST crews and officials get playoff assignments.

CosmoKramer · « **Reply #15 on:** January 05, 2021, 07:01:45 PM »

Quote from: clearwall on January 05, 2021, 09:54:37 AM

Oh you're still someone who thinks the BEST crews and officials get playoff assignments.

No, but I am that someone who thinks if this kind of penalty enforcement occurs they shouldn’t get another playoff game until they can prove otherwise.

Covid 22 · « **Reply #16 on:** January 06, 2021, 09:01:05 AM »

When my oldest was about twenty, he was arrested for DUI. Subsequently, the charge was modified to Attempted DUI.

Maybe the R changed his mind and he actually meant to give the Attempted HCT signal which we all know is not a PF and does not roll over to the try or KO.

As far as continuing to officiate: The video does present a bad look but with a seven man crew, he may have been just staying with the QB.

CosmoKramer · « **Reply #17 on:** January 06, 2021, 09:42:19 AM »

Quote from: Covid 22 on January 06, 2021, 09:01:05 AM

When my oldest was about twenty, he was arrested for DUI. Subsequently, the charge was modified to Attempted DUI.

Maybe the R changed his mind and he actually meant to give the Attempted HCT signal which we all know is not a PF and does not roll over to the try or KO.

As far as continuing to officiate: The video does present a bad look but with a seven man crew, he may have been just staying with the QB.

I love it! Thanks for the humor to start the day. I may incorporate this into my on the field vocabulary to coaches. Throw a flag because the player "Attempted" to be stupid.

JDM · « **Reply #18 on:** January 06, 2021, 12:45:21 PM »

Quote from: JasonTX on January 02, 2021, 02:51:28 PM

I remember either a bulletin or a video from NCAA that the runner does not need to be taken all the way to the ground with the ball becoming dead. If you have the buckling of knees the directive was it would still be a foul. I'm pretty sure there was discussion in the past on this topic on here.

Edit: Found this.

http://www.refstripes.com/forum/index.php?topic=10907.0

"This was put out in late 2012

From: Walt Anderson, Ken Rivera, and Byron Boston – Officiating Coordinators
Date: November 14, 2012

Horsecollar Rule

Just so we are clear on this rule, and we have confirmed this with Rogers Redding, the rule only requires that the player immediately pull the ball carrier “down”. This does not mean that he has to go all the way to the ground or be declared down by rule. A runner can catch himself, land on another player, or otherwise not be down by rule and continue running and still be pulled down in a manner that the intent of the rule is designed to prevent. Serious injury can occur from a runner being pulled down or to the side with this type of tackling action, so if the grab by the back or side of the collar creates an immediate downward pull of the runner, especially if there is any buckling effect of the knees or legs, that is the action that causes the injury and therefore must be called. It is NOT a requirement that this illegal action results in the runner being tackled although that commonly is the result."

If the spirit and intent of the rule is to simply pull the runner in a downward fashion, I'd like to see an editorial change in 9-1-15 where the word "down" is substituted with "downward". Just my 2¢

first_year_guy · « **Reply #19 on:** January 15, 2021, 07:29:56 PM »

Wow, an IC and a IM on one play, you hate to see that...