Author Topic: Correctable errors  (Read 829 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline FBstripes

  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-0
Correctable errors
« on: February 24, 2021, 01:41:07 PM »
Does anyone have any quick reference chart on what correctable errors are allowed?

I watch a play that I am unsure if we can correct the error. 

The play was a free kick and the receiver gave a fair catch signal at about the 30 yard line and no official saw the signal or killed the play. 
The R player paused for about 2 seconds then ran, as there was no whistle, and returned the ball to about the 50 where K then was flagged for a personal foul late hit. 
The crew got together after the play and the R announced that there was no FC signal and enforced the personal foul from the end of the run. 
However, replay clearly shows the player giving the signal. 
There is no replay allowed.

My question is if during the crew discussion they decide that the FC signal was given can that be corrected? 

If so:
What rule supports it?
Would they have to enforce a delay of the game foul for the player running after giving the signal along with the personal foul? 

Or is it uncorrectable?

Thanks

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1754
  • FAN REACTION: +138/-24
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #1 on: February 24, 2021, 02:02:55 PM »
You can usually always correct things that you can "retroactively" shut down.  So if you should have killed it for a fair catch, you can always go back and kill it at that point retroactively.  You can't do the opposite (since that's sometimes an inadvertent whistle).

For fouls, there's nothing written about it, but in plays like this we've traditionally always enforced all personal fouls that happen during the down after the point we should have killed it as dead ball fouls and ignored any other 5 or 10 yard fouls.

I would not enforce a DOG on the returner since it was our fault he ran with the ball, basically.  It would be supportable if you did though.

Offline twref

  • *
  • Posts: 55
  • FAN REACTION: +5/-2
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #2 on: February 24, 2021, 04:21:43 PM »
FB Stripes-did this play happen within a varsity fb game?  Five officials?

Online AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4114
  • FAN REACTION: +310/-658
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #3 on: February 24, 2021, 04:28:59 PM »
I watch a play that I am unsure if we can correct the error. 

The play was a free kick and the receiver gave a fair catch signal at about the 30 yard line and no official saw the signal or killed the play. 
The R player paused for about 2 seconds then ran, as there was no whistle, and returned the ball to about the 50 where K then was flagged for a personal foul late hit. 
The crew got together after the play and the R announced that there was no FC signal and enforced the personal foul from the end of the run. 
However, replay clearly shows the player giving the signal. 
There is no replay allowed.

My question is if during the crew discussion they decide that the FC signal was given can that be corrected?

Some (sarcastically) refer to NFHS 1-1-6 as "The God Rule", although "A Common sense/Adult Rule" might be far more accurate.  A key phrase included in the rule, "in the spirit of good sportsmanship" dictates both common sense and a basic understanding of the intent of the game are the guiding objectives and principles of dealing with situations "not specifically covered in the rules".

When there is agreement/acknowledgment, that an error has been made, that provides either an unearned advantage/disadvantage to either team, common sense and logic suggests correction should be made to eliminate the advantage/disadvantage provided by the error.  That responsibility, and determination, is EXCLUSIVELY granted (by NFHS: 1-1-6) to the Referee.

In the play suggested, the agreement (right or wrong) that no signal was "seen" logically eliminates any foul by R, who without a FC signal being determined, has the right to advance.  There is NEVER authority/permission to deliver an USC contact, which is a separate, illegal and excessive act, and the appropriate penalty should be maintained, as prescribed.

The intent of NFHS 1-1-6 is to AVOID endless arguments regarding differing perspectives and/or perceptions (whether subsequently proven accurate or inaccurate), leaving the settlement of such, unresolved, differences to the sole judgment of the Referee, as Officiating crew chief.   
« Last Edit: February 24, 2021, 04:31:01 PM by AlUpstateNY »

Offline FBstripes

  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • FAN REACTION: +0/-0
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #4 on: February 24, 2021, 07:58:04 PM »
FB Stripes-did this play happen within a varsity fb game?  Five officials?


Yes varsity game and I hate to say it but it was a 7 man game

Offline bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 2571
  • FAN REACTION: +91/-26
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2021, 07:20:38 AM »
Yes varsity game and I hate to say it but it was a 7 man game

Oof.  Sounds like someone was “officiating air”.

On my crew, I would radio the ECO/PCO and ask if he/she saw a FC signal. (You could also ask the chain crew/clip person if they are officials).  If they say “Yes”, I would handle it as Bossman suggested.

Online AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4114
  • FAN REACTION: +310/-658
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2021, 08:36:31 AM »
For multiple decades, to avoid unnecessary confusion with FC signals (valid, invalid, hesitation, etc.) a locally required, and practiced, mechanic, at ALL levels (4, 5, 6, 7 man crews) associated with scrimmage kicks has been for the field official(s) responsible for the deep receiver(s) to get the attention of the deep receiver(s) to remind them of, and demonstrate, a valid FC signal before EACH kick.

It becomes automatic habit and serves both to consistently remind receivers of their responsibility and focus the attention of the covering officials, to minimize signaling confusion.

Offline bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 2571
  • FAN REACTION: +91/-26
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #7 on: February 26, 2021, 07:07:32 AM »
That’s all well and good on a punt, but this was a kickoff.  I’ve never seen anyone use that preventive technique in that situation.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1839
  • FAN REACTION: +72/-40
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #8 on: February 26, 2021, 08:02:10 AM »
That’s all well and good on a punt, but this was a kickoff.  I’ve never seen anyone use that preventive technique in that situation.
This play scares me to death every Friday night. We run 6man, and there’s a hole in our coverage in this area. 3 guys are covering the kick lines, and 3 guys are covering the goal line. Even though as WH I’m at the goal line, I make sure to watch the potential receivers to see this fc signal on a short pooch. If my guys miss it because of watching a block or such, at least we can go back and retroactively award the fc. and no, I would not apply the god rule to this situation. It’s covered by rule.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Online AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4114
  • FAN REACTION: +310/-658
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #9 on: February 26, 2021, 12:43:46 PM »
If my guys miss it because of watching a block or such, at least we can go back and retroactively award the fc. and no, I would not apply the god rule to this situation. It’s covered by rule.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Actually, the intended purpose of NFHS 1-1-6 is NOT to establish some "divine authority" with omnipotent command authority.  On the contrary, it's an effort to establish a designated "decision maker" to render a final and BINDING judgment when contradicting conclusions prevent voluntary consensus about matters/issues NOT SPECIFICALLY addressed by rule.

Specific language is included to hopefully direct settlement towards practical, and effective, solutions that minimize, or eliminate any excessive harm, or benefit, towards any one perspective, or interest allowing the contest to progress without unnecessary, lingering dispute. 

Online Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 3453
  • FAN REACTION: +485/-27
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #10 on: March 09, 2021, 12:19:51 PM »
While we have rules covering errors on downs and on the clock, most others would require your creativity under 1-1-6. I had this occur a few years ago, and would be interested in your opinions :

(1) A's ball 3/10 @ A's 15 WHEN;
(2) B1 was in NZ before ball was snapped;
(3) rookie HL  ^flag but NO whistle;
(4)during A1's run, A2  ^flag for BIB @ A'25;
(5)B2  ^flag for DBPF after run ends @ A'40;
(6) HL reported to me: "B was 'offsides'"  :puke:
I was mic'd and announced to the frenzied masses >:( and confused coaches:
"What you just viewed was an optical illusion, as the encroachment penalty shut the play down. It will now be 3rd &5 for A. Please reset the game clock to...(I added 5")".

At our weekly meeting I had several opposing opinions, such as :
(1) Waive off the encroachment ,give A ball @30;
(2) Enforce both DB fouls with A's ball @ 25 ;
(3) Enforce 'em all.

When you use the "God rule", your "Apostles" may not agree :bOW…..What would you have done.....
« Last Edit: March 09, 2021, 12:50:50 PM by Ralph Damren »

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1839
  • FAN REACTION: +72/-40
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #11 on: March 09, 2021, 12:26:58 PM »
Well, since we do have the fundamental ole saying, “ the whistle seldom kills the play. The whistle only indicates the play has become dead, or in this case, never became live,” I guess the correct enforcement is exactly what you did. I wonder if we need a mechanic to deal with this inadvertent whistle in reverse


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1839
  • FAN REACTION: +72/-40
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #12 on: March 09, 2021, 12:28:01 PM »
Well, since we do have the fundamental ole saying, “ the whistle seldom kills the play. The whistle only indicates the play has become dead, or in this case, never became live,” I guess the correct enforcement is exactly what you did. I wonder if we need a mechanic to deal with this inadvertent whistle in reverse


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
And no, I would not apply the god rule in this case, since by rule the ball never became live.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Offline ncwingman

  • *
  • Posts: 866
  • FAN REACTION: +48/-5
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #13 on: March 09, 2021, 12:48:50 PM »
The "easiest" thing to do is to waive off the "offsides" and enforce the rest of the play, A's ball at the 35.

Alternatively, offset the "live-ball" "offside" and BIB, and enforce the DBPF only.

The most confusing thing to do would be to literally do #3 -- including enforcing *both* live ball fouls without offsetting them. The BIB from the 25 moves the ball back to the 15, the original LOS, wherein the "offsides" is enforced to the 20 and then the DBPF to the A35. There's zero rule support for this (and a lot of rule support to specifically *not* do this), but that's for the HL to explain later as to why he didn't kill the play -- and he'll never do that again!

Offline bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 2571
  • FAN REACTION: +91/-26
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #14 on: March 10, 2021, 07:05:12 AM »
Quote
Alternatively, offset the "live-ball" "offside" and BIB, and enforce the DBPF only.

My choice.

B screwed up by being in the NZ, so I wouldn’t ignore that.  I’d also use Signal 19 rather than Signal 18 for the first foul.

Online AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4114
  • FAN REACTION: +310/-658
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #15 on: March 10, 2021, 09:13:13 AM »
While we have rules covering errors on downs and on the clock, most others would require your creativity under 1-1-6. I had this occur a few years ago, and would be interested in your opinions :

(1) A's ball 3/10 @ A's 15 WHEN;
(2) B1 was in NZ before ball was snapped;
(3) rookie HL  ^flag but NO whistle;
(4)during A1's run, A2  ^flag for BIB @ A'25;
(5)B2  ^flag for DBPF after run ends @ A'40;
(6) HL reported to me: "B was 'offsides'"  :puke:
I was mic'd and announced to the frenzied masses >:( and confused coaches:
"What you just viewed was an optical illusion, as the encroachment penalty shut the play down. It will now be 3rd &5 for A. Please reset the game clock to...(I added 5")".

At our weekly meeting I had several opposing opinions, such as :
(1) Waive off the encroachment ,give A ball @30;
(2) Enforce both DB fouls with A's ball @ 25 ;
(3) Enforce 'em all.

When you use the "God rule", your "Apostles" may not agree :bOW…..What would you have done.....

Whenever possible, it's best to let God relax, and deal with the situation based on applicable rules.

The problem started with B's "encroachment".  Although an appropriate whistle killing the play may well have prevented both "live ball fouls" from happening, they actually did.  Existing rules provide a complete and accurate answer, without choosing to ignore anything.  Penalize B 5 yards for the DB encroachment, offset the "Double Foul" live ball penalties, resulting in "A" replaying the down, 5 yds closer to their original target. 

God didn't have to get involved, and (at least) 1 round is on the HL.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2021, 09:23:32 AM by AlUpstateNY »

Online dammitbobby

  • *
  • Posts: 376
  • FAN REACTION: +10/-5
  • I know just enough to be dangerous...
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #16 on: March 10, 2021, 11:53:32 AM »
Whenever possible, it's best to let God relax, and deal with the situation based on applicable rules.

The problem started with B's "encroachment".  Although an appropriate whistle killing the play may well have prevented both "live ball fouls" from happening, they actually did.  Existing rules provide a complete and accurate answer, without choosing to ignore anything.  Penalize B 5 yards for the DB encroachment, offset the "Double Foul" live ball penalties, resulting in "A" replaying the down, 5 yds closer to their original target. 

God didn't have to get involved, and (at least) 1 round is on the HL.

Those fouls occurred during a play that shouldn't have existed.  Would you handle it the same way if B was offsides, play was not blown dead, and B facemasked on the play, then B shoved A43?   you'd mark off all three penalties?  The facemask and deadball shove were allowed to occur solely due to an error by an official.  B coach is going to be (rightfully) absolutely livid if you enforce all three fouls.

Offline CalhounLJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1839
  • FAN REACTION: +72/-40
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #17 on: March 10, 2021, 02:00:02 PM »
Those fouls occurred during a play that shouldn't have existed.  Would you handle it the same way if B was offsides, play was not blown dead, and B facemasked on the play, then B shoved A43?   you'd mark off all three penalties?  The facemask and deadball shove were allowed to occur solely due to an error by an official.  B coach is going to be (rightfully) absolutely livid if you enforce all three fouls.
Exactly. Actually, you would have to invoke 1-1-6 to enforce or offset two live ball fouls on a play that never became live by rule, because there is no rule support for that. I can support an argument for enforcing any dead ball foul though, providing it was a PF or UNC.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Online AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4114
  • FAN REACTION: +310/-658
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #18 on: March 10, 2021, 05:57:07 PM »
Exactly. Actually, you would have to invoke 1-1-6 to enforce or offset two live ball fouls on a play that never became live by rule, because there is no rule support for that. I can support an argument for enforcing any dead ball foul though, providing it was a PF or UNC.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If maximum drama and semantics are the objective, you might choose leaning on 1-1-6 justification, if it became necessary.  However, the DB foul for encroachment is the catalyst for creating the conundrum and should be legitimately dealt with.  There are multiple paths available to satisfactorily dealing with the subsequent opposing transgressions, that arrive at the same conclusion.

However "Dead Ball  Fouls" are NOT considered for other than "Live-Ball" fouls, and would NOT "Offset" (although enforcing each would produce the same consequences, and result.)   
 

Online Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 3453
  • FAN REACTION: +485/-27
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #19 on: March 14, 2021, 11:41:44 AM »
YES, the HL :-[ bought the first round and promised not to believe everything he saw on TV  :o ??? ::) was the same in HS. yEs:

I wanted to come up with a simple solution and IMHO, W/O a rule for an inadvertent non-whistle, I had to make one up (1-1-6). It seemed to be the easiest path to ignore all action after  the snap, reset the game clock and move on. I understand those that felt the DBPF should still be enforced, but the BJ that flagged it said it was not an attempt to injure but merely poor timing. Where our HL was also guilty of "poor timing", I felt  ;) my choice fit best.

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1754
  • FAN REACTION: +138/-24
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #20 on: March 14, 2021, 09:33:24 PM »
YES, the HL :-[ bought the first round and promised not to believe everything he saw on TV  :o ??? ::) was the same in HS. yEs:

I wanted to come up with a simple solution and IMHO, W/O a rule for an inadvertent non-whistle, I had to make one up (1-1-6). It seemed to be the easiest path to ignore all action after  the snap, reset the game clock and move on. I understand those that felt the DBPF should still be enforced, but the BJ that flagged it said it was not an attempt to injure but merely poor timing. Where our HL was also guilty of "poor timing", I felt  ;) my choice fit best.

Ralph, case book 5.1.1C, while not exactly your play, seems to suggest we enforce all personal fouls when we are nullifying the play for whatever reason.  Thoughts?

Online AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4114
  • FAN REACTION: +310/-658
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2021, 09:20:29 AM »
Ralph, case book 5.1.1C, while not exactly your play, seems to suggest we enforce all personal fouls when we are nullifying the play for whatever reason.  Thoughts?

I would concur with the 5-1-1c interpretation, however in ANY foul situation, subsequent misgivings/doubt about the appropriateness of the call BY THE CALLING OFFICIAL should be considered prior to assessing the proscribed penalty.

Online Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 3453
  • FAN REACTION: +485/-27
  • SEE IT-THINK IT-CALL IT
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #22 on: March 16, 2021, 09:34:18 AM »
I agree that the DBPF could have been enforced. My feelings were, where we screwed up, to enforce the late hit and not include the BIB didn't seem fair. I did bring both coaches out and explained my decision. Both responded : "Ayuh, 'spect so"....and the band played on.

Online AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 4114
  • FAN REACTION: +310/-658
Re: Correctable errors
« Reply #23 on: March 16, 2021, 10:03:31 AM »
I agree that the DBPF could have been enforced. My feelings were, where we screwed up, to enforce the late hit and not include the BIB didn't seem fair. I did bring both coaches out and explained my decision. Both responded : "Ayuh, 'spect so"....and the band played on.

Common sense and fairness are (thankfully) usually hard to argue with.