RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: Welpe on December 30, 2010, 10:32:36 AM
-
What do y'all think?
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5968517
-
I am assuming the USC was because he was taunting Zona by getting near the goal line and running along the goal line without crossing it until someone got really close....
I was a D-III referee....and I think in my humble opinion...we have way to much of this type of thing that goes unpunished...and then something happens later because of the ill will such an act might create....
I heard a coach one time tell his players....if you are gonna score a TD...do it with class....act like you've done it before....
if that was what the USC was for...I don't have a problem with it...
-
I did not see the game but did see the clip I posted above. I don't see a flag so my guess is no foul was called. My question is, should there have been one?
-
Welpe was in the chat room when this happened and the majority of the peeps was flag for USC. But for the record Coach tore that butt up on the sideline.
-
the majority of the peeps was flag for USC.
Late in the half would he have been let off as legitimately taking time off the clock to either end the half or reduce the oppositions time of reply?
-
The action of running parallel to the goal line would be a marginal call IMHO, but coupled with the salute to the stands should warrant a call for USC.
-
The action of running parallel to the goal line would be a marginal call IMHO,
Marginal ?!
How about a prolonged act aimed at drawing attention to himself and at the same time demeaning his opponent.
^flag every time.
-
Marginal ?!
How about a prolonged act aimed at drawing attention to himself and at the same time demeaning his opponent.
^flag every time.
Definitely agree!! ^flag ^flag ^flag ^flag
-
This might have become vogue, but it will only happen once next year... if called, this will be a live ball foul. Then the rest of the showboats will think twice.
-
No way would my supervisor support a foul here. We would talk to the coach and put it in the game report.
If he taunts an opponent a UNS would obviously be supported.
-
Let me add I work for a NFL Official. Needs to be murder & mayhem.
-
The guy also went to the stands and high fived people there. ^flag Give him one for the BS struttiong along the GL and a 2d for going to the stands, and, like we say here in the Alamo City...Adios amigo!!!
-
Would have to be the Lambo Leap........
-
Not according to the preseason video
-
If he taunts an opponent a UNS would obviously be supported.
This isn't considered taunting?
-
Preseason video did not initially hire me or will rehire me in 2011.
The boss was clear on what is to be called and not called.
-
If he did the same little slither along the goal line and pointed at the opponent would your NFL guy support a flag?
-
Taunting would be supported.
All I'm trying to point out here is not every supervisor agrees on actions which should be called and actions that should not be called. It's apparent from the discussion there are at least two supervisors who disagree.
I'm sure you have seem all the training videos done by the CFO. Our crew had a play on one of the tapes where our supervisor disagreed with Dave Parry.
-
...and therein lies the bigger issue....too many supervisors.
-
Agree.........We are much closer in officiating philosophy's between conferences than we used to be.
At the end of the day it's up to the guy who's in front of the room at the clinic.
-
This might have become vogue, but it will only happen once next year... if called, this will be a live ball foul. Then the rest of the showboats will think twice.
Do National Federation rules enforce penalties for live-ball USC fouls as dead-ball? What about next year?
Anybody who thinks this act will not trickle down to high school still believes Santy Claus, Easter Bunny, and Tooth Fairy are alive and well.
-
Taunting would be supported.
My question is, why would what happened in the video not be enough for a taunting call? It fits at least three criteria for USC: it is prolonged, intended to focus attention upon himself and is demeaning to his opponent.
-
Do National Federation rules enforce penalties for live-ball USC fouls as dead-ball? What about next year?
No and no unfortunately.
-
This play came up for discussion and the consensus was this was not enough. He did not point, he did not run his mouth, alter stride, use a prop, etc. The only thing he was guilty of was running more steps than actually necessary. We must remember to make the foul make itself! It is often easier to issue a KTSO than to flag. If this was flagged and not supported, it is easy to see why. We don't flag a WR who is obviously faster than the DB covering him. It is not a foul to not be near a defender when you cross the goal line. What I would live for is this WR being back tapped and fumble through the EZ for touchback. If it's borderline, I'm ruling touchback for the simple fact he could've and probably should've already been on his sideline celebrating.
-
The rules specifically address the runner who "alters his stride" This move to slither along the goal line is pretty much the same thing to me. He is clearly showboating, drawing attention to himself, and tautning the opponent by "saying" see you can't touch me.
-
SJ2000, I have an NFL supervisor also, and although I have not heard of him specifically on this particular play, according to his philosophy on UNS calls, I'm about 99.9% sure he'd support this one. ^flag
-
I have no flag until the player goes to the stands.....
would your call be different if there were under 5 seconds left in the half/game and the player was trying to run time out on the clock?
-
Do National Federation rules enforce penalties for live-ball USC fouls as dead-ball? What about next year?
This would be penalized as a DB foul in FED. Although they have not had their annual meeting, I don't know of any move to change this for 2011.
-
I have no flag until the player goes to the stands.....
would your call be different if there were under 5 seconds left in the half/game and the player was trying to run time out on the clock?
Most definitely different if there was little time left in the 1/2 or game. Then he is not taunting or such, but using some good clock awareness.
-
This would be penalized as a DB foul in FED. Although they have not had their annual meeting, I don't know of any move to change this for 2011.
Not technically a DBFoul in Fed, but it is enforced from the SSpot, which has the same effect.
-
SJ2000, I have an NFL supervisor also, and although I have not heard of him specifically on this particular play, according to his philosophy on UNS calls, I'm about 99.9% sure he'd support this one. ^flag
Desean Jackson did the exact same thing on the last play of the comeback game against the Giants.
It wasn't a foul then, nor should it be one now.
If he turns back to face the defender, OK, he's taunting. But running parallel to the goal line is nothing but wasting time.
To paraphrase TxMike, if it isn't a foul on the last play of the game, it's not a foul earlier.
-
I wouldn't say he altered stride nor waste time. Nothing in the rules you have to run straight to the goal line if uncontested.
If though he stopped and walked or tippy toe or such then yes a flag but this was all in stride and maybe a bit presumptuous he was getting an easy goal. Would be funny to have seen him trip over his own feet. I don't think it was intentional to run time off either he was just in celebration mode a little early.
But what if the player who closed in on him at the end gave a shot just after the goal line and he thought he was being taunted what would be the response then by the official? Flag on each?
Happy New Year to all. It is a scorcher here in SA 40C for New Years Eve during the day. Glad I have a pool to escape the heat.
Grant
-
Desean Jackson did the exact same thing on the last play of the comeback game against the Giants.
It wasn't a foul then, nor should it be one now.
One could argue effectively that Desean Jackson "slithered" along the goalline to legally consume time, thus prevent the Giants from possessing the ball on a ensuing kickoff. That excuse is out the window in the Alamo incident.
-
One could argue effectively that Desean Jackson "slithered" along the goalline to legally consume time, thus prevent the Giants from possessing the ball on a ensuing kickoff. That excuse is out the window in the Alamo incident.
Time had already expired when Desean "slithered" the goaline. He also made arm gestures calling attention to himself.
I understand the NFL and the NCAA aren't the same thing. But those saying they have NFL Supervisors who would call this don't have much support with that example.
Running parallel to the goal line absent any other actions is nothing.
-
This would be penalized as a DB foul in FED. Although they have not had their annual meeting, I don't know of any move to change this for 2011.
First, I don't think running parallel to the goal line constitutes USC/taunting. That said, let's hope FED rulesmakers finally realize how this stuff "trickles down" and follow the NCAA lead (next year). I'm sure making taunting/show-off action a "live" ball foul will correct this unwanted behavior.
-
Ok, I am game...what "strategic reason" could there have been for this act at this time of the game?
http://newsok.com/big-12-coordinator-of-officials-says-justin-blackmons-td-run-not-excessive/article/3530803
Big 12 coordinator of officials says Justin Blackmon's TD run not excessive
BY BRANDON CHATMON Staff Writer bchatmon@opubco.com Oklahoman
Questions arose after Justin Blackmon's first touchdown catch for Oklahoma State in the Alamo Bowl. The Cowboys receiver ran along the goal line for several yards before running into the end zone on his 71-yard touchdown catch.
Big 12 coordinator of officials says Justin Blackmon's TD run not excessive
Several people considered it taunting, but Big 12 coordinator of officials Walt Anderson said Blackmon's touchdown was not excessive. He said he didn't see anything on the play that would warrant an unsportsmanlike penalty.
“There's nothing wrong with a player running horizontally, there's no rule that says you always have to be moving vertically on the field,” Anderson said.
Anderson pointed to the fact there could have been a strategic reason for Blackmon's decision to run along the goal line. He also noted that the Biletnikoff winner did not gesture toward his opponent during the play.
“In order for it to be a foul you have to couple it with: What is he doing while he's running horizontally? Is he looking at players? Is he doing something with his hand or the ball?” Anderson said.
“If he gets to the five and starts running horizontally, it becomes a real stretch when you start trying to get into the mind of the player. And I don't think that's the intent of the unsportsmanlike rule.”
Read more: http://newsok.com/big-12-coordinator-of-officials-says-justin-blackmons-td-run-not-excessive/article/3530803#ixzz1AVSL2Log
-
Told ya so!!! ;D
-
Big 12 coordinator of officials says Justin Blackmon's TD run not excessive
BY BRANDON CHATMON Staff Writer bchatmon@opubco.com Oklahoman
Anderson pointed to the fact there could have been a strategic reason for Blackmon's decision to run along the goal line.
Not yet in total disrespect, but a valid explanation for that statement is outside my reach.
The TD play occurred midway thru the first quarter. Blackmon catches the pass at ~B-35 and runs straight north/south for 30 yds. Only when he gets to the B-5, does he turn and run east/west along the goalline.
Somebody should call or email Mr Blackmon and ask him directly why he chose to run along the goalline rather than directly into the EZ.
-
"Strategically" laying the foundation for the next taunt ???
-
Well, well, well...seems the OSU player's stunt did grab some attention from on high...
Celebrating too much before TDs? Players to learn it's pointless
By Dennis Dodd
CBSSports.com Senior Writer
Jan. 17, 2011
Justin Blackmon probably doesn't know he has become must-see viewing for the NCAA rules committee. The Oklahoma State receiver's goal line-straddling touchdown against Arizona on Dec. 29 in the Alamo Bowl wasn't penalized, but it's been flagged for review by the committee at its meeting next month.
"That will be shown in February," said Dave Parry, college football's national officiating coordinator. "I've already told them to pull that play. Next year, with the rule as it's written as we speak, that would not be a touchdown."
Coaches and players may say they know about the radical rule change beginning this year that will take points off the board for unsportsmanlike conduct, but they really don't. Not until it actually happens. Not until it affects a game. Not until a win turns into a loss because a touchdown is discounted because of a "taunting gesture." The change, to be implemented this fall, will negate touchdowns by any player judged as excessively celebrating on his way to the end zone. Parry said the penalty will apply to any offensive player, not just the ball carrier, and defensive players -- for example, when someone returns an interception for a TD.
Philadelphia Eagles punt returner DeSean Jackson set a dubious example on Dec. 19, tip-toeing along the end zone before his TD. (Getty Images) There will be rules seminars. There will be threats of discipline from coaches. There will be reminders. But it's going to happen and when it does, all hell is going to break loose.
Taking away a touchdown because of emotion?
"It's going to have a huge impact," Auburn coach Gene Chizik said.
The so-called "Miami Rule" was adopted last year as part of the rules committee's continued emphasis on sportsmanship. Currently, excessive celebration penalties on scoring plays are treated as dead-ball fouls. The 15 yards are marked off on the extra point, two-point conversion or kickoff. Going forward, excessive celebration flags thrown on players going in for a score will be treated like holding in the open field. The penalty will be marked off from the spot of the foul. So, the six points from Blackmon's 71-yard touchdown catch, capped by a you-can't-catch-me 20-yard run parallel to the goal line, would have been eliminated.
"That would be a 15-yard penalty from the 2-yard line back to about the 17," Parry said. "That would get people's attention quickly."
Awareness is already growing.
"I guess college football is trying to make a statement -- celebrations, how far to go," Oregon receiver Josh Huff said. "Coach [Chip] Kelly, he taught us to hand the ball to the referee and celebrate with our teammates. When you celebrate with yourself, it kind of takes the air out of everything. It's like a selfish way of celebrating with yourself and not giving any credit to your teammates."
There were enough questionable judgment calls by officials during the bowl season to suggest there is going to be an adjustment period. Kansas State was denied a shot at a normal two-point conversion that could have tied the Pinstripe Bowl late against Syracuse. Wildcats receiver Adrian Hilburn was flagged for excessive celebration after saluting into the stands following a late touchdown catch.
That wasn't a precise example of the Miami Rule, but the same broad definitions of NCAA "unsportsmanlike acts" conduct applied: "Obscene language ... pointing the fingers ... taunting ... baiting ... ridiculing an opponent verbally ... inciting an opponent ... simulating the firing of a weapon ... delayed, excessive, prolonged or choreographed act ...." Now officials are going to potentially determine the outcome of a game because of what a hormonally charged teenager may decide to do while scoring a touchdown. Fair?
"The coaches are going to have to take the bull by the horns," said one veteran official who attended an NCAA rules seminar last year. "It's one thing to do a point-after-touchdown from the 18. Do you want to lose the opportunity for the PAT? They're really putting the burden on the coaches more than they're putting on us. The NCAA wants it cleaned up."
Don't blame this, by the way, on the big, bad, faceless NCAA. The rules committee is college football, made up of coaches and administrators who rely on input from coaches. The committee then recommends changes to an NCAA oversight panel. This change was made early last year, and later approved by the oversight panel. Most rules changes now are made every two years to allow discussion and implementation.
If you're a fan of civility, the change is coming along at just the right time. With the New York Jets flapping their gums, the Miami Rule is doing its part to shut the mouths of collegians. Or at least try. This also puts more of the emphasis on the "judgment" part of judgment calls. Once again, Hilburn's penalty was a dead-ball foul and wouldn't have impacted by the new rule. However ...
"I think all of us would agree that there are moments in games when common sense takes over. This might have been one of those moments," said Parry, adding he did not want to throw the Big Ten officiating crew "under the bus." "How do we know he [Hilburn] wasn't saluting uncles in the Army? This is a real problem for us, to get [the rule] written up so it is practical."
There was a similar play in 2009 when Georgia's A.J. Green was flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct after a touchdown against LSU. The yardage assessed on the kickoff allowed the Tigers better field position to drive for the winning touchdown. The SEC officiating crew was later suspended when the league determined the flag should not have been thrown. Rogers Redding is the outgoing SEC supervisor of officials who had a hand in that decision. Redding, also the secretary-editor of the NCAA rules committee, will replace Parry, who's retiring, as national officiating coordinator on Feb. 1.
"I don't know how I feel about that," Auburn receiver Darvin Adams said of the Miami Rule. "Coach Chizik is always teaching us, 'Don't do anything to cost the team.' That rule should be enforced, I guess. Sometimes guys just got to show their emotions."
Adams is headed to the NFL, where such conduct is mostly tolerated. Blackmon had to be "inspired" by Philadelphia's DeSean Jackson, whose last-play punt return beat the Giants on Dec. 19. On the play, Jackson, who clearly was going to score, ran along just outside the goal line before entering the end zone.
"DeSean Jackson is my favorite receiver to watch," Huff said. "That crossed the line a little too much. You just scored, do what you have to do afterward. Straddling the goal line and throwing the ball into the stands, that's not what football is about. Football is about enjoying yourself."
Huff and his peers are about to learn how far that enjoyment can go.
-
:thumbup
-
The play made the CFO video this year and RR says it qualified for 2 flags on the player and and DQ
-
Like the Big 12 coordinator said, if he points, gestures, taunts, then this qualifies for a foul. Absent that, I don't care what any players intentions might be, there was no foul committed here simply based on the fact that he ran horizontal.
-
Perhaps in the Big XII you would be right but its sounds like RR wants it flagged