RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: Reverend30 on December 03, 2011, 01:46:34 PM
-
Food for thought - remember, MA uses NCAA rules. 4A is a low division. Haven't seen any video of the play but hunting for it on YouTube
Penalty, interception negate Cathedral's chance for win; Blue Hills takes D4A title
By Lorenzo Recupero, Globe Correspondent
WALTHAM -- Sprinting untouched from 56-yards out -- with nothing but green turf between him and the end zone -- Cathedral quarterback Matthew Owens, with the ball tucked in his left arm, raised his clenched right hand to signify a lead-grabbing touchdown with just minutes to go in the Division 4A Super Bowl.
Excitement or unsportsmanlike conduct?
The call was unsportsmanlike conduct. The consequence was a 56-yard, possible game-winning touchdown negated. Instead of an 18-16 Cathedral lead with a little more than six minutes to play, the Panthers were forced to take the ball from the spot of the foul at Blue Hills' 24-yard line. On the next play, a visibly upset Owens threw an interception which all but sealed the win for Blue Hills.
Blue Hills went on to win 16-14.
"In the game being played, we won the game," said Cathedral coach Duane Sigsbury, who couldn’t believe his teams previously undefeated season came down to that one penalty called against Owens. "Give Blue Hills a lot of credit they are a great football team, but we deserve better. The game got taken away from us. If you're going to take a game away from a kid being excited because he just made the play of his life, shame on you."
Blue Hills's John Curran threw a 45-yard TD pass to Isaiah Teixera and Vincent Burton ran for a 1-yard TD in the win.
-
Without seeing it, it's impossible to say one way or another, so somebody PLEASE find video of this.
Prior to this year, this call could be made without nullifying the touchdown. Crews I've been on would generally approach a kid who had done something like this and warn him to "act like he'd been there before." They generally understood and it didn't happen again. If it did, 15 yds on the PAT or kickoff. But here, this kid likely had NOT ever been there before. We can't really expect a 17 or 18 year old to be emotionless can we?
-
Live by NCAA rules; die by NCAA rules.
-
I reaaaallly hope the newspaper story is leaving out some important information. like the kid was doing something else to earn the flag. because if it truly was just a raised fist, then that is awful. it's a bad flag in any game. but to throw it during a TD run late in a state championship game is unconscionable to me.
I do mass HS. the playoff assignments are kinda funny--the people doing a game are from different boards/assignors. it's not uncommon that you dont know any of the 4 other guys on the crew. I wonder if they went over this in pregame. at any rate, if it was indeed just for the raised fist, that crew should be ashamed. I'm sorry. there's just no excuse for it.
ugh. this really bothers me. it's an example of how some guys just dont get it. and please dont say that the kid put his fate in the officials hands when he raised his own hand. that's total crap. it's not the kid's fault that some over-officious nut job was assigned to the game.
gotta find some video.. I hope to see that the kid was in fact doing some serious over the top taunting for the whole stadium to see. that's the only thing that'll get my blood pressure down. :)
-
Interesting one since simply raising an arm with a clenched fist does not appear in the long and inclusive list of what would warrant a UNS call in the rules or the ARs for 9-2. Unless some additional action(s) that are actually on "banned list" also occurred it would appear that this was a bit of over-officiating.
-
I reaaaallly hope the newspaper story is leaving out some important information. like the kid was doing something else to earn the flag. because if it truly was just a raised fist, then that is awful. it's a bad flag in any game. but to throw it during a TD run late in a state championship game is unconscionable to me.
I do mass HS. the playoff assignments are kinda funny--the people doing a game are from different boards/assignors. it's not uncommon that you dont know any of the 4 other guys on the crew. I wonder if they went over this in pregame. at any rate, if it was indeed just for the raised fist, that crew should be ashamed. I'm sorry. there's just no excuse for it.
ugh. this really bothers me. it's an example of how some guys just dont get it. and please dont say that the kid put his fate in the officials hands when he raised his own hand. that's total crap. it's not the kid's fault that some over-officious nut job was assigned to the game.
gotta find some video.. I hope to see that the kid was in fact doing some serious over the top taunting for the whole stadium to see. that's the only thing that'll get my blood pressure down. :)
Why would you be so worked up and vicious in your attack on these officials based solely on a reporter's article? Chill and then crank it up if the video proves what the reporter claims. :)
-
granted, still photo doesn't prove anything. for all we know, right after this the ballcarrier could've given the finger to the opposing sideline.
(http://multimedia.heraldinteractive.com/images/20111204/8574d1_120311footballtf15.jpg)
and zebra, I agree with you. my invective is purely conditional. IF IF IF the only thing the kid did was what's in this pic, then I stand by my rant.
-
If this is all the kid did, then I suspect the assigning protocols for playoffs might need to be re-evaluated, because this is - in my mind - a blown call. Again, "if" being the key term.
-
A quote from the reporter's story:
"...with the ball tucked in his left arm, raised his clenched right hand to signify a lead-grabbing touchdown with just minutes to go in the Division 4A Super Bowl.
Excitement or unsportsmanlike conduct?
The call was unsportsmanlike conduct. The consequence was a 56-yard, possible game-winning touchdown negated. Instead of an 18-16 Cathedral lead with a little more than six minutes to play...
Blue Hills went on to win 16-14."
It's a bit hard to trust the reporter when:
1) The picture shows the ball tucked in the right arm.
2) A raised, clenched LEFT hand.
But more importantly.
3) What kind of play was going to change the score from 16 - 14 to 18 - 16. I'm aware they might do some things differently in MA, but a 4 point TD????
Yeah, all sort of small details. But the pic shows the raised fist near the 24. I hope he did more, and he had time to do more. Likely somewhere around 2.5 seconds.
-
Foul left the ball at the 24 (according to the story) so the infraction must have been deemed to have happened at the 9. So something else must have happened. Of course it could have just been this and the official, running full gallop took some reaction time to toss the hankie.
-
Speaking of Mass. ...I am watching replays of some of their Championship games. Do they use 10 min quarters in reg season also?
-
Period lengths vary by leagues in the regular season. There are some 10's, 11's, and 12's. In the playoffs, and superbowl games they are always 10 minutes which is an MIAA rule based on the fact that teams are playing multiple games on short rest (Thanksgiving, then November 22nd [the playoff round], then Dec 2 [the finals round, or superbowls as we refer to them]).
-
And you announce fouling player numbers?
-
And you announce fouling player numbers?
I believe that player numbers were to be included but you'll get a variation of announcements from game to game since R's are not normally miked the regular season, or the first round of the playoffs. The coordinator of officials gives out the specific announcement instructions just before the games, but sometimes they are not followed to the letter in the heat of battle.
-
I believe that player numbers were to be included ...
What's the thinking on that? We're not supposed to announce #s here in TX but every now and then an R messes up and does. Whenever I called PeeWee, the kids would always ask, on who? Usually, just so they could yell at the fouler (so I stopped telling them). Occasionally , the answer was "you" and that kid always slunk off with his mouth shut.
-
In all games at all levels we are required to report the number of the fouling player to the head coach when he asks - they ask on virtually every foul call. Not sure why some of the foul announcements during this years MA superbowls included numbers and others didn't, but as noted, during the regular season for high school games we do not announce fouling player numbers unless we are ejecting the player.
-
And you announce fouling player numbers?
Obviously, that's an NCAA rule. I thought Texas and Massachusetts play by NCAA rules.
Is this an "adjustment"? What other adjustments are made to NCAA rules in TX and MA? Obviously, length of quarters is one in MA.
-
TX - 12 min qtrs, no 40 sec play clock, no announcement of fouler numbers, fighting ejections do not require subsequent game punishments, KO from 40 are the ones that come to mind imediately
-
The MA rules are attached.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
5 times out per half, now that's different.
-
Obviously, that's an NCAA rule. I thought Texas and Massachusetts play by NCAA rules.
Is this an "adjustment"? What other adjustments are made to NCAA rules in TX and MA? Obviously, length of quarters is one in MA.
Biggest one TXMike sort of left out was that we use 2005 NCAA timing rules. That's the year before the NCAA messed up all the timing rules. There are numbering exceptions. You can have as many people on the sideline as you want. And during playoffs they suit up even the freshmen sometimes. The sidelines can get real crowded.
-
Looks like this falls into a "time and place" category. As officials, you need to have some kind of feel for the game situation and adjust accordingly. This isnt like the Aledo/Stephenville topic we have going on in another forum where the kid high-stepped in with his team skunking the opponent. You should kind of expect some "youthful exuberance" when a kid makes a big play to win a state title in a close game.
-
Interesting one since simply raising an arm with a clenched fist does not appear in the long and inclusive list of what would warrant a UNS call in the rules or the ARs for 9-2. Unless some additional action(s) that are actually on "banned list" also occurred it would appear that this was a bit of over-officiating.
For us "non-NCAA officials", could someone post the "banned list"?
Thanks
-
Here are the ones I can remember from memory:
Altered stride
Hand gesture directed at opponent
Diving with no threat
Turning head to yell at opponent
Any gesture that draws attention to self
-
For us "non-NCAA officials", could someone post the "banned list"?
Thanks
Here's a free PDF copy of the current NCAA rules for your desktop.
http://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4229-2011-2012-football-rule-book-2-year-publication.aspx
Best regards,
Brad
-
So today we apparently get the rest of the story - from an attendee at the game. As noted earlier, the hand goes up around the 24-25 yard line. But that's not all - it's followed by the altered stride high step at the 9-10 yard line. The actual flag was at the 9 yard line explaining the next snap going off from the 24 yard line. Also, during each pre-game conference, the R+U gave the coaching staffs the reminder that there would be no unsportsmanlike actions tolerated from either team, and that any such actions prior to a score are treated as a live ball fouls this year.
So after all, there was more than just a hand in the air, and the call was justified.
-
Here are the ones I can remember from memory:
Altered stride
Hand gesture directed at opponent
Diving with no threat
Turning head to yell at opponent
Any gesture that draws attention to self
list is below...if it's a finger or fist raised in celebration, then flagging it isn't just "over-officiating," imo. it's worse than that. it's making up your own rules. where's the rule support for a flag? I've heard some say that fits under "d" below, because it's "[focusing] attention upon [oneself]". but using that category ignores the wording of the rule. we don't have the leeway to flag any act that we deem as attention drawing. it first has to be either delayed, excessive, prolonged or choreographed. and i'm sorry, but I dont see how anyone can sanely characterize a fist in the air 3 seconds before a score as any of those 4 things.
Specifically prohibited acts and conduct include:
1. No player, substitute, coach or other person subject to the rules shall
use abusive, threatening or obscene language or gestures, or engage in
such acts that provoke ill will or are demeaning to an opponent, to game
officials or to the image of the game, including but not limited to:
(a) Pointing the finger(s), hand(s), arm(s) or ball at an opponent, or
imitating the slashing of the throat.
(b) Taunting, baiting or ridiculing an opponent verbally.
(c) Inciting an opponent or spectators in any other way, such as
simulating the firing of a weapon or placing a hand by the ear to
request recognition.
(d) Any delayed, excessive, prolonged or choreographed act by which
a player (or players) attempts to focus attention upon himself (or
themselves).
(e) An unopposed ball carrier obviously altering stride as he approaches
the opponent’s goal line or diving into the end zone.
(f) Removal of a player’s helmet before he is in the team area
(Exceptions: Team, media or injury timeouts; equipment adjustment;
through play; between periods; and during a measurement for a first
down).
(g) Punching one’s own chest or crossing one’s arms in front of the chest
while standing over a prone player.
(h) Going into the stands to interact with spectators, or bowing at the
waist after a good play.
-
Never ceases to amaze me at how we seemed to be able to score 30 - 50 points a game when I was in HS 35 years ago and I don't recall one time that a guy felt the need to do something like this goose stepping, pointing, etc. I wonder how many points we might have been able to score had we included those type activities?
-
So today we apparently get the rest of the story - from an attendee at the game. As noted earlier, the hand goes up around the 24-25 yard line. But that's not all - it's followed by the altered stride high step at the 9-10 yard line. The actual flag was at the 9 yard line explaining the next snap going off from the 24 yard line. Also, during each pre-game conference, the R+U gave the coaching staffs the reminder that there would be no unsportsmanlike actions tolerated from either team, and that any such actions prior to a score are treated as a live ball fouls this year.
So after all, there was more than just a hand in the air, and the call was justified.
ok good! if he high stepped, he violated a specific rule. some may still wonder whether the flag should be thrown, but I at least get to take back my provisional anger. ;D if he high stepped, the flag is definitely justifiable.
-
I would pay money to see TXMike goose step. yEs:
-
list is below...if it's a finger or fist raised in celebration, then flagging it isn't just "over-officiating," imo. it's worse than that. it's making up your own rules. where's the rule support for a flag?
2 things:
1 - The rule says "included but not limited to", and
2 - RR's guidance bulletin said "if it feels wrong, flag it"
These 2 things make the rule open to essentially whatever interpretation someone wants to make
-
I would pay money to see TXMike goose step. yEs:
That will be $1.50 please...
(http://www.nvdaily.com/lifestyle/images/curtains6-14-11kick.jpg)
-
That will be $1.50 please...
Not til we get confirmation which one is you!
-
I am from Texas. Even a coach should be able to figure it out from that fact. LOL
-
2 things:
1 - The rule says "included but not limited to", and
2 - RR's guidance bulletin said "if it feels wrong, flag it"
These 2 things make the rule open to essentially whatever interpretation someone wants to make
Agree on both. But this isn't the model UN or a phil donahue show where we need to validate everyone's feelings. Just because it's open to interpretation, that doesn't mean that nobody can make a BAD interpretation, does it?
How bout we flag kickers kickers who put their fists in the air after they boot a ball and they know it's going to be a good FG? actually, LOL, where would we spot the ball on such a flag? would we have to estimate the yardline above which the ball was soaring the moment the kicker fistpumped? ;D
-
I thought this was you, Mike?
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_D1ZZyTOG7tQ/TFbs0nqXdjI/AAAAAAAAHkA/cbDjSU6PVEs/s400/The+Best+Little+Whorehouse+in+Texas+The+Aggies.jpg)
-
Agree on both. But this isn't the model UN or a phil donahue show where we need to validate everyone's feelings. Just because it's open to interpretation, that doesn't mean that nobody can make a BAD interpretation, does it?
I think we can honestly say that if it was not something that 45[ drunks in a bar would say was unsportsmanlike conduct then it probably should not have been flagged. http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1235794
(http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1235794)
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP_mCEP-1z0
-
After watching the video, I don't see justification for the call.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP_mCEP-1z0
Ugh. I'm not even sure what to say... I can't support that call in any way.
-
aaand I'm right back to being HACKED off again, haha. >:(
no stride altering at all. no pointing at an opponent. no basis for the flag.
So what do we do when 45 drunks in a bar all have no foul but the BJ throws a flag?
also, the officials assignor supports the call.
http://bostonherald.com/sports/high_school/football/view.bg?articleid=1386049
Joe Cacciatore, the assigner for officials in the Catholic Conference and Greater Boston League sympathized with Cathedral, but was quick to defend his comrades in their handling of the situation.
“It’s tough, but the official absolutely made the right call according to the letter of the law,” Cacciatore said. “It says it right there in the rules that any attempt to draw attention to yourself, whether it is pointing the finger, raising a fist or anything like that, is a penalty.
“We’ve been instructed to call it when it happens, it’s zero tolerance now. I served as a liaison for the two semifinal games at Andover Tuesday night, and that was one of the first thing we talked about with the coaches and captains.”
it's tough when the "attention drawing" myth rears its misinformed head in the 4th quarter of a state final.
-
Sounds like maybe they talked about it so much they may have been predisposed to pull the trigger?
We might get 20 of the 50 drunks in the bar to flag but we'd have a hard time getting to 45.
-
Maybe live ball UNS is too damaging to be used at the high school level. Just an idle thought.
-
Maybe live ball UNS is too damaging to be used at the high school level. Just an idle thought.
No unfortunately, at the HS level, there are just WAY too many folks who don't get it. I'd be that most of these wouldn't even have been called last year.
-
aaand I'm right back to being HACKED off again, haha. >:(
no stride altering at all. no pointing at an opponent. no basis for the flag.
So what do we do when 45 drunks in a bar all have no foul but the BJ throws a flag?
also, the officials assignor supports the call.
http://bostonherald.com/sports/high_school/football/view.bg?articleid=1386049
Joe Cacciatore, the assigner for officials in the Catholic Conference and Greater Boston League sympathized with Cathedral, but was quick to defend his comrades in their handling of the situation.
“It’s tough, but the official absolutely made the right call according to the letter of the law,” Cacciatore said. “It says it right there in the rules that any attempt to draw attention to yourself, whether it is pointing the finger, raising a fist or anything like that, is a penalty.
“We’ve been instructed to call it when it happens, it’s zero tolerance now. I served as a liaison for the two semifinal games at Andover Tuesday night, and that was one of the first thing we talked about with the coaches and captains.”
it's tough when the "attention drawing" myth rears its misinformed head in the 4th quarter of a state final.
well, the apparently crew made the right call because they were so instructed. Your angst should be directed to the supervisor and others who gave them that instruction.
That's my major complaint regarding some posters on this board who take strong positions against those in the pits making the calls they are instructed to make.
-
No unfortunately, at the HS level, there are just WAY too many folks who don't get it. I'd be that most of these wouldn't even have been called last year.
That's my point.
-
Looks like part of the information I rec'd was a bit of fiction. I'll go back to my original comment in that a raised hand alone is not a foul the way the rule is currently written. I guess that a picture, in this case a video, really is worth a thousand words.
-
Maybe live ball UNS is too damaging to be used at the high school level. Just an idle thought.
Maybe Mass. should be using Federation rules. Then we wouldn't be having this conversation.
-
I thought this was you, Mike?
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_D1ZZyTOG7tQ/TFbs0nqXdjI/AAAAAAAAHkA/cbDjSU6PVEs/s400/The+Best+Little+Whorehouse+in+Texas+The+Aggies.jpg)
I can just hear TXMike - "The stars at night are big and bright....."
-
love the commentary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP_mCEP-1z0
-
Thanks to:
Skybolt (Brad) for the NCAA desktop link;
clearwall, Chymechowder for the list; and TxMike (and many more) for insight
-
Maybe Mass. should be using Federation rules.
you take that back. god forbid we be cast down with the Fed heathens. ;)
story's picking up some speed int he boston papers. here's the touchy feely columnist's take on it.
http://bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view/2011_1206cathedral_qbs_dad_no_arm_no_foul/srvc=home&position=0
also as upset/angry as I've been on this point, I should point out that I'm really not trying to rip the officials personally. I'm on the same board as these guys (though I work for different assignors). what bothers me is there are people entrenched at high levels who dont necessarily have a good understanding of certain rules. but because they're "politically" locked in, it doesn't matter.
moreover, rather than look at mistakes as educational opportunities (like we do on the college board), sometimes it's like they'd rather just scoff at the notion that they could actually be mistaken about something. and instead they just ignore questions and move on.
-
It is pretty funny that a good 40% of the comments are blaming liberals for the call.
Damn those liberals and their meddling with high school football being played by college rules! Obama needs to answer for this! FlAg1
-
what's wrong with that?
I still blame Leonid Brezhnev for Boston losing the 1975 world series to cincinnati.
-
what's wrong with that?
I still blame Leonid Brezhnev for Boston losing the 1975 world series to cincinnati.
...and Bill Buckner in '86 because he couldn't field a ground ball?
-
haha no, brezhnev and andropov and chernenko had all died by 86....gorbachev and ted kennedy share the blame for buckner's gaffe, imo. :)
-
Here are some guidelines we were given by the NCAA rules editor:
•Remember that the game is one of high emotion, played by gifted teenagers who are affirmed by playing a game at which they are exceptionally talented.
•Do not be overly technical in applying this rule.
•Do allow for brief spontaneous emotional reactions at the end of a play.
•Beyond the brief, spontaneous bursts of energy, officials should flag those acts that are clearly prolonged, self-congratulatory, and that make a mockery of the game.
A list of specifically prohibited acts is in (a) thru (h) on FR-122,123; this list is intended to be illustrative and not exhaustive. We can all agree that when these acts are clearly intended to taunt or demean, they should not be allowed—not only because they are written in the book, but because they offend our sense of how the game should be played. We now have enough experience with this rule to know what “feels” right and wrong. Note that most if not all of these actions fall outside the category of brief, spontaneous outbursts. Rather, they present themselves as taunting, self-glorification, demeaning to opponents, or showing disrespect to the opponents and the game.
When such a situation arises, officials should wait a count, take a deep breath, and assess what they feel about what they have seen.
If it feels OK, let it go.
If it feels wrong, flag it.
-
Having seen the video, I find it hard to justify this flag, even knowing the NCAA variances and suchlike.
Let em play.
-
It is pretty funny that a good 40% of the comments are blaming liberals for the call.
Damn those liberals and their meddling with high school football being played by college rules! Obama needs to answer for this! FlAg1
I didnt see the comments about liberals, but I dont think it would be innaccurate if people DID blame liberals for it. Arent most Massachusetts-ers? liberals anyway? Kind of casting a big net with that one.
What I DID see, though, were some pretty clueless fans. I loved this one:
"What a bunch of whiners...they placed the ball at the spot of the foul and the QB threw an interception."
Sheeesh...
-
"What a bunch of whiners...they placed the ball at the spot of the foul
IF the flag was for the raising of the fist (which is all I can see, I sure don't see any change in stride), then in essence, they DID place the ball at the spot of the foul.
The fist was raised ~24 yard line. The flag is thrown at the 9. After marking 15 yards from the 9, the ball wound up exactly where the fist went up.
-
So today we apparently get the rest of the story - from an attendee at the game. As noted earlier, the hand goes up around the 24-25 yard line. But that's not all - it's followed by the altered stride high step at the 9-10 yard line. The actual flag was at the 9 yard line explaining the next snap going off from the 24 yard line. Also, during each pre-game conference, the R+U gave the coaching staffs the reminder that there would be no unsportsmanlike actions tolerated from either team, and that any such actions prior to a score are treated as a live ball fouls this year.
So after all, there was more than just a hand in the air, and the call was justified.
No evidence of any of that in the video that was posted. No stride alterning, absolutely none. Very sad.
-
Thanks to: Skybolt (Brad) for the NCAA desktop link .......
FYI Here's another good NCAA site with lots of football info including the 2011 Play Situation Memos:
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/ncaa/NCAA/Sports%20and%20Championship/Football/Playing%20Rules/index (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/ncaa/NCAA/Sports%20and%20Championship/Football/Playing%20Rules/index)
-
IF the flag was for the raising of the fist (which is all I can see, I sure don't see any change in stride), then in essence, they DID place the ball at the spot of the foul.
The fist was raised ~24 yard line. The flag is thrown at the 9. After marking 15 yards from the 9, the ball wound up exactly where the fist went up.
Well, if that's true, then shame on the officials again. I thought someone earlier posted the announcement said the penalty was at the 9? 9 + 15 = 24.
-
Maybe Mass. should be using Federation rules. Then we wouldn't be having this conversation.
I wish the Fed would implement the same rule. I hate the that we must enforce as a dead ball foul.
-
I saw the video on Fox news this morning. The talking heads are idiots (what's new?) That said, it was a TERRIBLE call... I feel bad for the kid and his team - a horrible way to lose a championship.
-
ESPN SportsCenter also had it this morning.
-
In the local San Antonio newspaper this morning. "Celebrating" is now illegal.
-
I wish the Fed would implement the same rule. I hate the that we must enforce as a dead ball foul.
Then the REAL bellyaching will begin! :'(
-
Then the REAL bellyaching will begin! :'(
Maybe we could remove some of the unsportsmanlike play. I played in North TX and our coach would remove a player from a game if he did anything like that. You also knew that if you got removed, you were running sprints after the next practice. Guys eventually learned it wasn't worth it.
-
Hank,
Do you think raising a finger (not the middle) or fist towards the sky in an unsportsmanlike act?
Best regards,
Brad
-
Without more, NO. But what's wrong with just running into the end zone and handing the ball to the ref?
What if the same player, raises a finger and PUMPS his arm a few times?
What if an opposing player pops that player after he scores? He was obviously incited by the scorer. Was what the scorer did unsportsmanlike? Should we throw a flag for the second but not the first act?
-
I saw the video on Fox news this morning. The talking heads are idiots (what's new?) That said, it was a TERRIBLE call... I feel bad for the kid and his team - a horrible way to lose a championship.
Did you feel bad for him because of this play or the interception he threw the next time he had the ball? (And no, I also do not believe a flag was warranted)
-
Without more, NO. But what's wrong with just running into the end zone and handing the ball to the ref?
Nothing wrong with that.
What if the same player, raises a finger and PUMPS his arm a few times?
I've got nothing if it's not directed at an opponent.
What if an opposing player pops that player after he scores?
FLAG
He was obviously incited by the scorer.
Disagree
Was what the scorer did unsportsmanlike?
No
Should we throw a flag for the second but not the first act?
YES
-
Maybe we could remove some of the unsportsmanlike play. I played in North TX and our coach would remove a player from a game if he did anything like that. You also knew that if you got removed, you were running sprints after the next practice. Guys eventually learned it wasn't worth it.
The coaches today are of a different breed than the coaches of yesteryear. There's part of the problem.
-
Nothing wrong with that.
I've got nothing if it's not directed at an opponent.
FLAG
Disagree
No
YES
I agree with everything you said. Just trying to be a little bit of a devil's advocate to get people thinking.
-
Gotcha Hank.
-
the MIAA released a statement. pasted below. (Life lessons for the win! ;D)
MIAA statement on Cathedral-Blue Hills Super Bowl
Wednesday, December 7, 2011 | http://www.bostonherald.com | High School Football
STATEMENT REGARDING DIVISION 1V-A FOOTBALL CHAMPIONSHIP
Franklin, MA Dec. 6, 2011 - - In response to inquiries regarding an unsportsmanlike penalty called in the Division IV-A football game the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association (MIAA) issued the following statement:
The official involved reported he had determined a violation of NCAA Football Rules and Interpretations of Rule 9, Section 2 covering Unsportsmanlike Conduct Section A. He called the violation and assessed the penalty.
There is no provision in MIAA rules (or rules for any other sport at any other level) to overturn an officials’ call after a game has been concluded. Once the final whistle is sounded the game is over. (Reference – MIAA Handbook Rule #17, Page 24) The Cathedral coach chose not to challenge the call when it was made.
At the start of the season the MIAA and football officials took comprehensive measures to ensure that everyone understood this rule. In fact, the officials at this game reminded the captains and coaches that there would be zero tolerance for any unsportsmanlike actions. Likewise, this message was communicated in the pre-playoff game administrative meeting, as well as the MIAA”s Super Bowl Breakfast with coaches and captains.
Anyone may parse the language of rules and apply them as they see fit. Contest officials must familiarize themselves with the rules, both the letter and the sprit, and bring their judgment to bear in calling the game. Per the Points of Emphasis in the NCAA Rulebook: “When an official imposes a penalty or makes a decision he is simply doing his duty as he sees it. He is on the field to uphold the integrity of the game of football, and his decisions are final and conclusive and should be accepted by players and coaches.”
MIAA Philosophy reflects that high school students who participate in educational athletics learn many things from that experience including lessons that we believe will be helpful as they go forward in life. While we hope and wish they would all be from positive experiences sometimes that is not the case.
Losing a game, having an official’s call go against you, even occasionally having an officials’ mistake go against you or your team are all part of sports. Athletic officials try hard to do the best job possible but they are human. Athletes must learn to put these things behind them and move forward. During their lifetime they will experience similar situations where they feel “wronged” by a superior or authority figure and they must learn to deal with that situation.
Finally, we would hope that in people’s reaction to this situation they would consider the students and coaches at Blue Hills Regional Vocational Technical School who feel their properly won championship is being tarnished and discredited.
-
A New England relative sent this to me.
Menino weighs in on football controversy
The Lowell Sun
Updated: 12/07/2011 08:41:00 AM EST
BOSTON (AP) -- Boston Mayor Thomas Menino is weighing in on the excessive celebration penalty that cost a local high school football team a shot at a state title.
Cathedral High School quarterback Matthew Owens was about to score the go-ahead touchdown in the final minutes of Saturday's Super Bowl game when he briefly raised his left arm in triumph. The gesture drew a flag that nullified the touchdown and Cathedral wound up losing 16-14 to Blue Hills Menino told WBZ-AM on Wednesday that he plans to invite the Cathedral players to lunch, calling them "champions on the field and off the field."
Menino called the unsportmanlike conduct call "ridiculous" and said the rules should allow for reasonable displays of exuberance by student athletes.
The organization that governs high school sports in Massachusetts is reviewing the play to determine if the rule was applied properly.
-
I know. It's too funny. yes, the call was the wrong call. but the Mayor getting involved and the nonsense he's spouting--sorry, make that MUMBLING--is just ridiculous. this is from today's Herald.
Mayor Thomas M. Menino this morning called the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association “frustrated athletes” for adopting rules that robbed Boston’s Cathedral High School of a coveted Super Bowl title.
“I think sometimes these rules are written by frustrated athletes,” Menino said on a visit to the high school. “They never participated in a sport, and they don’t know what it is to be excited. You play in a football game, you run for a touchdown, and you do something special.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/2011_1207mayor_slams_miaa_as_frustrated_athletes_who_ruined_super_bowl_game/srvc=home&position=0
-
In the finest traditions of politicians everywhere who can't solve their community's real probelms and instead focus on those issues which they can use to win votes, even when they are issues they are powerless to influence.
-
FYI Here's another good NCAA site with lots of football info including the 2011 Play Situation Memos:
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/ncaa/NCAA/Sports%20and%20Championship/Football/Playing%20Rules/index (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/ncaa/NCAA/Sports%20and%20Championship/Football/Playing%20Rules/index)
Excellent!!
Thanks "Ump"...
-
Let me paraphrase the MIAA memo:
"Sure, it was a bad call, nothing we can do about it now. Get over it."
-
Let me paraphrase the MIAA memo:
"Sure, it was a bad call, nothing we can do about it now. Get over it."
A very good summation.
I am disappointed the MIAA did not take the position that it was a judgment call and just left it at that, instead of implying the official used poor judgment. These types of calls are often judgment calls, calls that the players' conduct forces us to make a decision.
-
...The Cathedral coach chose not to challenge the call when it was made...
Huh? ???
-
I think they mean by 'challenge' is call a timeout and ask for a discussion on the misapplication of a rule.
-
I think they mean by 'challenge' is call a timeout and ask for a discussion on the misapplication of a rule.
Haven't we established this was a judgement call and not a misapplication of a rule?
-
A very good summation.
I am disappointed the MIAA did not take the position that it was a judgment call and just left it at that, instead of implying the official used poor judgment. These types of calls are often judgment calls, calls that the players' conduct forces us to make a decision.
Similar to the way that this is a learning experience for the players and coaches, it's also a learning experience for that official. While most of us agree that this brief display of exuberance does not rise to the level of a foul that we would want in the National Championship game, this official will hopefully learn from this and someday reflect upon this call. We have all made calls that were not popular and we have made calls that are incorrect. A large part of what we do on the field involves accountability. If this official is honest with himself, he will realize that this should have been a pass and that nobody would be saying after the fact that a flag was deserved in that situation. Moral of the story: We get into more trouble for what we call, than what we don't call...
-
Similar to the way that this is a learning experience for the players and coaches, it's also a learning experience for that official. While most of us agree that this brief display of exuberance does not rise to the level of a foul that we would want in the National Championship game, this official will hopefully learn from this and someday reflect upon this call. We have all made calls that were not popular and we have made calls that are incorrect. A large part of what we do on the field involves accountability. If this official is honest with himself, he will realize that this should have been a pass and that nobody would be saying after the fact that a flag was deserved in that situation. Moral of the story: We get into more trouble for what we call, than what we don't call...
+1000
the reason i'm still upset about this is I'm seeing first hand how our board (or at least half of it) is handling this. and it's the opposite of what you suggest.
rather than looking at this as a possible educational experience, there are assigners who are putting up walls and defending the call. either by citing rules that dont' exist ("the book says you can't raise your hand!!!"), or by passing the buck to the MIAA.
yes, an MIAA rep has a brief pre-coin toss meeting with officials and coaches. and yes, good sportsmanship is one of the things they mention. but trying to link the MIAA with this specific call is a red herring. (maybe that should be yellow herring for the flag color?)
I guess I shouldnt be too surprised. I think I'm taking my college board experience (only 2 years) and looking at the HS board through the lens of what the college board would do. :(
-
I don't know about the rest of you, but I have been approached by several friends and coworkers about this issue. Apparently it is a big news story everywhere now. I think it is such a shame that so many people (including some officials) talk so negatively about someone's motivation, common sense and skill level when they know so little about the individual. I personally have no idea of why the calling official threw the flag. Maybe he over officiates, maybe he felt the player was taunting the other team, maybe he was told by his crew chief, local association or other authority that there was zero tolerance for any act beyond running. I would not have thrown a flag in a similar game situation but I have no problem with another official throwing the flag. (Of course I will reconsider that stance if my crew chief or supervisor want it thrown).
It is one thing to have to hear overly negative comments from the press and public. It is another thing to hear it from other officials. It is okay for officials to discuss whether a mistake was made on a particular call. It is even okay to disagree with a call. But we should ALWAYS empathize with the calling official. Holy crap. That guy is our brother in arms. I hope no one on this board takes this personal. It was not aimed at anyone on here.
-
I'm not sure anyone here is denigrating the official as a person. Even as a coach (and an official in other sports), I can empathize with the poistion. But empathy or not, there is nothing wrong with criticizing the call. It was poor judgment.
Hiding behind "They want zero tolerance" is justifying the action. There is no good justification, it was poor judgment. Wanting "zero tolerance" still means wanting zero tolerance of what's in the rule, not stretching it to something that was never meant to be included. Even the MIAA statement says, in veiled terms, that is was a bad call.
But bad calls happen, even from good officials. I'm assuming, that if he got to a state championship game, he had to be pretty good, unless the MA way of choosing playoff officials is totally political (politics in Massachsetts, who would think such a thing?).
But if it's a bad call, a great official will own up to it with at least, "Yeah, I might have missed that one." A less than excellent official continues to try to justify his bad call.
-
I'm not sure anyone here is denigrating the official as a person. Even as a coach (and an official in other sports), I can empathize with the poistion. But empathy or not, there is nothing wrong with criticizing the call. It was poor judgment.
I thought the same thing. I dont remember seeing in this thread anyone calling the official incompetent or a bad person, what we are criticizing is a gross misapplication of the rule. This video should definitely be included in someone's training stack of what NOT to flag.
-
I'm not sure anyone here is denigrating the official as a person. Even as a coach (and an official in other sports), I can empathize with the poistion. But empathy or not, there is nothing wrong with criticizing the call. It was poor judgment.
AB, I have no problem criticizing a call if the point is to become better informed or better officials. IMO, it is also fine to be critical in a general conversation about an official's call. Where I object, and I may be in the minority, is when we (not necessarily a member of this group) use phrases to describe the act or official with words we would never use to describe ourselves when we make a mistake. I have never heard an official talk about something he or she did with words/phrases like "unconscionable" , "very sad" or "even shame on me".
As I look through the threads on this board, 98% of the comments are positive (even if critical). I guess that is a pretty good mark. I guess I could eAt& a sNiCkErS and relax a bit.
-
Hiding behind "They want zero tolerance" is justifying the action. There is no good justification, it was poor judgment. Wanting "zero tolerance" still means wanting zero tolerance of what's in the rule, not stretching it to something that was never meant to be included.
I have thought the same thing during some of the discussions on this board related to HCTs and Targeting calls. If the rulesmakers wanted us to officiate those particular things so broadly, why did they define them so narrowly?
While there is no way I would have had a flag on this play I can certainly understand the official's potential confusion over what is or is not a foul since we seem to have no shortage of interpretations and expectations from a multitude of authorities.
-
Lots of discussion of what the 1 official did or didn't do...
Not looking to throw the crew under the bus, but looking to explore if someone else on the crew could/should have got to the B and talked about whether the foul was justified. I'm thinking there was at least one other set of eyes on the runner who saw the action and passed, maybe 2? Our crew talks about "help plays" alot and as individual officials, we welcome the help to avoid a big mistake.
Again, not criticizing the call, more viewpoints on whether this is a case where a fellow crewmate can come in with help on a critical call like this...
-
Following up on the previous "talk 'em out of it" I've done it - and had it done to me - and I firmly believe it's part of the toolkit for a crew, at all times.
I remember talking the R/HL out of a BIB that I'd seen develop as a legal block with no separation. I talked to both of em (working U) and asked, "guys, you had a better view of the side at the end - did you see separation." Neither had seen the play from the start, neither saw separation, so we picked up the flags.
The very next game, the tables were turned. And that's the other part of the process: we have to be receptive to our brothers and sisters in stripes, regardless of our experience - and of theirs.
-
I seem to remember early on in this story that the flag was for going into a highstepping motion at about the 9 yd line, not for raising his fist in the air. That is consistent with the spot of the ball after the penalty was applied. If it was for the fist in the air, the ball would have been placed several yards back. The media assumed it was the fist and published a picture accompanying their story of the fist in the air as well. As we all know, this then becomes the "facts" surrounding the whole thing. I can't find anything relating to that now and I could be confusing with one of the other USC calls being discussed.
Does anyone else remember that or have knowledge that this was or was not the case?
Also, if that was the case, does that alter anyone's opinion on the validity of the call?
-
Just look at the video.... No high stepping.
---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=30.183883,-98.876478
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I seem to remember early on in this story that the flag was for going into a highstepping motion at about the 9 yd line, not for raising his fist in the air.
That was reported, however the video shows there was no change on stride of any sort.
-
I seem to remember early on in this story that the flag was for going into a highstepping motion at about the 9 yd line, not for raising his fist in the air.....
Does anyone else remember that or have knowledge that this was or was not the case?
I believe that you're referring to my earlier post where I quoted a source that was at the game. The video shows that information was incorrect.
If in fact the "high-stepping" had occurred on a play like this, then IMO it's a violation of rule 9-2 as currently written and certainly could deserve a flag.
-
I have a question. What's the difference between running into the end zone with an arm raised, and high-stepping in? Why is one act automatically worth a live-ball 15-yard penalty and the other is not?
-
Because Rule 9-2 explicitly says so, and we've asked to enforce the rule as written. A brief hand raising is considered spontaneous celebration while the change in stride is considered taunting. The hand raising is not listed in 9-2, the change in stride is.
The 9-2 list is:
(a) Pointing the finger(s), hand(s), arm(s) or ball at an opponent, or imitating the slashing of the throat.
(b) Taunting, baiting or ridiculing an opponent verbally.
(c) Inciting an opponent or spectators in any other way, such as simulating the firing of a weapon or placing a hand by the ear to request recognition.
(d) Any delayed, excessive, prolonged or choreographed act by which a player (or players) attempts to focus attention upon himself (or themselves).
(e) An unopposed ball carrier obviously altering stride as he approaches the opponent’s goal line or diving into the end zone.
(f) Removal of a player’s helmet before he is in the team area (Exceptions: Team, media or injury timeouts; equipment adjustment; through play; between periods; and during a measurement for a first down).
(g) Punching one’s own chest or crossing one’s arms in front of the chest while standing over a prone player.
(h) Going into the stands to interact with spectators, or bowing at the waist after a good play.
We've been given guidance that we should not be flagging anything that is not on the 9-2 list unless it's flagrantly over the top. I'm not sure what that would be, but we've been told that we'll know it when we see it. Certainly that's not simply raising one's hand.
-
I'm not looking for "because the rule says so". We're told that the best way to learn the rules is to understand why they are the rules and what they're trying to accomplish. I now know, for instance, that a low block towards the opposite sideline is frequently very difficult for a defender to brace for, which can lead to serious injury (and is therefore illegal); while a low block towards the near sideline usually has a completely different angle and is much more safe to be on the recieving end of (and remains legal).
I am having difficulty working out why high-stepping is specifically prohibited and raising the arm is not; I can see no practical difference between the two acts.
-
If a player waits until he is in the endzone prior to raising his arm above his head, I imagine that few if any of us will throw a flag. It is really nothing at all. I believe the problem comes when the player hasnt scored yet and raises his hand, alters his stride, etc. Doing that may appear to taunt the defense by saying there is nothing you can do to stop me. I am going to score. Look at me.
I dont believe that was the case in this play, it appeared to be pure excitement over the impending score. I don't think it would hurt for the rule to state that any celebration may not start until the play is over. That would make it simple. Then limit the celebration after a score to things that dont taunt, are choreographed, etc. There will never be a perfect rule, but that would simplify the most important part (penalties that take points off the board).
-
I'm not looking for "because the rule says so". We're told that the best way to learn the rules is to understand why they are the rules and what they're trying to accomplish. I now know, for instance, that a low block towards the opposite sideline is frequently very difficult for a defender to brace for, which can lead to serious injury (and is therefore illegal); while a low block towards the near sideline usually has a completely different angle and is much more safe to be on the recieving end of (and remains legal).
I am having difficulty working out why high-stepping is specifically prohibited and raising the arm is not; I can see no practical difference between the two acts.
Have you ever heard the saying that armies always prepare to fight the LAST war they fought?
Rules are the same.
One is illegal and the other not simply because when the rule was written, players high stepping was a common way that they would draw attention to themselves. The rules intent is to stop this kind of grandstanding and attempts to focus attention on the individual rather than the team.
So we get rules that try to do two things:
1. Stop particular instances of known behavior that is definitely not ok (high stepping, spiking, pointing, throat slash) while
2. Being general enough to provide officials with enough latitude to penalize similar actions that are not identical to the listed actions, but close enough that they are effectively the same. This is to make sure that if you ban high stepping, someone does not subtly alter the behavior so it does not meet the specific definition of the rule, while still violating the obvious spirit of the rule.
This is why we get language like "acts include, but are not limited to..." in the rules.
The problem is that we will always have competing issues with rules like this. On the one hand, you want the rule to be general enough that officials can use their judgement to penalize appropriately without the need to explicitly list every single possible way someone can be unsporting. On the other hand, the moment you make a rule generalized and count on the officials judgement, it is 100% inevitable that somewhere, sometime, some official will apply that judgement poorly, and penalize something that the rule likely did NOT intend.
There is no solution to this problem, you can only minimize it.