RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: TXMike on July 06, 2012, 12:53:09 PM
-
From CFO:
COLLEGE FOOTBALL OFFICIATING, LLC
HELMET COMES OFF DURING PLAY: NEW RULINGS
Please note the following changes regarding a player’s helmet coming off.
Helmet Comes Off Near The End Of The Down
When a player’s helmet comes off near the end of a down it is quite possible
that this happens after the ball is dead. The first play on the CFO “Helmets Come Off”
video shows a good example, in which the receiver who catches the ball lands on his
back and then his helmet comes off, just shortly after the ball becomes dead. The intent
of the rule is that this player should leave the game for the next down.
To make the statement of the rules consistent with this intent, the phrase
“through play” replaces “during the down” in the applicable rules. Here is the new
language, with the changes shown in italics:
Rule 3-2-4-c
“13. An offensive team player’s helmet comes off through play….”
Rule 3-3-2-e
“16. A player’s helmet comes completely off through play.”
Rule 3-3-9
“a. If a player’s helmet comes completely off through play, other than as a direct
result of a foul by an opponent, the player must leave the game for the next down…..”
Continued Participation After the Helmet Comes Off
Questions have arisen about whether a player who loses his helmet may
continue to play if he quickly puts the helmet back on. An earlier interpretation would
allow this; however, that interpretation is no longer in effect. The applicable rule (9-117)
now
reads
(new
language
in
italics):
9-1-17
“A player whose helmet comes completely off during a down may not continue to
participate beyond the immediate action in which he is engaged, whether or not he
puts his helmet back on during the down.”
NOTE: This requires a change in Play 12 of the “Helmet Comes Off—Play Situations,”
posted March 21, 2012. That play now reads:
12. During a down B55’s helmet comes off without a helmet foul by Team A. B55
immediately picks up his helmet, puts it on and continues to chase the ball carrier.
RULING: Personal foul by B55 for continuing to participate after losing his helmet. The
clock stops at the end of the down and B55 must leave the game for the next down.
Rogers Redding
Secretary-Rules Ed
-
Someone was listening. That's good to know.
-
Someone was listening. That's good to know.
Yes, but all this 'beta' testing of new rules is getting a little annoying. Curious as to what next week's rule 'correction' will be...
Oh boy, might get in trouble for that one... :P
-
Are there any mechanics to use so we know that a player took his helmet off in case he does put it back on? Beanbag, hat, anything?
-
If he "takes it off" then you have a flag as that is a foul. (You can wave it off later iff you determine he was "repairing " it)
There has been discussion about marking the spot where it "comes off" as you may not see him participate until later in the down. For now i am not aware of any instruction to bag that spot. I guess it would be like other fouls, as soon as you see it is a foul, flag that spot, which may well not be where he first lost helmet. EX:
1st and 10 at 50. B66 loses his helmet in line play, no foul by A caused it to come loose. B66 just sort of mills around while play develops. Long pass is caught by A88 at the 15 and just before he scores, he is hit and fumbles. B20 picks up the looose ball and starts a run back. B66 has sauntered back to the B-45 to pick up his helmet. Seeing a teammate running back the fumble he slips the hat on and goes to block someone at the B-35. B20 is tackled at the B-40. B66 has fouled. Did he foul before or after the change of possession? What is the spot of the foul and enforcement?
-
I hadn't heard that 'losing' your helmet (not to be confused with losing your head) was a foul, only if he then chooses to participate in the play. At that point, I would think the flag would be thrown. In your example, sounds like he participates after the COP but you might have a situation where it is before the COP.
-
I hadn't heard that 'losing' your helmet (not to be confused with losing your head) was a foul, only if he then chooses to participate in the play. At that point, I would think the flag would be thrown. In your example, sounds like he participates after the COP but you might have a situation where it is before the COP.
Agree, but when did he "participate"? If he is chasing the ball carrier but never catches him, did he participate? If a defender continues to block him and he resists, has he particpated?
Some case will be clear, but many will not.
-
The guidance is pretty clear on both your situations Atl. Chasing is participating, contact or not. And the continued action he was engaged in (i.e. resisting while being blocked as he loses the hat) is NOT a foul.
Whether or not the player's conduct is worthy of a flag seems pretty straight forward. What is not so clear to me is how we keep track of the player all throughout the down and decide at what moment and where he was when he started to participate.
-
I believe this is immediate continuing action.
http://youtu.be/i1c9JaCZ9W0 (http://youtu.be/i1c9JaCZ9W0)
-
I believe this is immediate continuing action.
http://youtu.be/i1c9JaCZ9W0 (http://youtu.be/i1c9JaCZ9W0)
Kind of a "no-brainer", too! ;D
-
Agree, but when did he "participate"? If he is chasing the ball carrier but never catches him, did he participate? If a defender continues to block him and he resists, has he particpated?
Some case will be clear, but many will not.
And if the other player continues to block him the opponent has committed a personal foul. If they both continue both are guilty. We won't see helmets come off very often.
-
Mike, my question would mostly be about remembering that either HE was the one who lost the helmet and that he DID lose his helmet. In your situation, a lot of other stuff has gone on that might cause us to forget about the lost helmet and who exactly it was. This is going to be worse than BBW, imho
-
This is going to be worse than BBW, imho
Only in week 1 - maybe 2. After that, this will not be a problem at all.
-
Only in week 1 - maybe 2. After that, this will not be a problem at all.
Sending out a team's start QB for one play will definitely solve this problem. I know some schools that may wrap duct tape on them to keep them on if we send out their QB.
-
Sending out a team's start QB for one play will definitely solve this problem. I know some schools that may wrap duct tape on them to keep them on if we send out their QB.
Especially if the QB gets to sit a play at a critical point in the game because he can't keep his hat on. Teams all around the country will take note pretty darn quick, then.
-
Playing devil's avocate here, but I would think under most scenarios unless the QB is TAKING his own helmet off, if he's getting hit and losing it, you're probably going to have a roughing call.
-
Playing devil's avocate here, but I would think under most scenarios unless the QB is TAKING his own helmet off, if he's getting hit and losing it, you're probably going to have a roughing call.
I've seen them run the ball and get hit cleanly in the chest and the helmet flies off like a ball cap.
-
Yep and now since it has been clarified that losing the helmet after you hit the ground also means you have to go out there is even more chance of a QB leaving. Most of the helmets I have seen come off of runners have been when they hit the ground.
-
Most of the helmets I have seen come off of runners have been when they hit the ground.
No disrespect, but I don't think that is an unique observation. Perhaps the prevalence of helmets coming off when the player hits the ground led Dr. Redding to announce the change "during the down" is replaced by "through play".
-
I heard today at a clinic that during the D-1 spring games that there was only 1 report of a helmet coming off. Perhaps this is already beginning to be a non-issue.
-
Jason, you must have been at Abilene. Was there also. Ha
-
Jason, you must have been at Abilene. Was there also. Ha
I was the one who Bill used to describe a block in the back.
-
Was further back. I see you posting on Six man site sometimes, I think.
-
A, 2/10 @ 50... While pass blocking at the 50-yard line, the L-Tackle’s helmet comes off. The L-Tackle runs from the 50 to the 30-yard line and blocks or attempts to block a defender trying to tackle the pass receiver. The ball becomes dead at the B-25. No foul was involved regarding the Tackle’s helmet coming off.
-
A, 2/10 @ 50... While pass blocking at the 50-yard line, the L-Tackle’s helmet comes off. The L-Tackle runs from the 50 to the 30-yard line and blocks or attempts to block a defender trying to tackle the pass receiver. The ball becomes dead at the B-25. No foul was involved regarding the Tackle’s helmet coming off.
The trick here is determining the enforcement spot. If the foul occurs before the pass is complete, then the previous spot is the enforcement spot. Easy. If after the pass, it becomes a 3 and 1 enforcement based upon the Basic Spot. This can be a bit of a judgment call. If he immediately begins running hard to get involved in the play, then he has fouled immediately, and the spot is wherever he began to move (in this case probably right at the 50). However, he might just wander downfield a bit before he decides to move hard to get into the play. In your judgment, when he begins to move to participate in the play, he has fouled at that spot, and that is where the flag goes.
In the given play, the EOTR is beyond the NZ. The spot of the foul is most assuredly at or beyond the NZ, but definitely behind the EOTR. So, the penalty would be from the spot of the foul. Let's assume it was the 50. So the 15-yard penalty leaves the ball at the A-35. A, 2/25, A-35, 25-second play clock, game clock status quo. The Team A left tackle is sent off the field for at least one down.
-
I believe this would be a live ball foul and we'd repeat the down. I like the way you break it down. It was talked about this weekend and it was stated that, like you said, whenever you first notice him start running to participate. Since we aren't going to zero in on a player who loses his lid (to the determent of other duties we have) we may not notice that he's attempting to participate right away.
-
I believe this would be a live ball foul and we'd repeat the down. I like the way you break it down. It was talked about this weekend and it was stated that, like you said, whenever you first notice him start running to participate. Since we aren't going to zero in on a player who loses his lid (to the determent of other duties we have) we may not notice that he's attempting to participate right away.
Yes, A, 2/25, A-35. Mistype or brain fart, not sure which....
-
This may have been discussed but does the player have to sit our for one tick of the clock? Say the next "play" is a FST or DOG.
-
along the same lines, can anyone point to something officially in writing that says the injured player must stay out for one tick of the clock? Just trying to verify stuff.
-
Rule 3-3-9
Helmet Comes Off—Timeout (New Article)
ARTICLE 9.
a. If during the down a player’s helmet comes completely off, other than as the direct result of a foul by an opponent, the player must leave the game for the next down.
Down
ARTICLE 1. A down is a unit of the game that starts after the ball is ready for
play with a legal snap (scrimmage down) or legal free kick (free kick down)
and ends when the ball becomes dead.
If the next play is a FST or a DOG the ball would have never been put in play.
-
You're up early today, 99! ;D
I was about to type an answer but fencewire beat me to it...
While I haven't seen anything "official", if the player is required to sit out the next down, I would agree a down wasn't played if, following his departure, we had a FST or DOG.
-
Rule 3-3-9
Helmet Comes Off—Timeout (New Article)
ARTICLE 9.
a. If during the down a player’s helmet comes completely off, other than as the direct result of a foul by an opponent, the player must leave the game for the next down.
Down
ARTICLE 1. A down is a unit of the game that starts after the ball is ready for
play with a legal snap (scrimmage down) or legal free kick (free kick down)
and ends when the ball becomes dead.
If the next play is a FST or a DOG the ball would have never been put in play.
I saw that - what's interesting is that I believe the Federation (high school) is coming up with a different interpretation with basically the same rule book language thus my inquiry.
-
If we end up replaying the down (IW, accepted penalty, etc), can the player come back in?
-
Welpe, I would say if we actually played a down, yes, that qualifies for the player to return.
99, I've not heard of a different interp. The caveat to the Fed rule are exceptions regarding the helmet coming off if it is due to a foul attributed to the opponent (e.g. grabbing the face mask and ripping the helmet off), or if halftime or overtime intermission occurs.
-
A down is from snap/legal free kick, to dead-ball. It has nothing to do with game clock time, or penalty enforcement. A helmet-comes-off violator must sit out one down. He can't buy himself back into the game with a team time-out. A Referee's time out, an opponent's team time out, and the end of a period don't help him. If the violation is during the last play of the 2nd period, he must sit out the first down of the 3rd period. If during the last play of the 4th period, he must sit out the first play of the extra period, if there is one. (No he doesn't have to sit out the first down of the next game. ;D)
If there is a pre-snap dead-ball foul(s) before the next snap/legal free kick, he hasn't sat out a down yet, so he is not yet eligible to return to the game. If there is a live-ball foul(s) during the down that he sits out, it/they are irrelevant - he has sat out a down, so he is eligible to return.
I still predict, after week 2, we just won't see many/any helmets coming off.
-
...after week 2 1, we just won't see many/any helmets coming off.
Fixed that for you. :angel:
-
A down is from snap/legal free kick, to dead-ball. It has nothing to do with game clock time, or penalty enforcement. A helmet-comes-off violator must sit out one down. He can't buy himself back into the game with a team time-out. A Referee's time out, an opponent's team time out, and the end of a period don't help him. If the violation is during the last play of the 2nd period, he must sit out the first down of the 3rd period. If during the last play of the 4th period, he must sit out the first play of the extra period, if there is one. (No he doesn't have to sit out the first down of the next game. ;D)
If there is a pre-snap dead-ball foul(s) before the next snap/legal free kick, he hasn't sat out a down yet, so he is not yet eligible to return to the game. If there is a live-ball foul(s) during the down that he sits out, it/they are irrelevant - he has sat out a down, so he is eligible to return.
Is there a consequence, i.e. price to pay, if the helmetless player plays the next down?
-
caning?
-
Make him play the next down without his helmet ;D
-
Was instructed this weekend that if helmet comes off on last play of first half, player may play first play of second half. If it happens on last play of tie game, he must sit out first play of extra period.
-
Fixed that for you. :angel:
Well, if ALL teams play in week 1, OK. But I don't think that's the case. It usually takes two weeks to get everyone on the field. >:D
-
Was instructed this weekend that if helmet comes off on last play of first half, player may play first play of second half. If it happens on last play of tie game, he must sit out first play of extra period.
That is not true, according to RR, the next down means the next down what ever that may be, and if the next down is the opening kickoff of the second half, then that is the down he must sit out. I heard him say this in person.
-
I think many of us may have been basing our assumptions on this based on what happened after the change to the injured player procedure. When it first started that the injured player had to sit out a down we got into all the "what if's". I think we may have even had a bulletin or something that told us if it was the break between quarters then he had to stay out but if it was between halves he could come back in. Seems logical same would be true for the player losing the helmet. RR will be with us in McAllen this weekend and we'll give this one to him.
-
Be sure and ask him about the modified halo (square,moving triangle, semicircle) and resetting on the kickoff
-
Someone needs to reiterate this to the conference coordinators then...
The coordinator explainded that it was a punishment, it was to allow time for the equipment manager to ensure the helmet was properly fitted before the player returned to the game.....You'd think 30-40 minutes would be more than sufficient to do this.
-
I think many of us may have been basing our assumptions on this based on what happened after the change to the injured player procedure. When it first started that the injured player had to sit out a down we got into all the "what if's". I think we may have even had a bulletin or something that told us if it was the break between quarters then he had to stay out but if it was between halves he could come back in. Seems logical same would be true for the player losing the helmet. RR will be with us in McAllen this weekend and we'll give this one to him.
Dr. Redding was unambiguous in stating that it is the next down, even if the half intervenes. This is contrary to the guidance we'd received from clinicians and what I think is usually understood to be the case for injuries, but he was pretty clear in McAllen that the half doesn't change anything.
-
Dr. Redding was unambiguous in stating that it is the next down, even if the half intervenes. This is contrary to the guidance we'd received from clinicians and what I think is usually understood to be the case for injuries, but he was pretty clear in McAllen that the half doesn't change anything.
That was the message I received as well. One play means one play, even if that one play is the kickoff to start the thrird quarter were pretty much the words he used.
-
This just came across our mailbox. Looks to me there is a lot of grey area surrounding what "direct result of a foul" actually is.
Please read. This is from Walt Anderson, Big 12 Football Supervisor. New play interpretations from Rogers Redding NCAA Rules Editor. The spirit of this rule is if a player loses his helmet as a result of a foul against him by another player he does not have to leave the game for one play. To remain in the game the loss of the helmet must be directly a result of a foul.
CFO Staff,
I talked to Rogers today at the TASO state meeting and he confirmed that there will need to be some interpretation regarding the recent play situations on helmets off that he sent out. The operative phrase needs to be "contact that directly results in a player losing his helmet". Two examples he gave: (1) RPS by defense because of use of crown to chest of QB; he stumbles back, falls backward and when his head hits the ground, his helmet comes off. Ruling - foul for RPS was not the "direct" cause of the helmet off; QB has to leave game for one play. (2) RPS by defense who hits QB late and drives him to the ground, forcing his head to contact the ground which results in his helmet coming off. The helmet comes off here more because of the "direct" result of forcing the QB's head to hit the ground and thus would qualify as a foul that resulted in the helmet coming off and the QB would NOT have to leave the game for one play.
Also, on the scenario we discussed at the clinic that if we have a PFH foul because a player participates without a helmet, and replay reverses to a point where the ball is dead clearly before the player's helmet came off, we would pick up the flag for PFH. However, if an opponent during that time blocks a player without a helmet, he has committed a UNR/HDP and that flag, like other "contact personal fouls", will always be enforced even if we pick up the flag for PFH.
Walt
-
This just came across our mailbox. Looks to me there is a lot of grey area surrounding what "direct result of a foul" actually is.
It just gets more complicated every day. Let's see if this is an issue at all about 9/15.
-
Dr. Redding was unambiguous in stating that it is the next down, even if the half intervenes. This is contrary to the guidance we'd received from clinicians and what I think is usually understood to be the case for injuries, but he was pretty clear in McAllen that the half doesn't change anything.
Yep he was absolutley clear. He said he did not maytter if it was last play of a quarter, half or regulation. The kid sits the next down.
-
(1) RPS by defense because of use of crown to chest of QB; he stumbles back, falls backward and when his head hits the ground, his helmet comes off. Ruling - foul for RPS was not the "direct" cause of the helmet off; QB has to leave game for one play. (2) RPS by defense who hits QB late and drives him to the ground, forcing his head to contact the ground which results in his helmet coming off. The helmet comes off here more because of the "direct" result of forcing the QB's head to hit the ground and thus would qualify as a foul that resulted in the helmet coming off and the QB would NOT have to leave the game for one play.
Interesting - especially since it would seem that the QB being driven into the ground would be more likely to suffer a head injury than the one in the first situation.
-
The players are not being required to leave the game because they may have suffered a head injury. they are being required to leave as part of the punishment for not having the helmet on properly. If we determine the foul was why the helmet popped off then they are excused from that punishment. If not, then they are not excused. So, as was said, this leaves the very real possibility that after a big hit, the hitter will be penalized AND the hittee will be leaving the game for a play. Lots of coaches, fans and players are going to struggle with that one.
Coach: He roughed my QB and because of that my QB hit the ground and his helmet came off. He should not have to sit.
Zebra: Yes coach, your QB was hit a tad late so we flagged the hit. But even if the hit had been a tad earlier and been legal, your QB still would have hit theground that way and his helmet would have still come off.
-
The players are not being required to leave the game because they may have suffered a head injury. they are being required to leave as part of the punishment for not having the helmet on properly. If we determine the foul was why the helmet popped off then they are excused from that punishment. If not, then they are not excused. So, as was said, this leaves the very real possibility that after a big hit, the hitter will be penalized AND the hittee will be leaving the game for a play. Lots of coaches, fans and players are going to struggle with that one.
Coach: He roughed my QB and because of that my QB hit the ground and his helmet came off. He should not have to sit.
Zebra: Yes coach, your QB was hit a tad late so we flagged the hit. But even if the hit had been a tad earlier and been legal, your QB still would have hit theground that way and his helmet would have still come off.
I was looking at this rule more as a safety thing than a "punishment" thing. I guess that logic makes sense, if I look at it that way.
-
Ultimately, it is a safety issue. If the helemt isn't on and secure, it doesn't serve its purpose - that of protecting the wearer (to its maximum ability to do so).
But, sadly, rather like our federal government, there seems to be some need on the NCAA's part to protect people from their own foolishness and irresponsibility. It wouldn't take but one hit to the exposed head to teach a guy to wear his helmet - and wear it securely. Perhaps even his teammates would learn, too; especially if he lost significant playing time. Instead, they make us the 'stupidity police.'
I suppose they had to find something to take the place of us being fashion police.
The good news is that the punishment for this reckless beahvior may be strong enough to put an end to this issue. I stll say it won't be a problem after week 2.
-
It wouldn't take but one hit to the exposed head to teach a guy to wear his helmet - and wear it securely.
Unless the brain damage erases his memory of getting hit :!#
-
Apologies if this was covered in another post and I missed it.
Is it correct to state that, for the purposes of a player sitting out the next down, that it applies to the first play of overtime? In other words, halftime is the only exception to missing a down?
-
Recent interpretations by RR have been conveyed that they must sit the next down, nothing buys them back, timeout, quarter, half, or regulation. They have to sit the next down of the game.
-
In other words, halftime is the only exception to missing a down?
Echoing Fencewire - there are no exceptions. Period. If his helmet comes off illegally, he sits out the next down of that game.
-
There are already some high school players around here complaining how tight they are fitting these helmets. Looks like some may be getting the idea of how serious this is.