Philosophy

[Diablo]

"Don't knit-pick plays at the goal line pylon. If in question on plays at the pylon, rule touchdown."

Agree or disagree and why?

[Kalle]

Disagree. That runs counter to the usual "no cheap scores" philosophy. Why should we treat the pylon differently from the goal line?

[NVFOA_Ump]

I'd have to agree with Kalle on this - when in doubt, spot it at the best identifiable OB spot you've got, and move on.  You either see it inside the pylon, or know from the angles that it had to be inside the pylon or it's OB.  I don't believe that awarding 6 points with a "don't nitpick" the pylon calls is in the best interest of the game - unless my supervisor says it is.

[El Macman]

With replay, the philosophy by many FBS guys is rule the positive (TD), and let replay be the bad guy and rule the negative, if needed. But that is only if it is so tight that they just don't know for sure.

[With_Two_Flakes]

You have to be very careful with NCAA philosophies now that we are in the era of video replay. We need two sets of philosophies depending on whether a game has replay or not

Many philosophies have changed due to replay - i.e. if unsure then on the field rule it one way and let replay change it if they see that you were in error.

But for games without replay, and that's many games in the US and certainly every game outside the US (which is where Europeans like Kalle and myself come in) then you have to use non-replay philosophies.

I can recall a while back when a bunch of philosophy changes came from NCAA and in the UK we were about to include them as per usual in our updated Mechanics Manual. When I actually looked closely at them, many were at odds with what I'd been taught over the years. Then it dawned on me that they were replay related and not relevant to the game as officiated in Europe.

[Diablo]

With replay, the philosophy by many FBS guys is rule the positive (TD), and let replay be the bad guy and rule the negative, if needed.

When a game has replay, I can see using that philosophy in situations where one option would lead to a dead ball and the other choice results in "play on".  For example:  Forward pass vs fumble; when in question, rule fumble on field.  Or ball carrier did or did not step on the sideline.  When in question, rule he was still inbounds. 

However, in the situation on the table, both options result in a dead ball.  So, even with replay, what's the rationale in ruling TD on the field?

[El Macman]

When a game has replay, I can see using that philosophy in situations where one option would lead to a dead ball and the other choice results in "play on".  For example:  Forward pass vs fumble; when in question, rule fumble on field.  Or ball carrier did or did not step on the sideline.  When in question, rule he was still inbounds. 

However, in the situation on the table, both options result in a dead ball.  So, even with replay, what's the rationale in ruling TD on the field?

Mostly because, statistically, ruling TD is correct most of the time.

[Kalle]

Mostly because, statistically, ruling TD is correct most of the time.

Would you happen to have a link to those stats? Also, doesn't that mean that if the replay is inconclusive, it again results in a cheap score, as the ruling on the field will then stand?

[ABoselli]

Touchdowns are forever - unless you have an RO.

Awarding TD's when in doubt in a non-replay game is a dicey proposition, in my opinion.

[foureyedzebra]

I'd have to agree with Kalle on this - when in doubt, spot it at the best identifiable OB spot you've got, and move on.  You either see it inside the pylon, or know from the angles that it had to be inside the pylon or it's OB.  I don't believe that awarding 6 points with a "don't nitpick" the pylon calls is in the best interest of the game - unless my supervisor says it is.

   

[jg-me]

Sometimes, when in doubt, we should check the CCA manual. For those who have not yet done so, go to page 37. When in question, it IS a TD.

[NVFOA_Ump]

Sometimes, when in doubt, we should check the CCA manual. For those who have not yet done so, go to page 37. When in question, it IS a TD.

But don't we expect that to be "fine tuned" with this year's changes that are coming?

[El Macman]

Would you happen to have a link to those stats? Also, doesn't that mean that if the replay is inconclusive, it again results in a cheap score, as the ruling on the field will then stand?

Kalle, no I don't actually have those stats. That's just what we've been told by those that keep track of those things.

Does it result in a cheap score? Who can say? It might just as easily be a score. Hence, then term "inconclusive."

I I didn't say it was 'rule,' or that anybody had to buy into it, if they don't want to. But is IS what many, many FBS guys follow (as directed).

[Mike L]

Just seems inconsistent.
Did he maintain possession or fumble? wid = fumble
Did he make the catch or no catch? wid = no catch
Did he get in or not? wid = he got in? Seems like it should be not.