|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaSIznfs3dc OK, so finally I get some spare time I can waste to make a proper thread. I started calling football a while back, and it seemed like the GDTs appreciated having someone around them who could answer questions like "how come the offense got the ball back after recovering the punt when they didn't get it past the first down line?" Thing is, I often ended up getting caught up in these discussions and missing entire quarters of football while explaining PSK enforcement as it relates to the commentators being full of poo poo (they're always wrong, by the way). It seemed like the discussions were interesting enough to need their own thread, and so they were, and on we went, and now here we are in 2014, seven years later, and now people who've read these threads have picked up whistles and flags of their own, and will be taking it out of their pants on high school fields across the country. Hi, guys! Remember they took the auto first off DPI, yeah? This is where we talk about why Play X from the big TV game got ruled the way it did, and where I dissect the rules in slightly more detail than anyone needs to know. This is not where we write "DEAR ED 'GUNS' HOCHULI" or whine about being screwed; that is for gameday threads and open letters. We joke about SEC refs not Pac-12 refs, and if you need to ask a question then it helps to have a video, or a GIF, or a really detailed description, else I'm liable to give four different answers because the correct ruling is going to hinge on something else that was happening. My games are played to NCAA rules, so when I'm explaining things, I will default to explaining the NCAA rule where possible, and then any exceptions or changes that the NFL uses; unless it's strictly an NFL thing. I know the college rulebook much better than I know the NFL one, so it makes it much easier on me if I can work from that where possible. Questions that are about statistics rather than rules are also welcome here, but don't take my word for anything because I'm not a stat man. Do we have anyone who's done stats before? I like stat men. They've saved me from losing a down a few times. One final thing: do be slightly careful of what the pet retired ref said on the TV when the play happened. He's a retired ref, so he may very well be blind. Something I have noticed is that NFL guys like Mike Pereira and Gerry Austin are also covering college ball, but they do sometimes forget different subtleties and interpretations and mechanics that college officials use, and then they end up giving out a curate's egg of a ruling; the one small bit they've got wrong torpedoes their entire line of reasoning. For the past seven years these threads have provided useful, quality discussion. Even after That Dropped Calvin Johnson Pass When They Ruled It Incomplete And Everyone Said "Huh?". Let's carry on like that, no? Textbooks: For no good reason, the NFL tends not to release its rulebook publically until a way into the season. In the meantime, the 2013 edition is available here: http://www.nfl.com/rulebook . Beware of a legacy page on the NFL site claiming to be a "Digest of Rules", which was out of date when I first found it in 2006 and hasn't changed since. The NCAA rulebook is available as a free .pdf or .epub from http://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4309-2013-and-2014-ncaa-football-rules-and-interpretations.aspx; just check the box and click the "Download Now" button that appears. It says "2013 and 2014" on the cover; the 2014 revision should have "2014" on the title page and include the 2014 rule changes in the summary of same. Rule changes analysis will follow before the Saturday games get started. Don't be afraid to post in here, yo! Ain't no such thing as a stupid question.
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 12:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 09:48 |
|
|
 DEFINITIONS (IF YOU READ NOTHING ELSE, READ THIS) Okay, one of the defining features of any football rulebook is, er, the definitions. An absolute shitload of terms are defined, and for the purposes of the rules they become terms of art. Frequently, this means that a word has a different definition in the rulebook than when it's used in normal conversation. The best example of this is the word "block". We all know what a block is, right? Well, the rulebook disagrees. The NCAA book has its definitions in Rule 2... quote:Blocking And the NFL in Rule 3. quote:Blocking When a defender puts his shoulder into the runner and knocks him flat, that's every bit as much a block (by rule) as the gigantic pancake block that the center just put on a linebacker. This sort of thing is why officials tend to be slightly anal about using the correct rulebook terms: if we don't, it leads to ambiguity and can sometimes change the entire meaning of a question. For instance: an incomplete backward pass that hits the ground (not a lateral) is not the same thing as a fumble. It's very similar to a fumble, but it's not the same thing. This becomes very important at a certain time in the game, and if any non-regulars think they know when it is, please speak up. Okay, this post is divided into three parts: definitions of important rulebook terms, definitions of officiating jargon, and the names of people who you may not have heard of. They'll be added here when necessary. Definitions of Rulebook Terms Approved Ruling "An approved ruling (A.R.) is an official decision on a given statement of facts. It serves to illustrate the spirit and application of the rules. The relationship between the rules and an approved ruling is analogous to that between statutory law and a decision of the Supreme Court. If there is a conflict between the official rules and approved rulings, the rules take precedence." Thank you, NCAA book. For the NCAA, the Rules Committee officially makes approved rulings: in practice they originate from Rogers Redding. For the NFL, same deal with Dean Blandino and the Competition Committee. The final sentence was actually removed from the NCAA book a while back, but we're all assuming it holds true unless Rogers Redding (c.f.) issues a bulletin (c.f.) that contradicts it. Anatomy of a Game or Anatomy The best book that nobody's ever heard of. A 30-year member of the NCAA Rules Committee and former Secretary/Rules Editor, David M. Nelson, traces the development of football rules from the first American proto-handling football codes of the 1870s to the mid-1990s. Contains the kind of gossip and insight that you can only get from someone who was there, or who knew old-timers who were there, and who know how it all went down. (Among other things, this is how we know why NCAA doesn't allow an offensive lineman to report eligible for a down; because the Rules Committee at the time didn't like Bear Bryant and wanted to stop him running tackle-eligible plays all the time.) Available from Google Books for about $15. Well worth your time if you find yourself starting to care about why the rules are the way they are. Team A and Team B Team A is the team designated to put the ball in play. Team B is their opponents. Compare this with offense and defense. The offense is the team in possession, the defense is not. Thus, while (for instance) a punt is returned, Team B is on offense and Team A is on defense. These designations remain the same until the Referee declares the ball ready for play after the change of possession. Team K and Team R In NFHS rules, when a down has a kick in it, Team A is referred to as "Team K" and Team B is referred to as "Team R". Some people find that this is helpful. Some people do not. Forward Pass A forward pass is any pass where the ball is thrown and moves from its original position towards the opposing team's goal line. It is also a forward pass if a player is holding it to pass it forwards, begins the passing motion, and then loses control of the ball. Yes, the NFL tuck rule is dead now. Backward Pass A backward pass is any pass that is not forward. There is no such thing as a "lateral". Batting NCAA: "Batting the ball is intentionally striking it or intentionally changing its direction with the hands or arms." NFL: "A Bat or Punch is the intentional striking of the ball with hand, fist, elbow, or forearm." Foul, Penalty, and Violation A foul is an infraction of the rules for which a penalty is set; so roughing the passer is a a foul, for which the penalty 15 yards and an automatic first down. A violation is an NCAA term for a rule infraction that is not a foul and does not offset the penalty for a foul, such as illegal equipment or the kicking team illegally touching its own kick. The NFL refers to what would be NCAA violations as "special fouls with special penalty enforcement that does not offset ordinary fouls": exactly the same as a violation except not called "violation" because that would be helpful. Muff and Fumble A fumble is "any act other than passing, kicking or successful handing that results in loss of player possession". A muff is "an unsuccessful attempt to catch or recover a ball that is touched in the attempt" (NCAA definitions, the NFL rule is only cosmetically different and comes to exactly the same thing). There's an easy way to remember this: if he never gained possession and control of the ball, it's a muff. If he did have possession and control and then lost it again, it was a fumble. Very important where incompetent punt returners are concerned! The difference between a muff and a fumble is one of the things I make good and sure to drill into my rookies. Plays: Running Play, Passing Play, Free Kick Play, Scrimmage Kick Play, Field Goal Play As far as I can make out, the NFL uses all of these concepts in exactly the same way, but it doesn't put them together neatly anywhere like the college book does. Instead, it leaves them strewn throughout the book like a messy teenager who's too lazy to tidy his magazines away so he can stop tripping over them, which also makes them impossible to find. quote:Forward Pass Play Note: We've encountered our first example of rulebook code, which is further defined a little way down this post. Let's examine the implications of all this for a moment. My standard example to illustrate this kind of thinking goes something like: Every play starts with a running play. Let's say the quarterback drops back and throws a legal forward pass, which is then caught by a reciever who runs for a touchdown. Until the quarterback passed the ball, there was a running play. However, once the pass is thrown, the running play is reclassified as a forward pass play, which ends when the ball is caught, and another running play begins, ending with the touchdown. The important point is this: The word 'play' is not, as far as the rulebook is concerned, a synonym for 'down' (as in 1st down, 2nd down, etc.) There can be more than one play during a down, and plays can be reclassified depending on how they end. Slightly different example now, just to make sure we've all got it (and to show how brain-bending this can get). The quarterback hands off to a running back, who goes on an apparent sweep and throws a backward pass to a wide reciever, who runs the reverse, then stops and throws a legal forward pass. It is intercepted and run back by the cornerback, who then fumbles, and the ball is finally recovered by the tight end, who steps out of bounds. The sequence of plays: 1. A running play starts with the snap and ends with the QB's handoff to the RB. 2. A running play starts with that handoff and ends when the WR catches the RB's backward pass. There is a seperate "run" during the running play, which ended when the RB threw the backward pass. 3. A running play starts when the WR gains possession. It ends when he throws a legal forward pass. The previous three running plays are then reclassified as one continuous passing play. The passing play ends when the pass is intercepted by the CB. 4. A running play starts with the interception and ends with the TE's fumble recovery. The "run" during the running play ended with the fumble. 5. The final running play starts with the recovery and ends when the ball is dead by the TE stepping out of bounds with it. It's a whole series of posts to explain exactly why things are done this way, but basically it's to make penalty enforcement fairer. Spots: Previous Spot, Succeeding Spot, Dead-Ball Spot, Out-of-Bounds Spot, Inbounds Spot, Spot of Foul, Enforcement Spot, Spot Where Run Ends, Spot Where Kick Ends, Basic Spot, Postscrimmage Kick Spot Same "messy teenager" deal with the NFL and NCAA. NCAA Rule 2-25: quote:Enforcement Spot There is a reason to differentiate the dead-ball spot and the succeeding spot; for instance, when there's a touchback, the dead-ball spot is in the end zone and the succeeding spot is at the 20-yard line. quote:Spot of the Foul The momentum rule says that if you gain possession of a loose ball near the end zone, and then the momentum from gaining possession causes you to enter the end zone and fall over there, it's not a safety, it's your ball where you gained possession. A return kick is when a player catches a scrimmage kick and then decides to kick it back to the original kickers, and it looks something like this. Hasn't been legal for over 100 years. quote:Spot Where Kick Ends Simply put: a few penalties are always enforced from the same place (for example, kick catch interference is always a 15-yard penalty from the spot of the foul and Team B's ball), but for most fouls, the enforcement spot depends on what was going on when the foul committed and where exactly it was (hence the need for the play classifications just up there). I try to explain Rule 10 properly at least once a year to get it all square in my head, so that'll come along at some point. quote:Postscrimmage Kick Spot (NFL: Missed field goals are returned to the spot of the kick, not the previous spot.) Here's another piece of code. "When Rule 6-3-11 is in effect" means that when there is illegal touching in Team B's end zone, it's a touchback - that's what Rule 6-3-11 governs. NFL and NCAA rules on this last point differ somewhat: NCAA: The ball is in the end zone (but not dead) when it has broken the plane, no exceptions. If the ball is batted out by Team A, it's illegal touching in the end zone and Team B may have a touchback at the end of the play. However, if the ball hasn't broken the plane yet, the position of Team A players doesn't matter: they can stand in the end zone and bat the ball away before it enters, or lie with part of their body in the end zone and down the ball in the field of play. NFL: The ball is not in the end zone unless it is dead in the end zone. However, the position of Team A players does matter. If they jump from outside the end zone they can bat the ball back across the goal line into the field of play. However, if they are in the end zone and they touch the ball, the ball is dead in the end zone, even if the ball itself isn't physically in the end zone. Types of Block: Block in the Back, Clipping, Block Below Waist (Cut Block), Chop Block, Peel Back Block A block in the back is a block delivered when the force of the initial contact is from behind and above the waist. Clipping is a block delivered from behind and below the waist. A block below the waist is a block delivered from in front and below the waist, and is what everyone else calls a cut block. A chop block is a high/low combination block by two players against one opponent. The next time the NFL spins you a line of bullshit about how much they care for player safety, remember that chop blocks are broadly legal under NFL rules. A peel back is a downfield block by an offensive team player towards his own goal line. Watch #80 as the run develops. There's another kind of block involving diving low at the outside of someone's knee when executing a cut block rather than going in heads-up - it's very dangerous and the NCAA spent about five years trying to write a rule to fully outlaw it. Unfortunately coaching parlance has changed since they started trying to outlaw it, and so these days "crackback block" often means something different to what I've just described, what Dr Z used to refer to as the bastard block. People who you probably haven't heard of John Adams - Former NCAA Secretary-Rules Editor, since replaced by Rogers Redding. The NCAA book had a major facelift a while back, and some of that is Redding changing interpretations that Adams came up with and Redding doesn't agree with - pretty much the first thing he did when in post was to change an interpretation about what the result was of some ridiculously convoluted approved ruling for a play that involved the ball being fumbled out of the end zone after a change of possession and then going out of bounds somewhere. Dean Blandino - The NFL Vice-President of Officiating; their supervisor. He doesn't have a great deal of field experience, but he's worked in the officiating department since 1994 and has been instrumental in the development of instant replay over the last fifteen years. Ron Cherry - Currently the ACC's senior referee, and the poster child for why being able to sell your calls is far more important than actually getting them right; see Ed Hochuli for the yin to Cherry's yang. He's not a bad official, he just has a hard time convincing civilians that he's not a bad official. Tony Corrente - NFL referee and Pac-12 supervisor. He's doing a pretty good job of rehabilitating their reputation after some very poor years back in the late 00s. Bobby Gaston - The SEC supervisor for 18 years and an on-field official for more. Retired in 2006. More than anyone, is the reason why other refs tell SEC jokes instead of Pac-10 jokes. Has hopefully retired to somewhere where it's still 1955; he won't find happiness anywhere else. There are still officials in the SEC following the hilariously outdated mechanics that he insisted they use before retiring. Carl Johnson - Another former NFL supervisor; had the entirely unenviable job of trying to follow Mike Pereira, which is kind of like being an Australian in 1950 and trying to follow Bradman. He's now gone back to the field as the NFL office experiments with having some full-time officials; they're working towards having one full-time specialist for each position. He's also just started giving up his time on Friday nights to work with his local high school association, which is nice. Carl Johnson is not to be confused with the other Carl Johnson. Mike Pereira - Former NFL supervisor, now gainfully employed by Fox. Has been absolutely instrumental in the development of officiating in general within the past ten years, especially by identifying the nine flavours of pass interference and six flavours of holding. Probably the most influential figure in modern football officiating. Recently retired after 10 years as supervisor to rake in Murdoch's sweet, sweet dollars and spend more time with his family. He's also started again working Friday night high school games in his local district, and by all accounts is enjoying it very much. Rogers Redding - NCAA Secretary-Rules Editor, and is therefore in charge of the rulebook; although the NCAA rules committee tells him (mostly) what to write in it, he's solely responsible for interpretations. Officiated on the field for over 30 years in the SEC, worked three national championship games, many more bowl games and the 1999 SEC Championship Game, before retiring to replace long-time supervisor and notorious Luddite Bobby Gaston. Has been a noted "rules guy" for many years and for most of those years, personally wrote study guidebooks for both NCAA and high school rules (they're now being continued by another author under the Redding name). Steve Shaw - Former SEC referee, current SEC supervisor, is trying to continue Redding's uphill task of modernising SEC officials, which is kind of like trying to sell iPads to the Amish. He is getting somewhere, though. Definitions of Official-Speak and Other poo poo You Could Do With Knowing Acronyms DPI: Defensive Pass Interference OPI: Offensive Pass Interference KCI: Kick Catch Interference PSK: Post-Scrimmage Kick RFP: Ready-For-Play SKF: Scrimmage Kick Formation USC: Unsportsmanlike Conduct Bang-bang play - Any play that involves the ball being caught or recovered, and then the player immediately gets hit, and there's a question as to whether he was able to demonstrate full control of the ball before it came loose. Most supervisors these days want anything that looks like it might be a bang-bang play ruled incomplete or no recovery. No cheap fumbles. Bulletin play - A play contained in one of the NCAA's Rogers Redding's weekly bulletin of interesting things he thought up this week. Designed to facilitate trainings, bollockings, and ridiculous arguments in one fell swoop. If you had a complicated or controversial play last week, it'll appear in the bulletin next week; and depending on whether RR's ruling agreed with yours, it's either a major pat on the head or a massive kick up the arse. Competition Committee - The NFL Committee in charge of the playing rules. Made up entirely of current head coaches, but in practice the VP of Officiating also has a major say. Code - The practice of writing things in the rulebook like "In situation X, enforce outcome Y, except when Rule 6-9-1-b-u-1-1-5-h-1-t is in effect", rather than telling you what that rule actually means so you can find out what should happen without having to go somewhere else. I hate code and want to kill it with sticks. Covered up - A player is covered up if he is on the line of scrimmage but is not the end player, and is therefore ineligible by position. Federation or NFHS - The National Federation of High Schools, whose football rules are used in 48 states, with the exceptions of Texas's UIL and Massachusetts's MIAA, who use modified NCAA rules. We've got a few guys in here who call Fed rules. Football move - Yes, it still lives. It's now known as "an act common to the game", but don't be fooled, it's the same concept in a new haircut. Crucially, in its new form it's clear that "advancing the football" (or, put another way, "taking a step with the football in your hand after landing on your feet and not falling over") is a football move; and you do not necessarily have to make a football move any more, you just have to have had an opportunity to make one. One of those things that it's easier to see than explain. Ineligible by position - A player, not necessarily wearing a number (#50 to #79) that makes him ineligible to touch a forward pass, who is on the line of scrimmage and covered up. Since only the ends are eligible, anyone inside the ends on the line is ineligible by position. In the NFL, if you line up here wearing an eligible number, it's an illegal formation. Ineligible by number - A player wearing a number between #50 to #79 that makes him ineligible to touch a forward pass - there must be 5 such players on the line of scrimmage, unless it is an obvious scrimmage kick formation. In the NFL only, ineligible numbers may "report eligible" to the Referee before a down and legally take a position as an eligible reciever. If they do not report, they must also be ineligible by position, or the formation is illegal. Keep it in your pants/take it out of your pants - My preferred way of referring to the act of throwing the flag, or not throwing the flag, in honour of a Joe Theismann MNF quote where, after a DPI call that he disagreed with, he practically howled into the microphone, "but the official must have seen something to take it out of his pants!", whereupon Kornheiser had a gigantic laughing fit and then made fun of him, and you know you've done something really goddamn stupid when Tony Kornheiser is allowed to point out how stupid you've just been. Main Line - One of the solid 5-yard lines. The goal lines and sidelines are not main lines. MIAA - Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association, which runs high school sports there. Notably, they do not use NFHS rules, they use NCAA rules with a few minor exceptions. Philosophy - A philosophy is something that isn't in the rules, but that we still use to help us make rules decisions. They can do anything from providing a useful when-in-doubt rule ("if it's a bang-bang play, the pass is always incomplete") to plugging holes in the rulebook. Ready-for-play - Also "the Referee's ready-for-play signal", "declaring the ball ready for play" "the ready", "the whistle", "the RFP", "marking it ready", "blowing it in", and etc. After administrative stoppages, the Referee blows his whistle and makes a funny hand signal. This indicates that the ball is now ready for play and Team A has 25 seconds to snap it. When the 40-second clock is in use, the ball is automatically ready for play when spotted. Sometimes the game clock starts on the ready. The ready-for-play is one of the times when things change - it's when the chains are set and any penalty after it will result in something like 1st and 15 or 1st and 5, and it's also when, after a change of possession, the designations "Team A" and "Team B" swap over. Spots: Nose On, Tail On, Middle - "Nose on" is when you put the ball down with its nose (front end) touching a line. "Tail on" is when the ball is put down with its back end touching a line. "Middle" is when the ball is midway between two lines. Unless it is close to a first down, the ball will never be put down with its middle on a line, the nose one side, and the tail the other. Also, after every change of possession, the spot is adjusted if necessary to start nose on. These two things are done for the convenience of the stat men, who hate touchdown drives of 65.5 yards, and are tacitly approved at all levels. Supervisor - The guy in charge of officials for a league or conference. Dean Blandino is the NFL's supervisor. Steve Shaw is the supervisor for the SEC. Tack-on/Carry-over enforcement - To enforce a foul from the succeeding spot when it is not normally enforced there. For instance, illegal motion is usually enforced at the previous spot, but on a scrimmage kick, if Team B will next snap the ball, they can elect to tack the penalty on, put the ball in play 5 yards further up, and avoid a rekick while ensuring that Team A is still punished for loving up. Carry-over enforcement refers to personal and unsportsmanlike fouls that occur during scoring plays; if by the non-scoring team, they can often be carried over and enforced on the try down (if there is one), the kickoff, or the first play of the next possession series in extra periods. This means that scoring teams don't have to decline penalties for major fouls in order to keep the score. Technically correct - The best kind of correct, obviously. UIL - The University Interscholastic League, which (despite the name) runs high school sports in Texas (it's a part of UT). Notably, they do not use NFHS rules, they use NCAA rules with a number of exceptions. There is evidence to show that more NCAA rulebooks are sold in Texas than to the rest of the USA combined because of this. SERIOUSLY! READ THIS POST! IT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND WILL HELP YOU PICK UP
Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 12:34
|
|
|
Right, let's get these rule changes sorted. As ever, NCAA goes first. This is in three parts: rule changes, editorial changes, and then something else. We're quite light on honest-to-God rule changes this year, because this is a year when the NCAA rules committee refrains from making any rule changes. Except for the rule changes that they decide to make. Clear as mud? Perfect. Let's get to it. quote:1. Rules 9-1-3 and 9-1-4, Targeting Fouls (FR-87) You've probably heard of this one. The old formulation of the rule was seriously counter-intuitive, and although it was pretty drat successful in getting players to aim lower already, it's not really surprising that they've decided not to give a team a free 15 yards because the calling official done hosed up. quote:2. Rules 9-1-3 and 9-1-4, Targeting Fouls (FR-87) Seems like a reasonable idea. Next! quote:Rule 9-1-9, Roughing the Passer (FR-90) This is an NFL rule that has been in philosophy for about the last ten years to call roughing the passer this way. Now it's in the rulebook. Suits me fine! So now we move to editorial changes. An editorial rule change does not require the approval of the Rules Committee or PROP and is made by the Secretary/Rules Editor on his own authority; in theory, it should be a change that only clarifies or improves the wording of a rule. In practice, it also functions as a way for Rogers Redding to make rule changes that he thinks should be made without needing to involve the Rules Committee; the tradeoff for this is that he is smart enough only to use this process when dealing with minor things or edge cases that nobody cares about except officials (the standard example of this process is what should happen if the offense fumbles the ball forward out of its own end zone and out of bounds; the old Sec/Rules Ed thought it should be their ball at the OOB spot, Redding thinks it should be a safety and the first thing he did when he took over was to make an editorial change to that effect.) quote:1. Numerals not in contrast with the jersey: Clarification of 2013 Interpretation Jerseys with lovely numbers are a pain in the rear end. This is the latest attempt to force schools to stop designing lovely jerseys without actually prescribing a penalty serious enough that it might seriously stop them designing lovely jerseys. If I were in charge, I would also add to the statement of penalty that any coach on that team who in that situation says "What do you mean, you didn't get a number? How can you call a foul on my player if you didn't get his number?" should be ejected. quote:2. Classify receiver of a backward pass as a Defenseless Player See, this isn't a clarification of anything. This is an actual rule change. It's a small rule change, but it's still a rule change. In theory, this should have been done by the Committee. In theory. But then, very few people actually give a gently caress about what the rules are and how officiating is done, as long as it's not their ox getting gored, so there you go. quote:3. More than eleven players on defense—live-ball foul Finally, something that is a clarification, not a change! These days the rule says we should kill a play for 12 men even if we only notice as the snap is going off, but some people then got confused about how to enforce the penalty if we didn't notice until after the play has been going a few seconds and it's too late to kill it. quote:4. Targeting Fouls Last year it said "target and initiate contact". This led to situations where fouls were (correctly) called when minimal, incidental contact was made. There was a widespread perception that this should only be a foul when there was some level of force behind the contact, so now that's been fixed. quote:5. Personal Fouls by Team B on Pass Plays--Clarification of Enforcement This is an interesting little tweak that again should arguably have gone through committee. Previously, if (for example) a Team B player head-slapped an offensive lineman while rushing the passer, that penalty was only enforcable from the previous spot and had to be declined if the result of the play was a gain of more than 15 yards for Team A. Now Redding's taken the provision to stick it on the end of the play that used to apply only to roughing the passer, and expanded it to all personal fouls by Team B during a passing play. I like it. More incentive for Team B not to do naughty things can only be good for the game. quote:6. Allow Intentional Grounding to be reviewable in clearly obvious situations when the penalty results in a safety. Let's just be sure that we understand what this means. If intentional grounding is not called, replay cannot buzz in and call intentional grounding. If intentional grounding is called, replay cannot buzz in and say "actually the passer was outside the tackle box" or "that ball got back to the neutral zone". All it can do is buzz in when the passer may or may not have been in the end zone when releasing the pass and review whether or not the ball was, in fact, in the end zone. It's just reviewing which side of the goal line the spot of the foul should be. It cannot call or wave off intentional grounding. quote:7. Include recovery of a loose ball as a reviewable play Nothing to see here either. A few extra editorial changes then came down the pipe after that document was released. One is vaguely interesting, the rest are not. We'll start there. quote:4. Clarification of Inbounds and Out-of-Bounds Player This is something that Redding's had a stick up his rear end about for a few years. The college rule for many years was that "you are where you are". If you're standing inbounds, you're inbounds. If you're standing out of bounds, you're out of bounds. If you're in mid-air, you're neither, until you return to the ground somewhere. He didn't like that. A few years ago, he inexplicably made an editorial change to an AR, to make it a free kick out of bounds if a Team B player jumped from OOB and touched the football, which was in direct conflict with the "you are where you are" rule. He's been stewing about that ever since, so apparently now he's going to change the entire rule to make it conform. Now, what matters is where you last touched the ground; so a pass reciever who is forced out of bounds (and doesn't lose his eligibility) cannot jump forward from OOB, control the ball while airborne, and return to the ground inbounds to complete the catch. This year, he's come from OOB and must touch the ground inbounds before he stops being considered OOB. I have no idea why this needed to change, but now at least we have a consistent rule again. quote:2. Clarification of an airborne player Sigh. quote:8. Include Backward Pass Out of Bounds as a Reviewable Play Bold is the addition. There's another change that's been made this year. This is something that some people love with a passion, others hate with a vengeance, and most just plain don't give a gently caress. I'm talking of course about the totally vital not-a-rule-change that was supposed to make the chain crew swap sides of the field at half-time, like they do in the NFL. Why they do that I've never understood, but they do, and now this is coming to NCAA. Trouble is, because a few people hate the idea with a vengeance, they couldn't pass it as a rule change (they tried last year and it died in committee), and there'd have been an outcry to do it as an editorial. Solution? End run right round the whole process. They've left the chain where it is, and instead the officials on the sideline will swap sides, so the Head Linesman and Line Judge each will spend a half with the chain. This is an officiating mechanics change that goes through CFO and bypasses the rule change process entirely. All that's made my brain hurt. I'll get on to NFL changes later. Right now I need a nice lie down, and possibly a hot drink.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Jerseys with lovely numbers are a pain in the rear end. This is the latest attempt to force schools to stop designing lovely jerseys without actually prescribing a penalty serious enough that it might seriously stop them designing lovely jerseys. If I were in charge, I would also add to the statement of penalty that any coach on that team who in that situation says "What do you mean, you didn't get a number? How can you call a foul on my player if you didn't get his number?" should be ejected. Can you give examples of some lovely jerseys?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 01:22
|
|
|
Can I! I was worried there for a moment that you might ask me to show you some jerseys that aren't awful  So this collection isn't particularly scientific, or even necessarily recent; just a few minutes with Google and "ncaa football new jerseys". They can be divided into three groups. First is the people who tried to get cutesy and have numbers just by drawing a pair of contrasting outlines on the shirt.    gently caress you! OK, so here's how it is. I'm running backwards as fast as I can go, on a night game under floodlights, here comes the ball towards a defender and a receiver, they're both sprinting on a deep corner route. Someone's going to commit pass interference. Here's what I need to do in order to not gently caress up. See all the body of both players, including their heads so I know if they're playing the ball or not See the act that constitutes pass interference and be sure that it's one of the nine flavours Wait for the ball to arrive to be sure that the pass was catchable Continue officiating through the rest of the action, to make sure I don't get so excited about calling DPI over there that I miss someone else getting punched in the head right in front of me Quickly review the play in my head to be sure I've got what I think I've got and give myself a chance to pull up from calling a marginal PI or one that just plain isn't there Take it out of my pants and throw to the CORRECT spot, which is non-negotiable because the spot of the foul here is important If I'm lucky, I'll get about four seconds to do all this in. You'll notice that none of these things are "look for the player's number". There is no good time to specifically look for a number. There is always something more important to do. The player could be 20 yards away by the time the ball becomes dead. The number is one part of a player that, like the football, will never commit a foul. It needs to be clear enough on the player that "this is number 21 green and number 7 white" is just part of the information I absorb subconsciously as they're running together. These lovely outline numbers are not clear. You need a solid block of contrasting colour, or the numbers are simply not visible enough from any kind of distance or at any kind of speed. And the hell of it is that you're only going to disadvantage yourself with these lovely numbers, because what's going to happen is your coach isn't going to get a number when we call things, so he can't do anything about players who are giving up penalty yards. Why they allow their marketing departments to pull this kind of poo poo I don't know, considering how completely anal most coaches are about maximising any kind of advantage possible. Speaking of "contrasting colour!" Right is the worst offender of the first three, but the one on the left is still pretty poo poo.    What the gently caress is wrong with them? The whole point of grey is, it doesn't contrast with things! Jesus. There was a sound reason the NCAA used to ban grey jerseys entirely and mandate that gloves had to be grey (it was to ensure that you couldn't wear gloves the same colour as your opponent's jersey and make it less obvious when you were holding it). The middle jersey doesn't look like too bad an offender by comparison, but really that's a dull red against black and it's basically an extremely marginal improvement on just straight-up outline numbers. Ain't too much contrast there, especially not at 9:30pm. Last category, only one example because it's relatively rare, this being "stupid jersey poo poo that interferes with the number".  All I'm liable to see here at high speed is "Dude with pretty blue hoops". Bottom line, the rules about visibility of numbers (and I'm not touching the Great Vanderbilt Email Printout Affair with a bargepole, incidentally, that's a situation that's stupid and asinine from every single angle) are there for a very good reason, and it only benefits your team to make them as obvious as possible. There is literally no reason to try to get cutesy with them and if the marketroids want to do that they should gently caress off to another sport where numbers aren't as important. (There are of course other crimes against numbers but life's too short; my actual favourite is the ones that use a stupid stylised font where the 7 has a tiny little top-bar and about half a degree of angle on the downstroke, and you spend the entire game calling 87 when you mean 81, and vice versa.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 11:53
|
|
|
Do you ever hear about college refs not able to review a play because the offense got the next one off too quickly? We see it not work all the time, but it's impossible to see it work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 14:45
|
|
|
In terms of gameplay, does it matter if you call the wrong number? If you called pass interference on 21 and it was actually 27 that fouled, would it have any bearing if the play was challenged?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 13:44
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:In terms of gameplay, does it matter if you call the wrong number? If you called pass interference on 21 and it was actually 27 that fouled, would it have any bearing if the play was challenged? There are a few times when it actually matters. For instance, that team with the stupid stylised numbers? Working umpire, I move up on a pass play, it's quite slow developing, the QB scrambles, and number 12 heads back past me the other way. My thought process goes something like this. "Man, that's a bit late to be running a delay route, 12." The pass sails merrily off into the distance. "Wait a minute, I've not seen number 12 on the field before." About six people fall over each other, and the offense catch it for a healthy gain. I start moving to catch up. Defenders are shouting and pointing at number 12 about something, but he was loafing around nowhere near the ball, so I ignore them. "Wait a minute, I'm sure the tight end lined up the other side." I put the ball down and check for my five 50-79 numbers "Wasn't he a bit fat to be playing tight end? Where did he go? I'm pretty sure he didn't sub out. Hang on a minute... Of course that was 72, not 12. For some reason it's quite hard to sell ineligibles downfield to the offensive coach when the flag comes out after you've set up for the next play. For most things, getting a number doesn't necessarily matter, but it's a credibility issue. Coaches expect to have numbers for a very good reason; their job is to move the ball forwards, and if someone is moving it backwards then it helps everyone if the coach knows whose fault it was so he can do something about it. And if you give him the wrong number, then they immediately turn into counsel for the defence. "How can you see a hold by number 61 when we don't have one?" "If you thought it was 21 when it was 27, how can you be sure you weren't mistaken about what he did?" Coco13 posted:Do you ever hear about college refs not able to review a play because the offense got the next one off too quickly? We see it not work all the time, but it's impossible to see it work. It happens once in a blue moon, because what happens when a hurry-up team benefits from a tight call is that the covering official says "this one's hot", and then by a mysterious coincidence the ball relay in to the succeeding spot takes 5-10 seconds longer than usual and the replay official gets enough time to decide if he wants to buzz or not. Also, most of them are savvy enough to realise that if someone who's just hauled in a tough catch gets up screaming COME ON LET'S SNAP IT QUICKLY, that's probably a good reason to stop the game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Jerseys with lovely numbers are a pain in the rear end. This is the latest attempt to force schools to stop designing lovely jerseys without actually prescribing a penalty serious enough that it might seriously stop them designing lovely jerseys. I was told by an NCAA ref that I asked about this rule that his boss said something to the effect of "penalize a team with this and you'll be back to high school reffing next week."
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
Dude just threw his flag instead of his beanbag on an interception in GB-SEA. Is that a downgrade, or just a mild embarrassment?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
Jethro posted:Dude just threw his flag instead of his beanbag on an interception in GB-SEA. Is that a downgrade, or just a mild embarrassment? In NFL land? Probably a downgrade although not as bad as outright missing a call. Everywhere else it's just embarrassing as hell. I've done it!
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:31
|
|
|
Did they make the spot of the enforcement relevant in Fed recently? For NCAA rules we don't bag interceptions (unless they're near the goal line and we might have a momentum play) because they'll never be a spot that we need to know, and I always thought it was the same way for you guys. So I was seeing if anyone could give me a simple explanation of why the NFL bean bags interceptions, and I discovered that they've done something very nice via their NFL Officiating program; there's an old-but-useful copy of Ed Hochuli's hopper book in PDF format. (Someone else later stole the idea for NCAA rules and called it the bin book.) Hopefully it'll help some people understand more about how penalty enforcement works in the NFL; which a subject I don't really want to get too much into, because I have a hard enough time keeping NCAA enforcement square in my head without introducing more confusing crap into it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 12:07
|
|
|
^^^ Just saw the hopper link. Holy crap, that thing is a beast. Going down the hypothetical road here in reference to Earl Thomas's muffed punt last night. If you didn't see it, a Green Bay player was blocked into Earl Thomas the very instant that he touched the punt (no fair catch), he muffed it, recovered by Green Bay. Presuming the Green Bay player was not at all blocked into Thomas, could you have an argument for kick catch interference here? The Green Bay player made contact after Thomas touched the ball but before he caught it, if that makes sense. Am I being too semantic here? Wondering for Fed rules. If Thomas makes a fair catch signal, does that make a difference? I believe in Fed the fair catch signal does not have the same protection of being protected from contact until the ball hits the ground. Buckhead fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
From this discussion I just realized the reason they actually throw the blue beanbags and yellow flags is to mark where the foul happened  Years later and I'm still picking up stuff from this thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
Buckhead posted:Going down the hypothetical road here in reference to Earl Thomas's muffed punt last night. If you didn't see it, a Green Bay player was blocked into Earl Thomas the very instant that he touched the punt (no fair catch), he muffed it, recovered by Green Bay. OK, let's deal with the hypothetical first. For NCAA this is KCI via two routes. The first is that the Team A player has almost certainly violated the not-a-halo rule on his way in; if you move into a zone between the returner's shoulders and one yard in front of him, you commit KCI regardless of any contact made. The second is that even if he does come from the side, we have to remember that the full name of the foul is interference with the opportunity to catch the ball, not the opportunity to touch the ball, and that catching the ball is a process that goes beyond just gaining control of it: these two plays from a few years ago (before the not-a-halo rule was brought in, and it was brought in to make plays like number 1 easier to call) demonstrate this nicely: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfQ7bl2nvP8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDDeDWSJbiU No poo poo, you don't understand the rule completely. Both players have interfered with the returner's opportunity to complete the catch; this is not pass interference, where the rule goes away as soon as the ball is touched. Something I was taught to help with plays like these is, what would you rule if the returner drops the ball on contact? If you've got a bang-bang muff, you've got KCI. If you've got a catch and fumble, you don't. So now I've found a little cliplet of the play in question, and this is a pig of a play to try to rule on at game speed. NFL rules agree with NCAA that a Team A player who is blocked in does not commit KCI. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24694921/seahawks-safety-earl-thomas-muffs-second-punt-return-of-career At first look, it seemed to me that although A31 (I think that's his number) was moving backwards when he contacted the returner, he was participating equally in a dance with B25 and the only reason he was moving backwards was because of his retained momentum from blocking B25 in the side and then coming round the front of him to continue the block. And then after a few more runthroughs a penny dropped and I went "wait a minute, why would A31 want to do that? Surely he wants to shed B25 and get at the returner? What benefit does he gain from staying in contact? It's the sort of thing that should be happening the other way round, if the positions were reversed..." And that (also influenced by how the B and the deep wing are both right there and they don't call poo poo) then leads me to wonder what's going on with B25's hands that we can't see, to keep A31 close to him and not able to get away and face up to the returner. I'd love to see a few alternate angles on that, but it's the only reasonable explanation for A31 facing the wrong way to how he wants to be. It's a great example of the need to complement rules knowledge with football sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
That's what I thought given my understanding of the rules, and it is good to see that is indeed the case in NCAA/NFL. However, for my purposes, I just took a look at the exact wording in NFHS and it says KCI applies only when the kick is in flight and before it has been touched by R! By the book, I think this would mean that the contact between K and R would need to be truly simultaneous, and not bang-bang, to be KCI. Of course, that is by the book, and I think I would give some leeway on the simultaneous if R does not hold on to the ball. First game of the season tomorrow. Have my first Friday night lights coming up in two weeks! I'm pumped.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
Have you got someone in your association that you can go to for rules and philosophy questions? I don't know the exact wording of the Fed rule, but it may be that they'd interpret at least one of the two plays I posted as KCI by being too close to the B/R player (with or without contact) before he touched the ball, as in that first clip from the Auburn game; they're not touching him, but they are right up in his grill ready to hit as soon as the ball arrives, and that's KCI right there without needing to worry about whether they allow him to complete the catch before making contact. PS: Gratz, what position are you working?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Hi, guys! Remember they took the auto first off DPI, yeah?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2014 15:40
|
|
|
Hey Trin Good to see this thread back. Could you put together something on the "process of the catch" rule? Nearly every GDT erupts in an argument over somebody having caught the ball while falling, then losing it on contact with the ground or something. A lot of people think two feet down inbounds plus possession is all that matters. For example, there was a play yesterday in the KSU/ISU game that was ruled an interception even though the receiver had possession and a knee down - because he caught the ball while falling. A KSU defender got an arm underneath him, stripped the ball and took it away. Because the process of the catch had not been completed and the receiver had therefore not yet established possession despite his knee being down, it was ruled a live ball and valid interception. ISU fans were screaming they'd been robbed by the refs.   I don't know if they're still screaming about it, but it's a good example on which to base a discussion of the rule, anyway. Then we can point people to your explanation rather than arguing about it in the thread. Deteriorata fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Sep 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
Semprini posted:Cashing in my 'there is no stupid question' card right off the bat. When did this happen? And what's the new rule? For Fed (NFHS) that happened beginning this season. The other part of this rule was taking away the loss-of-down penalty for OPI.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
Here we go, now revised and expanded. Remember that this was written in response to someone asking why it's a first down when you catch the ball in midair past the line to gain, then get hit and driven back past it the other way, and fall over. Void where prohibited. It's very long. Unfortunately, there's no way to talk about this poo poo properly without being slightly long-winded; the rules themselves are long-winded to start with, so therefore they require long-winded explanation. And! Part 1: Control & Retrospective Possession There are three phases to completing a catch. Two of them are defined by the rulebook; one is not. The first is touching, and the third is possession. The second I am going to call "control", for want of a better word, despite the rulebook referring (rather annoyingly) to "possession and control". Hell with it. Touching occurs (somewhat obviously) when a player touches the ball. By rule, a player has always touched the ball before he has gained possession and control. Possession occurs when a player has the ball in his firm grasp and has fulfilled all the requirements for completing the catch (see part 2). However, it is possible for a player to have the ball in his firm grasp, but subsequently not to be awarded possession because has not yet fulfilled all the requirements for doing so. This leaves a hole for our intermediate stage, which I am calling "control", and I am defining it as "the time during which a player has a firm grasp of the ball, but has not gained possession of it by rule". Should the player lose his firm grasp during the control stage, it is a muff (tee hee hee) and he has never gained possession, even though he briefly had control. As long as the player remains inbounds, he can make more than one attempt to gain control. Right, so how do we relate this to the situation at hand? Well, we've got an airborne pass reciever. He jumps, touches the ball, and gains control. Should he subsequently gain possession, he is retrospectively granted possession from the moment when he gained control. (If the concept of retrospectively changing the definition of something because something else happened afterwards strikes you as odd, then please return to the definitions, the section about play classifications, and have a look at what happens when someone throws a forward pass.) The reason we have to grant him retrospective possession is so that we don't screw a reciever who gains control inbounds, puts two feet down inbounds, goes to ground, lands with his body out of bounds, but maintains his control all the way through going to ground. If he doesn't get retroactive possession for putting two feet inbounds, he's stuffed because the ball was still in the control stage when he touched out of bounds. The ball was not yet in player possession and touching something that was out of bounds, so if we don't give him retroactive possession the ball was out of bounds and it's an incomplete pass. This also means that a receiver who dives in the field of play, gains control of the ball at B's 3, his knee hits the ground at B's 1, and then lands in the end zone, is given a catch at B's 1; in this instance, retrospective possession works against him. If he were to lose control of the ball shortly after landing at B's 1, and then re-establish control while lying in the end zone, it's a touchdown; we don't rewind all the way back to B's 1 because the first control phase, the one with the knee down, ended when he muffed the ball. And it's this granting of retroactive possession from the moment at which the reciever gains control is why there's a difference between a receiver catching the ball past the line to gain and being forced back by an opponent, and a receiver catching the ball past the line to gain and then going back entirely because of his own momentum. See, the ball is dead when the receiver is "so held or otherwise restrained that his forward progress ends". The receiver who is forced back (but subsequently completes the catch) gets retroactive possession from the moment he touched the ball. Therefore, he was in possession across the line to gain, where his forward progress was ended, and the ball is dead at that spot. The receiver who goes back under his own power still gets retroactive possession, but he doesn't get the ball past the first down line because it's still live, he's completed the catch, and the down continues. Part 2: Completing the Process of a Catch So, you're in mid-air and you've gained control of the ball. Assuming that you keep control of it throughout whatever might happen next, what else do you need to do before we give you a catch? The first thing to do is to return to the ground inbounds. If you're in the NFL and you use your feet to do this, you must get both feet down; in NCAA, you only require one. There's also a nearly-a-rule interpretation; if you drag your toes and they're the only part of your foot to hit the ground inbounds, that counts for the whole foot; but if your toe comes down and then your heel hits right after because you're coming down flat-footed, you must get the whole of your foot inbounds. What happens next depends on what happens immediately after you return to the ground inbounds. If you start to fall over, or are falling, you are now going to ground; skip the next paragraph. If you return upright and do not fall, you must now have an opportunity to perform So now we have a player in control of the football who is going to ground. In order to complete the process, you must maintain your control all the way through the process of falling over, getting hit, having your head sat on, etc. If you maintain control, the football itself may touch the ground so long as you don't lose control of it, and by rule "control" does not mean that the ball must remain absolutely stationary in your hands. Meet these requirements, and you have completed the process. If you lose control inbounds, the ball is live until it touches the ground, and you can try to catch it again. If you lose control out of bounds, then you're not eligible for retrospective possession, and the pass is incomplete because the football either just was, is now, or soon will be touching something that is out of bounds. And finally, there are two when-in-question principles to understand. Anything that looks even remotely like a bang-bang play (see the definitions already) is to be called incomplete. However, in a situation where (for instance) an official sees a receiver dive to catch a low pass, is unsighted on whether the ball touches the ground before being controlled, and then sees the receiver roll over with apparent possession of it, you must give him the catch unless somebody knows it hit the ground (or the foot came down inbounds rather than out). Hopefully this will be good for stopping at least a few ridiculous shitfits in their tracks! I'd just like to finish by nothing that these are not just rules that apply to catching a forward pass; this is what any player must do in order to gain possession of any loose ball, whether that be intercepting a pass, catching a kick, or recovering a fumble. SO: In the play above, the Team A player's momentum from going to ground has not finished, therefore he is still in the control phase; the Team B player takes the ball away and controls it until after his momentum has stopped; the Team A player has muffed the ball and the Team B player has caught it. Semprini posted:Cashing in my 'there is no stupid question' card right off the bat. When did this happen? And what's the new rule? Just to expand on the above: this is a joke only relevant to people who are calling high school games to NFHS rules. For many years they had this strange little rule where OPI had a loss of down on it as well as 15 yards, which neither of the other rulebooks do (AFAIK this is something the Fed came up with for themselves in like the 60s, although I'll go check Anatomy to be sure it isn't a case of the NFL and NCAA moving away from them, and they'd kept the original rule). DPI wasn't a spot foul for them, and was always 15 yards, previous spot, auto first. Now, a perennial rule change suggestion for the Fed going back donkey's years was always "take the drat loss of down off OPI already, it's stupid", and it always failed because nobody cared enough and defensive coaches kinda liked the idea anyway. Last time round, some mischievous sod then suggested "OK, I'll back that if we also take the auto first off DPI, to even it out for the defenses", and everyone else in the room then agreed to it, presumably so they could troll every high school coach in 48 states. Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Sep 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
So here's an example of a hot play (that should have been reviewed and overturned, but I guess the replay official was getting another soda or something), like someone was asking about a while back. https://vimeo.com/106345870 Watch what the white hat is doing as TV comes back from the replay of the quote catch unquote. This is actually a great example of starting to go to ground before having the chance to do a football move so needing to hold on the whole way down...
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 12:50
|
|
|
OK, Trin we've got a "process of the catch" controversy for you: http://btn.com/2014/10/04/video-michigan-wr-amara-darbohs-late-third-down-catch-ruled-incomplete/ (Sorry, separate video not yet available to embed) On the one hand, it can be argued that he had the ball and took two steps, then made an "athletic move" in stretching for the first down. The ball was jarred loose out of bounds due to it hitting the ground first on the dive after possession was established. Thus it would be a completion and a first down. On the other hand, he catches the ball stretched out and off balance, never regains his balance and loses the ball on contact with the ground, making it an incomplete pass. This was called incomplete live, then reviewed and upheld. Good call or not?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
Hello Trin and others with rules understanding. Please tell me I am right and various announcers are wrong about this. I'm just thinking about NFL rules, although I also assume NCAA is about the same. PASS DEFENSE WITHIN 5 YARDS - Contact with receivers OK - Holding receivers not OK, 5-yard penalty - Ball in the air? Defenders have a right to it, but most contact is a spot foul and first down. My main irritation is that I hear announcers say "well that contact happened within 5 yards," trying to excuse defenders making contact while the ball was in the air. PASS OFFENSE ON SCREENS - Blocking on the outside is OK even when the ball is in the air, provided the blocking happens within __ yards of the LOS. I think it's 1 yard, could be 3 I guess. If it's outside that zone it should be OPI. I ask this because I see receivers on quick WR screens making blocks that I have always thought were illegal, but they don't get flagged. So I must be wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
During last night's Giants-Eagles game, the following happened: Team A punted. The punt was muffed by Team B in the field of play. While in the air, the ball was contacted by Team A in a way that caused it to go out of the back of the end zone. The play was ruled a touch back and Team B was given the ball at their 20. I have no idea why.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
A couple weeks ago against Pittsburgh the Ravens offense was driving late in the game and false started, but the clock kept running. Why did this happen? It seems like something that could easily be abused.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Disclaimer: I work NFHS, so these might not be entirely applicable to the higher levels.Badfinger posted:During last night's Giants-Eagles game, the following happened: Without seeing the play, consider that a kick is still a kick until it is possessed by a player. Muffing a ball does not end the kick. Once the kick touched the ground in the end zone (or went out of bounds in the end zone), it is a touch back for B (in NFHS, this would have been a touchback the instant the ball broke the plane of the goal - this is a common "gotcha" question on tests). Kawalimus posted:A couple weeks ago against Pittsburgh the Ravens offense was driving late in the game and false started, but the clock kept running. Why did this happen? It seems like something that could easily be abused. There is nothing that would cause a "major clock stopper" here that would require the clock to start on the snap, as opposed to the ready for play. That said, the referee has wide latitude to start or stop the clock in instances where he think it could be abused. You might have seen the SEC acknowledging that the referee should have done that in Ala-Ark: http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11694663/southeastern-conference-says-referee-alabama-arkansas-game-mistakenly-ran-clock Trin Tragula posted:PS: Gratz, what position are you working? Missed this from way earlier, but I do HL/LJ/BJ. Been a fun season so far. How is the year going? Buckhead fucked around with this message at 22:07 on Oct 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
^^^ We're in a break at the moment between our two full seasons a year. It's not been bad but it's not been great, but OTOH I know why it's not been great and I've got a huge incentive to sort that out for next year. ^^^football fuckerman posted:Hello Trin and others with rules understanding. Please tell me I am right and various announcers are wrong about this. I'm just thinking about NFL rules, although I also assume NCAA is about the same. This is completely different depending on what level it is. Prior to the pass, the NFL allows defenders one block that must be within 5 yards of the neutral zone unless the passer leaves the pocket, in which case you can block until the pass is in the air. In NCAA you are allowed as many blocks as you like from the snap, provided that they are individual blocks not continuous contact, and that you lay off if the receiver gets to the same yard line as you. This is probably the NFL rule I hear most often quoted at me. NFL says 5 yards auto first, NCAA says 10 yards auto first if there was a pass and if it crossed the neutral zone. Hold a receiver good enough that the QB eats a sack on 3rd and 15? Next down is 3rd and 5. If both players are playing the ball, they have equal rights to it. I cannot stress this enough. If a defender is playing the ball, he is entitled to be somewhere that gets in the receiver's way. To have him for DPI, he must make some additional action that plays the receiver; driving through him to get at the ball, grabbing the receiver's arm, throwing out an arm bar, etc. The vast majority of DPI calls these days come when the defender is not playing the ball. That completely flips the equation; any contact he makes with a receiver, while not playing the ball, that stops the receiver getting to the ball, is pass interference. quote:PASS OFFENSE ON SCREENS Here we have different rules that in the context of a bubble screen come to the same thing. NFL: contact must be one yard or more beyond the neutral zone to be PI, but the pass itself does not need to cross the neutral zone. NCAA: the pass must cross the neutral zone to have PI; the contact must be "beyond the neutral zone", in practice you give either the receiver or the pass the benefit of the doubt that it did not cross the neutral zone, unless it's blindingly obvious. quote:During last night's Giants-Eagles game, the following happened: Ah, our old friend responsibility and impetus! Muffing the ball does not change its original impetus as long as the ball has not come to rest. Only batting or kicking can change the impetus of a loose ball. All you have here is a kick dead in Team B's end zone and Team A is still responsible for putting it there. Also, because Team B touched the ball, it is not dead when it hits the ground in the end zone; it has to leave the field of play or come to rest to become dead. (In case anyone's thinking "well, why not just intentionally muff everything through the back of the end zone?", two things. One, do it often enough and officials will catch on and start calling it a bat. Two, if Team A can run down and recover the ball in the end zone, congratulations, you just made them eligible to do that and now they have a touchdown.) quote:A couple weeks ago against Pittsburgh the Ravens offense was driving late in the game and false started, but the clock kept running. Why did this happen? It seems like something that could easily be abused. Don't trust the TV clock! It's operated by a guy in the truck; it's not connected to the game clock in any way, shape or form. Sometimes they do sneaky things like this to catch back up to the game clock without resetting the DOG and giving away to everyone that they got out of sync. (I assume you mean it ran through the penalty enforcement, not that it restarted after the penalty was enforced but before the next snap, which is just the usual rule.) Deteriorata posted:OK, Trin we've got a "process of the catch" controversy for you: Pig of a play to rule on. I think the wing should have backed himself, but he's got that body language as he steps up that screams "wait a minute, did I just gently caress that up?" and then his mate comes in to bail him out. I do think this is a catch and run out of bounds, and I think it's clear enough to overturn; although I can see why the deep wing had it incomplete and I can see why the replay official didn't want to overturn it. Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Oct 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
I'm glad I clicked this thread because I've watched plenty of high school football up here in MA and never knew that the MIAA abides by (mostly) NCAA rules rather than the national rules.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
Buckhead posted:Without seeing the play, consider that a kick is still a kick until it is possessed by a player. Muffing a ball does not end the kick. Once the kick touched the ground in the end zone (or went out of bounds in the end zone), it is a touch back for B (in NFHS, this would have been a touchback the instant the ball broke the plane of the goal - this is a common "gotcha" question on tests). Ah. I knew that muffed punt vs fumble was relevant, but if they said why during the game I missed it. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
Badfinger posted:Ah. I knew that muffed punt vs fumble was relevant, but if they said why during the game I missed it. Thanks. Well, I would listen to Trin over me. Sounds like the NFL might handle this significantly different than NFHS. These are the more obscure edge cases that define the significant differences between NFHS/NCAA/NFL.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Something I was curious about: So I was rewatching last week's Baylor/TCU game, and near the end of the game Baylor gets called for a substitution infraction for having 12 players on the field when TCU's getting ready to punt. Then I saw the replay and the player who wasn't supposed to be on the field trying to sprint from his spot near the visitor's sideline all the way back to his own and I got curious - would it have been legal for him to just go onto TCU's sideline for a play instead, or was having to run the width of the field his only choice there?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 04:15
|
|
|
Spiritus Nox posted:Something I was curious about : So I was rewatching last week's Baylor/TCU game, and near the end of the game Baylor gets called for a substitution infraction for having 12 players on the field when TCU's getting ready to punt. Then I saw the replay and the player who wasn't supposed to be on the field trying to sprint from his spot near the visitor's sideline all the way back to his own and I got curious - would it have been legal for him to just go onto TCU's sideline for a play instead, or was having to run the width of the field his only choice there? You're only allowed to substitute over your own sideline, and it must be in the field of play, not in the end zone. It doesn't have to be directly into the team area, as long as you go straight there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 09:44
|
|
|
In the UCLA vs. Cal game, at the end of the first quarter, Cal's QB made an empty-hand passing motion that was ruled a fumble. Cal recovered, but the coaches complained that it should have been ruled an incomplete pass. The head referee checked with another official, then made an announcement on the mic that the play was ruled a fumble. The game clock stayed running the whole time and ultimately expired before Cal could run another play. Shouldn't the ref have stopped the clock to make that announcement? Or, since it was only the end of the quarter, who cares?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
Probably, but if Team A aren't interested in snapping the ball and it wouldn't be a significant advantage for anyone to change ends, then change ends already.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
I'm a HS Varsity Back Judge on a 5-man crew and I had this situation in my game last Friday night...code:Answer: Touchback the instant the ball crosses the goal line. No complete possession by the fielding R player
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Question about this play from the Arkansas State v Louisiana Lafayette game from last night. While it was clear that the running back never hit the ground, how come he isn't called down for having his forward progress stopped? Separate question, I would think that if someone had slammed in to him while he was laying there they would have been called for a late hit, so the defenders were put in a lose-lose situation. Is that correct?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
Thoguh posted:While it was clear that the running back never hit the ground, how come he isn't called down for having his forward progress stopped? The only official that would blow their whistle at all is the LoS guy on that side of the field. More than likely that official will have a slow whistle or no whistle at all on that play, especially if they see that the runner is on top of another player and not down. Also Forward Progress only applies when the runner is trying to push forward, and is being pushed backwards by the defense. As far as a defender slamming into him, if there's no whistle and not targeting the head, I wouldn't throw a 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
Yep. The official was probably waiting to see a knee or elbow hit the ground, and when Gordon popped back up before either of those happened the ref obviously didn't bother. That play was a textbook example of why you play until you hear the whistle. ULL's defense just stopped because they assumed he was down. They wouldn't even have needed to really hit Gordon, just push him down off the pile, and he would have been down by contact. You can't have a "late hit" on a ball carrier if he's in the field of play and the whistle isn't blown. A personal foul would likely be called if they put a dirty hit on him (spearing, cheap shot to the head, etc), of course. e: How did I not notice this: You can even see one official run up toward the pile when Gordon's being brought down - he's definitely got the best view of the play but he doesn't whistle it dead. I think he even put the whistle in his mouth but stopped short when he realized Gordon hadn't hit the ground. Fenrir fucked around with this message at 15:53 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 09:48 |
|
|
The ball is dead when the ballcarrier is held so that his forward progress has stopped. Imagine these players were upright and the defenders held him in that manner. Would you expect a forward progress call? Of course not. Finish your tackle off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 20:45
|
|