|
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
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 10:39 |
|
|
 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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
^^^ 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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
I'd also like to drop this in here; Rogers Redding says "gently caress Notre Dame". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tYn7Yv6EYo (Not in as many words, but still.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
Sure. This is a case where penalty enforcement is actually simpler than people think. The rulebook doesn't care that you just had a weird as gently caress interception where the ball was tipped three times and dropped twice and then bounced off someone's arse instead of the ground. All it cares about is that there was a foul by the team in possession during what the rulebook calls a running play, and you use the same principle as for any other offensive team foul (in Rulebookese the offense is the team in possession at any given moment, not the team who put the ball in play) during any other running play. Either the foul occurs ahead of the end of the run (and the enforcement spot is the end of the run) or behind it (and it's the spot of the foul); both of those spots are in the end zone, there's nowhere to enforce the penalty to, safety. That said, if the ballcarrrier doesn't get out of the end zone, we're going to avoid turning a touchback into a cheap safety if at all possible. Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 09:48 on Oct 24, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2014 09:42
|
|
|
I think this is something where the answer to the hypothetical is an annoying "maybe, it depends exactly what happened and in what order". However, if your ruling is that the player did not maintain control through going to ground, then got to his feet and did then successfully gain possession, the ball is still live because it was never possessed until the player regained his feet; just the same as it would still be live if a team-mate or opponent had then possessed it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2014 12:42
|
|
|
If the ball comes to rest and nobody is attempting to recover it (this is a judgement call) it's dead, and it belongs to the team who "should" have possession; the team last in possession after a fumble or backward pass, or the receiving team on a kick. We all know what to do in this exact situation because it's happened at least half a dozen times on TV in either Div I-A or the NFL in the last couple of years - this is the first time I've seen where the covering officials didn't kill it with an inadvertent whistle because they assumed the runner was about to score. This means I can also tell you off the top of my head that if the ball had come to rest in Oregon's end zone without an attempt to recover it, it would have been declared dead, belonged to Utah, and the only thing it could have been is a touchdown for Utah. (Also that, on fourth down, it wouldn't trigger the fourth down fumble rule because the ball must be recovered before that can happen.) Gerty posted:So you know how when people are diving for a TD they can jump out of bounds and cross the hypothetical world-circumferencing goal line for a TD as long as they're not down/touch the ground out of bounds before they cross and it's a TD? Does that not apply for spotting the ball on the rest of the field? Like, it seems like if people dive/jump out of bounds the ball is placed where they crossed the sideline, not where the ball was when they actually touch the ground. I believe that NCAA and the NFL both have shitcanned "Goal line extends round the world" (because it was a really stupid idea) - did you see it happen somewhere recently? On most plays the ball is spotted where it crosses the sideline prior to the player going out of bounds, and this now applies when you're approaching the end zone also. "Crosses" implies "completely crosses", which is why you can still dive and put the ball over the pylon for a touchdown (Also it looks cool, and things that look cool should be encouraged)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 10:40
|
|
|
Fenrir posted:Well, and the pylon actually sits in-bounds This is an interesting* point. A while back somewhere I posted a little diagram of the pylon and the sideline, which of course I can't find again. This'll do just as well. *For a given value of "interesting".  The camera is out of bounds, the end zone is to the left. By rule, the goal line extends to the outer edge of the sideline (it doesn't go all the way to the edge of the thick white belt you'll see on many fields, just to the edge of the standard line width). A properly-positioned pylon is therefore both on the goal line and out of bounds, because it's on the sideline as well as the goal line. (The NFL has an exception to say that something that touches the pylon is not out of bounds; NCAA does not.) wa27 posted:Also in reference to this video (skip to around 3:10). Does it not matter that the Oregon player ran out of bounds and then touched the ball? Or did the ref just not notice? No. Restrictions about going out of bounds only apply to Team A players on a passing play (you lose your eligibility to touch the pass) and on a kicking play (once you go out of bounds voluntarily, you cannot come back in for the rest of the down), to stop them running loops round the back of the coaches' box to avoid defenders. SkunkDuster posted:What if a the possession of the ball is established (in a reception) while the ball is not in the end zone but the receiver's feet are? Like if the receiver is standing inside the goal line, but leaning forward (away from the post) and makes a catch where the ball never crosses the goal line, or where a receiver catches one out of the side of the end zone but drags his toes inbounds before going down? If the relevant line is the goal line, the pass is complete in the field of play; the ball remains live until something else happens, and must be advanced into the end zone to score. However, if the relevant line is the sideline or the end line in the end zone, the pass is considered complete in the end zone.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:Does it get under your skin when the crowd bitches about your calls like in the third link? I don't hear crowds. From the centre of the field you can barely hear the coaches, even on the occasions when I've been out in front of a thousand or two. Perception's a seriously weird thing when you're concentrating on something. And I firmly believe that everyone has a right to be as ridiculously one-eyed as they want while the game's on; the ones that annoy me are the ones who still insist that black is white three days later after they've seen it a million times, from five different angles, in beautiful slow motion. KingShibby posted:So a little while back in this thread I posted my story as a High School Back Judge on a punting situation where I made the right call. Well thanks to the magic of Hudl, I now have video of the play! Hopefully you don't mind a spot of well-intentioned feedback: this is a nice example of why it's always good when working deep to be very conservative about moving forward to meet a bouncing ball. It seems like you get back and find the goal line well enough, but you'd have been able to do it far more comfortably if you hadn't been hustling forward so hard before the ball landed. (Also, you really need to find out who's stolen the horse that the R was riding.)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
If the ball isn't at the inbounds spot by the time the play clock hits 20, pump it up. NCAA 3-2-4-b-3. There's a philosophy to say "don't fly-speck it".
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
The principle is that only a foul that immediately causes the clock to stop carries a runoff. Holding and other live-ball fouls only cause it to stop at the end of the down. False starts and similar dead-ball fouls that prevent the snap cause it to stop immediately, so do qualify; and incomplete illegal forward passes are in there as well by extension, because a forward pass thrown incomplete to stop the clock has been illegal for a long time. (There's an exception to allow teams to spike the ball.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 12:23
|
|
|
Let's begin at the beginning. Yes, the NCAA rule is that after the clock has been stopped only to enforce a penalty, it restarts on the ready-for-play signal. (The NFL adds an exception for the end of a half, to always start the clock on the snap. That of course makes it possible for a team behind in the score to save time by committing a foul. Swings and roundabouts.) The cynic's answer is "Don't let them make a first down if you want the ball back". Which is not entirely unjustified. How many plays are there in which their success or failure rests entirely and totally on one block? Very few. Even if the hold is out in the open field and directly makes the difference between the line to gain being made or missed - what happened before the runner got to where he could benefit from it? But it does irritate me because people use it far too often to have a flip answer where a more thoughtful one is justified, so. There is a rule (3-4-3) that allows the referee to override when the clock should ordinarily start and do something else. Sort of. The wording is extremely unhelpful. quote:The referee shall order the game clock or play clock started or stopped whenever either team conserves or consumes playing time by tactics obviously unfair. This includes starting the game clock on the snap if the foul is by the team ahead in the score. Emphasis mine. That rule is all well and good when Team A just stands around and takes a delay penalty with no intention of snapping the ball, and it's obvious that you should make them snap it before any more time comes off. However, a perennial source of argument is whether or not you should use 3-4-3 and start the clock on the snap in the situation we're looking at now. The trouble is that I don't think that we're describing "tactics obviously unfair". The outcome may be so, but there's no way the guy who held was thinking "tee hee, I can hold this guy and make sure we get to run extra time off the clock!" He was just trying to get the first down, in the same way that any other player in the previous 56 minutes who holds is just trying to get more yardage for his team. That's not an obviously unfair tactic. That's just football. Having said that. If this situation happens in my next game, I will start the clock on the snap, because I think this is exactly the sort of thing 3-4-3 should be used for. And it seems that the SEC office agrees that the rule would be better if it said something like "...when time is unfairly conserved or consumed." Get rid of that annoying word "obviously" (because it starts pushing things towards the realm of "obviously unfair act") and put the emphasis on the outcome, not the cause. As long as the rule continues to suck, there'll be people who'll not use it and be technically correct.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
The thing is, making a first down (or stopping one) by fair means is almost always going to be far easier to do because of the very particular circumstances in which it'd be optimal to cheat. Let's say you're Team A leading by one point, the clock reads 1:20 at the snap, Team B out of timeouts, on 3rd and 5 from your 35. You can't just call "Student Body Left XYZ Hold Like A Motherfucker". All that's going to do is guarantee you can't win the game. It makes no sense to call a play where whatever happens, Team B will still have a chance of getting the ball back. Also, if somehow your blatant cheating doesn't work for you, and Team B still stops you getting a first down, congratulations, they're going to stop the clock to deal with the flags. If you're lucky they'll still start it again after Team B declines, but now you can only take 25 seconds off it before 4th down instead of 40. So it has to be an individual player decision, made on the field at the time. And here's what that player has to consider. If the run is probably going to make a first down, why hold? If you make a first down, you win the game. No need to get clever with the clock. Likewise, if the run is probably not going to make a first down, why hold? All that does is stop the clock, and see above. Even if they start the clock on the ready, now you're only going to get to take 25 seconds off it before 4th down instead of 40. For a situation where committing a foul is unequivocally the best thing to do, you have to go a mile down the rabbit hole. I can't find the one play I'm thinking of, but off the top of my head it involves two or three changes of possession and at least one foul before the rules get twisted so far that fouling gives you a better result than not.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 11:44
|
|
|
Red herring from someone clutching at straws. They all use the same mechanics. I'd try to go into watching linemen for you, but everything I know is based on the U being in the defensive backfield (where he belongs  ) and I don't know anything about how to work with two in the offensive backfield.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Goal line plays (which for the NFL may be 5 yards and in, or possibly they've joined the rest of us at 7 yards and in) and all plays inside (IIRC) two minutes of the first half and five minutes of the second half.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
Any decision may be changed at any point before the next snap. (The exception is "what down is it?", which can be corrected at any time during a series.) In practice, obviously it looks better if you're going to talk someone off something the quicker it gets done, but priority #1 is "get the right result". I've been in situations where we've enforced a penalty and then someone suddenly realises "oh wait a minute, I know something that might have been important", speaks up, and you end up having to wave it off and go all the way back again.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
AFAIK, since they invented the process of the catch, it's always been the case that to establish possession you need to get control + feet + football move before you start going to the ground, otherwise the "hold on all the way down" thing kicks in. It's been called differently to that during this time, due to people getting used to calling it this way (it takes time to break habits of twenty-odd years), but that was always the intention. Bryant's pretty clearly on his way to the ground as he's reaching out. And yeah, I've already got my spiel for "so, this business about reporting ineligible..." worked out. "Your guy can't report anything, but he doesn't need to, he's allowed to be covered up. (If the coach goes "huh?", clarify that in the NFL that would be an illegal formation but our rules aren't stupid.) You also need to make sure you still have five 50-79 numbers out there. You can still run the same concept, it just works slightly different."
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 13:53
|
|
|
blackmongoose posted:Wait, so college teams can dress skinny guys in lineman numbers and linemen in skill position numbers as long as there are five 50-79 numbers? And anyone's allowed to play an eligible or ineligible position? That sounds like it could get confusing for the referees... Well, exactly what number a player wears is mostly irrelevant to us, beyond the restrictions on 50-79s. You're not allowed to put two of the same number on the field at once, and big-time NCAA has another rule that you're not allowed duplicate numbers on the same side of the ball (which has had the side effect of limiting their maximum roster size to 297, where previously it was completely unlimited). Beyond that, putting receivers in 80-89 and halfbacks in 20-39 and fullbacks in 30-49 is about as relevant to officiating as where those players went for breakfast that morning.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
SNAFU, and simulposted: editing
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2015 06:19
|
|
|
Covering the A-11 hinges on the rule that requires five interior linemen who are ineligible by position on every scrimmage down. The loophole the A-11 used was based around the numbering exception for scrimmage kick formations* - when you're in a kick formation, you don't need five 50-79 numbers. This is because your punt coverage team is small and fast and the suicide squad will often play positions where it's useful for them to be in an eligible number - back in the 70s those players had to be on the roster under two numbers and they'd wear tearaway jerseys for punts, which is even more ridiculous than it sounds. When it all blew up, Smart Football did a wide-ranging post on the offense - there's a lot of stuff about every facet of it. The videos still work! (I still can't stop myself yelling at the wing officials to get off the field already.) CTRL-F for "let's talk football" to skip to his discussion of how the offense might work and what his concerns are. (Basically, not enough blockers in the middle of the field restricts the number of pass receivers you can actually send downfield, and it's also very reliant on confusing the gently caress out of defenders in pass coverage, which disappears if they can start identifying ineligibles pre-snap and ignoring them - now you're left with a spread-style offense wearing a new and impractical hat.) *At the time, the Fed rule for a scrimmage kick formation required there to be a player 7 yards or more behind the center, and nobody under center. NCAA rules had an additional "...and it is obvious that a kick may be made" clause, which Fed didn't have. All you needed was a QB in deep shotgun, and suddenly you could have a scrimmage kick formation on every down. Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
The way I would actually run it, if I were a coach with an irrational hard-on for trying overly complicated poo poo he sees on TV, would be from a formation like this.code:
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 14:26
|
|
|
The ball is dead when the runner is held so that his forward progress is stopped. (In practice it also applies to being knocked backward and to the ground; the key point is whether any given hit or series of hits forced the player to ground.) The only way he should get the first down is if a defender remains in contact with him through the entire process, and you probably should have killed it and given it to him before the defender brought him to the ground. Live-ball fouls enforced at the previous spot, or the spot of the foul; it should be the East/West spot as well as the North/South one. When a defender intercepts a pass in the corner of the end zone and then kneels or goes out of bounds. (Also some other ways of having a touchback. They have the option of any point between the hashmarks.)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
...yes, and why isn't it a football move? Because he's going to ground before he can make it. Taking a step in any direction with the ball under your firm control is specifically defined by the NFL book as being a football move. If you could cancel out going to the ground by making a football move on the way down, then the rule would never apply to any of these situations where a player controls the ball and then falls over while moving at high speed, because they often end up taking four or five stagger-steps on the way down.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 14:52
|
|
|
The smart thing to do there is almost always to take a knee unless you're certain you can get back out past where you intercepted the ball, and even then it's often better to knee it. At worst you'll get forward progress or a momentum exception out to where you first gained control, and there's no chance of fumbling it back. But most of the time those plays are actually touchbacks. The one thing it can't be is a safety. The only time that's going to be a safety is if he completes the catch outside his own 5-yard line, or he completes the catch in the field of play, stops moving, and then has a brainfart and runs backwards into the end zone to knee it. On this play, if he kneels in the end zone, I am ruling a touchback because I don't think the process of the catch is complete until he plants the foot and starts coming back out, and he's also going back mostly under his own power; he was never "held so that his forward progress is stopped". If he gets hit and drops the ball at any point before then, that's an incomplete pass; so I have a pass intercepted in his own end zone, and a touchback. Forward progress or the momentum exception would only apply for me if he was clearly held in the field of play and then pushed back, or he clearly gained control further out and then it took him more time than it did to get back into the end zone. (True momentum exceptions are so rare that none of my usual suspects for clips actually have one; it's all "no, this is a touchback".)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2015 12:07
|
|
|
This is a philosophy that the NFL and big-league NCAA guys have been moving towards for some time, and it makes a lot of sense in a lot of situations. When poo poo happens, it's a much more effective deterrent to say "you started it, you can eat a 15-yard penalty and go explain to your coach why". There are some situations where they're obviously both as bad as each other, but most of the time there's a guy who went starting poo poo and a guy who was just standing up for himself. If people can start poo poo and know most of the time it'll end in "meh, everything cancels, get on with it", they'll start poo poo. IIRC the first time I remember someone making it clear they were doing this was the time when Sean Taylor spat at Michael Pittman. Once upon a time the video of Mike Carey going to the other Washington players to tell them what had happened was on Youtube, but of course some killjoy got it taken down. I do remember the conversation going "...Spit right in his face, what would you do?" "Ohhhhh..." "He nearly hit me! That would have been real bad..." Now, having said that, there was a lot else going on there and I would only be using this philosophy to excuse guys who were minding their own business or trying to calm things down until someone ran in and started swinging at them and they defended themselves. The thing is that fighting or flagrant USC has a yardage penalty on it, so you can't eject multiple players and still enforce yards on someone; and there are clearly many people running in and making things worse who also deserved what Irish commentators rather charmingly refer to as "the ultimate sanction". Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 00:15 on Feb 3, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 10:39 |
|
|
What we do where I am in that situation is we just say "You're out of timeouts, they can run the clock out by kneeling, let's go home already" and stick the ball in the air, which is good at stopping people being stupid. We also have automatic suspensions for disqualified players that would carry over to next season, so while I might well be inclined to be lenient towards players defending themselves after they get thumped, it would be for that reason only, and never for "oh, you just won the bowl game".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2015 20:22
|
|