|
Post by Amir on Aug 31, 2010 15:09:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by withtwoflakes on Sept 1, 2010 1:44:49 GMT
Indeed! I tend to agree with TXMike on Refstripes that we should give forward progress around the 25 yard line. Once a defender is latched firmly onto him and he is not gaining yards then kill it.
Froward Progress is what I thought the very first time I watched this before I even got further down the Refstripes thread to read the coments by TXMike and others.
|
|
|
Post by phclarke on Sept 1, 2010 8:00:58 GMT
Hmm - from the clip looks like the guy is quite happily going back under his own power with or without the defender present.
I didn't see enough of an "effort" being made to shift the defender that would make me start thinking forward progress.
Also - where was the white hat on that clip, they should have been the first to the goal line!
|
|
|
Post by teevee on Sept 1, 2010 8:26:32 GMT
I'm with the 'give-him-forward-progress' guys! I don't think he has much option than to keep going backwards! But there are some things I do find a bit odd about the clip ... like there isn't, or doesn't appear to be a white hat, and no-one on that officiating crew seems to be making great efforts to cover the play back to the goal line.
|
|
|
Post by Ed Herk on Sept 1, 2010 13:30:05 GMT
Mechanics are along the lines of "let's just jog about, doesn't matter if we're 40 yards from the action". I would like to think that anyone on this forum would be more alert and quicker than that.
Save Team A from the disaster they suffered and kill it once you are absolutely sure the runner isn't going to be headed north. Why he decided to try and pass the ball is beyond me, perhaps he was trying to throw it out the back of his own EZ??
|
|
|
Post by Amir on Sept 1, 2010 15:49:50 GMT
Following on from that, here's the worst kick return ever.
|
|
|
Post by New(ish) Ref on Sept 1, 2010 17:07:17 GMT
Invalid fair catch signal? Ball dead as per Rule 2-7-1-c?
|
|
|
Post by Amir on Sept 1, 2010 20:23:15 GMT
Unsportsmanlike Conduct for spiking the ball perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by phclarke on Sept 1, 2010 20:30:09 GMT
From Rule 2
Forward, Beyond
ARTICLE 1. Forward, beyond or in advance of, as related to either team, denotes direction towards the opponent's end line. Converse terms are backward or behind. Forward Progress
ARTICLE 2. Forward progress is a term indicating the end of advancement by the ball carrier or airborne pass receiver of either team and applies to the position of the ball when it became dead by rule*.
* All the exceptions refer to driving back or holding.
The player never advanced the ball towards the opponents end line, so how can we give forward progress? In the clip the defender is just steering and not seeming to add any momentum worth classing as driving back.
The offense have every right to run a dumbass, but legal play, and we should let it run the same way as we do a normal play.
|
|
|
Post by The Ref That's Left on Sept 1, 2010 21:06:23 GMT
Invalid fair catch signal? Ball dead as per Rule 2-7-1-c? I don't think there is any waving of arms during the kick so no.
|
|
|
Post by New(ish) Ref on Sept 1, 2010 22:17:59 GMT
Invalid fair catch signal? Ball dead as per Rule 2-7-1-c? I don't think there is any waving of arms during the kick so no. 2-7-1-c refers to a signal made after the catch. We clearly have a signal made after the catch. It is clearly not a valid fair catch signal as per 2-7-2, but is a waving signal, so could be argued to meet the requirements of 2-7-3. Thoughts...
|
|
|
Post by withtwoflakes on Sept 3, 2010 3:14:46 GMT
THE FIRST FILM CLIP.
To those who queried no White Hat:- Some regions of the US for lower level games do not bother to wear a WH if working the Referee position. T_R_T_L and EdHerk can back me up on that as I know that happens in Texas at lower level games.
THE SECOND FILM CLIP Newish ref said "Invalid fair catch signal? Ball dead as per Rule 2-7-1-c?" This game was a high school game in Vermont, therefore played under Federation Rules. Their FC rules are rather different to ours in that they have both illegal and invalid FC signals. An illegal FC signal is one given BY THE RUNNER after the ball is caught or recovered. The signal by the teammate ahead of him is not illegal as the Fed rules only talk about the RUNNER. Possibly the holding the ball in the air might be considered an illegal FC signal. An illegal signal in Fed rules does NOT cause the ball to become dead.
Much more pertinent is exactly where the kid caught the ball. The commentator claims he caught it in the EZ but hard to clarify that opinion in this film clip. If so, the ball should have been blown dead as Fed Rules give touchbacks as soon as the ball breaks the plane of the GL on scrimmage kicks. If the BALL never crossed the GL then the crew were right to keep the play alive. Of course they're under the posts so thats a real tough call. Some local assocs train their guys to come forward as soon as it is clear the kick will miss, so they can have a better angle to rule on that.
Amir said "Unsportsmanlike Conduct for spiking the ball perhaps? " Can't be that as under Fed Rules (or indeed NCAA Rules) that is only possible when the ball is dead. Fed Rules:- When the ball becomes dead in possession of a player, he shall not.... Spike the ball. NCAA Rules:- After a score or any other play, the player in possession........This prohibits:- Spiking the ball. In this play the ball isn't dead, so he cannot get a U/C for spiking. He has made a pass, in this case backwards.
|
|
|
Post by Christian on Sept 3, 2010 14:38:25 GMT
Since the goal line is not visible in the second clip, it's impossible to verify from the video if the ball was caught in the end zone or not.
However, if you use the edge of the shadows on the ground as a reference, it is a very close call whether the ball enters the end zone or not. The ball is caught at 10 seconds into the film, and it looks to be very close to where the official is placed at 22 seconds of the clip, signalling a TD.
If one then assumes that the official is on the goal line when he signals the TD, he's pretty much at the same kind of general spot as the ball is caught, and if the official is not on the goal line at the point of the catch, then he won't be able to see whether or not the ball has crossed the plane.
|
|
|
Post by Amir on Sept 5, 2010 6:42:02 GMT
OK, those two plays are pretty cringeworthy - on the other hand, this one made me smile
|
|
|
Post by teevee on Sept 5, 2010 8:17:08 GMT
I've seen something similar before but ...
Anyone else agree with me that that one borders on USC? From anywhere else but bang in line with the passer it isn't obvious that that pass is backwards, so in order to be sure that they won't commit a late hit the D practically have to stop or at least slow down to either (a) see what the officials are signalling or (b) simply see what happens next. Which means if B plays responsibly with regard to player safety etc, they are potentially disadvantaged. That doesn't seem right somehow!
|
|