• Announcements

    • Coach Nowlin

      HEAD COACH OPENING 2018   11/01/2017

      CONFIRMED HEAD COACH CHANGES IN 2018 Lafayette Central Catholic;  Don Collier  Kankakee Valley:  Zack Prairie  Valparaiso:  Dave Coyle  Evansville North:  Brett Szabo  Hamilton Southeastern:  Scott May Peru:  Bob Prescott  North Daviees:  Scott Helms  Evansville Central:  Andy Owens  River Forest: Austen Robison  Shelbyville:  Pat Parks  Cathedral: Rick Strieff

bobref

Booster 2016-17
  • Content count

    15,277
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    116

Everything posted by bobref

  1. Then my guess is that if the IFCA really wants this, they need to do their homework and get the ADs and principals behind it. The IHSAA is a member institution. If the members want something, they can make it happen.
  2. Legal? Can you "curl" the Punted Ball?

    Maybe. Maybe not. Perhaps the Force is strong with them.
  3. Despite what he's on record as saying, the Commissioner would absolutely do a 180 if it turned out that there was a grassroots movement among the membership of the IHSAA toward seeding. That movement can only be led by the Indiana Football Coaches' Association. Quite simply, if the coaches want seeding, they'll get seeding. If there is no seeding, it's not the Commissioner's fault, it's the coaches. The Commissioner works for them. Not the other way around.
  4. Legal? Can you "curl" the Punted Ball?

    I would say that field is not on the level.
  5. Lowell vs East Central!

    Unlike NCAA football, a targeting foul does not mandate ejection. Targeting results in ejection at the high school level only if it is flagrant, meaning a foul so severe or extreme that it places the opponent in danger of serious injury. Targeting ejections are not the norm, but there are a significant number of them, especially when a defenseless player is involved.
  6. SemiState Scores

    They would be the first to deny it.
  7. Zionsville beat Elwood for the 3A championship in 1987 ... my first state final.
  8. Interesting play

    The rule does not mention non-player or unsportsmanlike fouls. It refers only to live ball fouls.. which this is, assuming it took place before the IW. 7-2-3d.
  9. Interesting play

    Think about the effect of the foul on the inadvertent whistle.
  10. The reason you don’t use the bag in that situation is that the bag has very specific uses on that play. The back judge uses a bag to mark the spot where the kick ends. A bag is also used to mark the spot of first touching by the kicking team. These spots are marked because, depending upon what else happens during the play, you may have to come back to them later for penalty enforcement or other purposes. The spot where the receivers muff or touch a kick has no significance. So, there is no reason to mark it.
  11. I haven’t seen the play but it is not the proper mechanic to use a beanbag to signify that a member of the receiving team touched, or was touched by, the kick. That beanbag is for marking first touching of the kick, which is touching by the kickers, not the receivers.
  12. Of course, NP was averaging about 400 yds. rushing per game.
  13. Penn/Carmel

    The crew chief is from Franklin, IN. This crew worked a state final in 2013, and they are eligible for and on track to go back to LOS next week.
  14. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Park_Zoo
  15. A Primer on Holding

    Sometimes we are our own worst enemies. This official thought he was being clever. But he just made Friday nights more difficult for a bunch of other officials in the future.
  16. A Primer on Holding

    As the season moves toward its climactic weekends, the officials are coming under more scrutiny (if that's even possible). Calls and no-calls get magnified by the importance of the games. The stakes are very high. So, if you're one of those guys who sits at a game and hollers at the officials about holding ... or if you have the misfortune to be sitting in front of or next to that guy ... this is for you. Holding: The Most Misunderstood Foul Holding is, without a doubt, the foul that is most misunderstood by players, coaches, fans, media … and yes, sad to say, by officials, too. The barrier to our more complete understanding of the holding foul is our desire for simplicity, clarity, and consistency. The complex nature of the holding foul is unlikely to satisfy that desire. Recognizing and calling the holding foul requires a disciplined “mental checklist.” The first item that must be checked off is “illegal technique.” The blocking rules are fairly complex, when applied to 7 or 8 blocks on each play, many of them occurring simultaneously. A thorough knowledge of what is permitted and what is not is essential for properly calling this foul. Notably, the rules do not distinguish between holding that occurs inside the shoulder pads and holding that has the hands outside the pads, although the latter is much easier to detect. The second essential element of holding is a “restriction” imposed on the movement of the player being held. This includes the concepts of “disengagement” and “superior legs.” It is never enough to simply hold an opponent. There must be restriction of movement to consider a foul. If a player is content to merely maintain his position while the opponent has a handful of his jersey, and never attempts to disengage from the hold, there’s no foul. Similarly, if an offensive lineman has a grip on an opponent’s jersey, but is simply driving him away from the point of attack through superior leg position and drive, the fact that he is holding the opponent’s jersey becomes irrelevant. The third item on the checklist is “effect on the play.” Location is key. To be called a holding foul, the contact must normally include not only all the preceding elements, but also be located at or near the point of attack. Keep in mind, there can be several distinct points of attack in a single play. I once spent an entire playoff game watching the visiting team’s right tackle, who was badly overmatched by the home team’s all-state defensive end, hold on virtually every pass play. I never threw the flag once. The reason, the shotgun QB never held the ball for more than 2 seconds. It was strictly a rhythm passing game. When he wasn’t doing that, he was rolling away from that side. There’s no way the defensive end could have gotten anywhere near the QB before the ball was long gone, even if his rush had been unopposed. Therefore, since the fact that he was held had no effect on the play, no foul. I hope I have more luck explaining this concept to you than I did telling it to the all-state defensive end and his coach that night. Since each of these elements involves a degree of judgment on the part of the covering official, with so many judgments to make on a single potential foul, it is no wonder that consistency is a concern. A few guidelines can help officials call this foul more consistently: Call holding well away from or behind the play only when absolutely necessary and then, only with reluctance. What do you do when two guys get locked up well away from the play and one just obviously takes the other down, right out there in front of everybody? Do you lose credibility if you pass on such an obvious foul? You can help the situation by using “preventive officiating,” talking loudly to the players as they lock up and encouraging them to disengage. You can also term this “unnecessary roughness,” since it’s well away from the play, and make it a personal foul, instead of holding. But you’re probably going to need a takedown to sell that calla. If at all possible, the situation should be handled with a “talk to” instead of a flag. Ditto for calling holding on a double team block. The theory here is that the offense is committing two players to a single opponent and, therefore, any advantage gained by the holding is negated by the fact that there is another player unblocked. This is only a guideline, and defensive players have been known to defeat a double team on occasion. So questionable contact on a double team simply requires an extra pause to more carefully scrutinize the action to determine if the criteria are met. Make It Be There. As an official, you always get in more trouble for calling the foul that wasn’t there, compared to missing one that was. If you’re going to throw the flag for a holding penalty, remember: we’re fishing for whales, not minnows. There is so much hand contact in blocking that if you get nitpicky about holding, you are only opening yourself up to claims of inconsistency. So when you call a hold, make sure it’s one that will jump out at you on the video. Because of both the nature and the number of judgments needed, calling holding penalties will never be free from controversy. I hope this helps explain why.
  17. Hey, I’m in favor of anything that increases officials’ compensation. But this idea, and others I’ve seen, shows a basic misunderstanding about the relationship between schools and the IHSAA. They are the same thing. The IHSAA is funded by its tournament revenues. At the end of the fiscal year whatever the IHSAA doesn’t spend on operating costs is returned to the schools. Like a dividend. So, if the IHSAA were to use part of its operating funds to subsidize officials’ compensation, it will just have that much less to return to the schools at the end of the financial cycle. It’s just one pot of money, in the final analysis. And I doubt you’d find anyone at 9150 N. Meridian who would agree that “[n]o one has more money than the IHSAA...”
  18. You mean the 2007 sectional game at the Rockpile. I was also there for that classic.
  19. A Primer on Holding

    It has nothing to do with punishment, and everything to do with exactly what the rules are directed to: preventing someone from gaining an advantage using an unfair technique. No advantage -- no foul.
  20. Should be a great game between two great programs. They will be hard-pressed, however, to try and match the excitement and intensity of the 2007 semistate at The Inferno.
  21. A Primer on Holding

    Sorry, but that analysis goes into every holding call or no-call. Officials are also taught to give every benefit of the doubt to the offended team. But in the final analysis, this call, like so many others, requires a fair amount of judgment. There’s just no way to take that out of the game. You can certainly quarrel with the decision that flows from that judgment. But that judgment is a critical part of the process cannot be denied.
  22. Certainly not. And by the way, it is certainly not true that it is always "running into" when contact is on the kicking leg and not the plant leg. That is a useful guideline when contact is relatively slight. That's not the case with this play.
  23. Give it up! What part of “defenseless player” do you not understand? Who cares whether someone’s feet came off the ground? This is football, not sumo wrestling. When his forward progress is obviously stopped, let him go.