JustRules

It can but after enforcement they would have had to reach the line to gain. This was a goal to go situation so there was no way for A to get a first down on a penalty enforcement for encroachment. We also don't know for sure on this video if the box was at 1 before the 4th down play. If you look at the previous play the line to gain chains are lying on the ground. But when the box is shown with 1 during the discussion, the line to gain chains are now in place for Ballard's drive. They could have already switched it getting ready for the next series. It's possible it was 1 on the 4th down play, but this video doesn't prove it. The coach's argument based on lip reading was only that the ball had broke the plane. It definitely looks possible the ball was across, but if the H was on the goal line this would be an easy one to see. If the H did tell the box to update to 1st down and the teams both assumed it was 1st down (defense is reacting like they knew it was fourth down), I agree with Bob's use of the God rule to replay the 4th down. I would need to be absolutely positive the box was 1 before the play and the coach believed that to be correct down. Tough situation for the crew and a potentially huge mistake on their part.

Those are great ideas. I'm surprised nobody has brought them up here before. @Bobref...do you think this may be something to consider and propose to the IHSAA? Seriously, I do like both of these ideas for the reasons you state. I would even be open to 6 teams per sectional so that 4-5 or 3-6 team that struggled due to injuries or competition level gets a chance. 1 and 2 get byes and 3 plays 6 and 4 plays 5 in the first round. The best way to do this of course would be to align your regular season schedule with your sectional teams. That way the seeding it based on actual results. If you don't want to have all rematches in the sectional round, pair 2 sectionals together and play cross sectional the first 3/4 rounds. I don't expect we'll ever see something like that though.

One of the challenges with some shields today is any tint may depend on the angle. I had a game this year where I could see my reflection in the shield of the player. He insisted there was no tint. I asked another player to confirm we could see our reflection, and he said he could not. Turns out if the player turned around 180 degree and I looked at it from that side, perfectly clear! That's not fair! I wish the manufacturers would keep it simple and only sell clear eye shields.

You know who owns Ticketmaster right?

I had it up in multiple browser windows plus my TV and two mobile devices. It was a regular control center. Hard to focus on any one game but nice to be able to switch to a close game at the end. Lots of great football played Friday night and some heartbreaking losses.

Now you are just trolling and wasting my time and everyone else's time. I'm out.

He didn't say the officials were going to state. He said Carroll defeats the officials. Nice try. Being critical of a call or calls by disagreeing with them is fine. Fans are biased and will see things how they want to see things. The officials are going to call things as they see them. Maybe they had a bad angle or were out of position or made a decision too quickly. Or maybe they were actually right. Accusing them of intentionally make calls against a team (which is what this quote did) is accusing them of cheating. Maybe he meant this: Carroll defeats HSE overcoming some unfortunate calls that went against them in the same game to go to state But he didn't. Words matter. He's had plenty of chances to clarify but instead used a movie reference to support his argument. BTW...this crew is working a state final this week.

Here is exact quote: That directly says their opponents were HSE and the officials. He is saying the officials intentionally made calls against Caroll to help HSE win. How else could you interpret that? If people don't see why this contributes to the abuse of officials we will never be able to overcome this obstacle to retaining younger officials .Officials are never opposed to ANY team.

This is one area where NFHS, NCAA, and NFL are all vastly different. NFHS is the simplest. The kick crosses the plane it's a touchback.

When you say a team has to compete against the officials you are directly implicating them of intentionally making calls against your team to increase their chances of losing. It's one thing to disagree with judgement calls but to accuse the crew of cheating on favor of one team crosses the line and needs to be called out. GC is right. The comment probably should have been ignored. But in getting frustrated with officials leaving due to abuse and recruiting being hard because people don't want to put up with the abuse. His comment doesn't affect my desire to keep officiating because I know he's ignorant on this topic. And the more people realize how the words they choose contributes to the problem maybe we start see some change.

The best way to know someone doesn't know anything about officiating is to be critical of the best crew in the state hands down.

It was informally done but there were instances where one team would refuse to do it so regular clock rules were applied. This eliminated that option. That's why coaches pushed it.

Agree with Bobref. Also be wary of the terminology you use. Remember a pop-up kick is one driven directly into the ground that goes high into the air like a pooch kick. The OP here was describing a pooch kick. A pop-up kick is dead immediately and a 5-yard penalty against the kicking team.

As long as I've been an official (20+) years the NFL philosophy has been "a blade of grass". They aren't going to be picky on that unless both players come out and communicate they are on. The NFL had a rule you couldn't cover an eligible number unless you reported (similar to reporting as eligible). I don't remember if they added the reporting option or removed it. It could be a foul whether or not the covered receiver goes downfield. College has a very similar philosophy of "blade of grass" so you won't see it called often there. Since you can cover an eligible number in NCAA you could also rule both on if putting one in the backfield creates an illegal formation (5 in the backfield). This is usually treated as a talk to unless it's really bad or you have already been warned.

We were one of the last states to add a mercy rule so if we mirror anyone we were not in the leadership role.

Playing rules yes. Recruiting and contact rules very different. I think NAIA may technically have some rules but I'm not sure how much they enforce them. One of the college fields I've worked on has both HS and college hash marks because it's a community field used for both. Every time I've worked there I've put the ball on the HS hash for a college game at least once. The snapper very politely reminds me of my error.

I used to be him! My parent's basement couch has a notch in the wood frame of their couch from a clipboard I may or may not have thrown when I was 15 after my team lost due to a horrible officiating call.

I love when I talk with a player or coach and explain how we read run/pass just like they do so it helps us read and react on a play and where to put our focus (and that's different for each official). It's not just watching the play.

Replay could have helped with this too. No matter how hard we try it's impossible to have a perfect game. You need to count EVERY play. If there are 180 plays in a game you have to count 180 times. If you do miss one you only hope it's not one where the team has more than 11 and if it is you hope it's 2nd and 8 in the middle of the first quarter and not at an instance like this. Of course if it happened on 2nd and 8 in the middle of the first quarter nobody is going to bring it up n public. I know many officials who count players while watching a game on TV! I finally broke myself of that habit, but I do often still count for 4 in the backfield on the offense and look at the formation to see if they have trips, balanced or 21. It's weird.

You do realize the knee is not the only body part that makes a runner down? Anything but a hand or foot. In your own picture it appears the helmet is on the ground so that shows you are already incorrect on one of your facts. The ball is already loose in that photo so we don't know how long the helmet was on the ground before the ball became loose. That's why you can't use a still photo as evidence. These types of plays are generally not conclusive on Hudl video. That type of precision is not what coach videos are trying to capture. You may be 100% correct but it's very unlikely these videos are conclusive either way. And stills definitely don't prove anything. Your best argument is you and everyone you talked with fell it was a fumble. Unfortunately only one opinion matters and that was the unbiased person on the sideline who had a great view. He had the best chance of getting it right.

FBS games take on average 3 hours and 25 minutes. D3 games take on average 2 hours and 45 minutes. Same rules. Same timing/clock procedures. Similar number of plays, penalties, incomplete passes (things that stop the game). There are only two differences and they contribute significantly to the longer game times: Replay TV time outs They keep trying new rules to speed up the game. They help marginally. The two things above are never going away.

Is your answer, "find a better observer"?

that's when you wish you had a mic to the referee huddle after a play where the defense sacks the QB for an 8 yard loss on 3rd and 1. Referee: Whadyagot? Wing: I have an illegal procedure on #12 offense Referee: We don't have such a foul. What did he do? Wing: He left early. Referee: So we have a false start Wing: Yeah, that's what you call it Referee: So why didn't you kill it before the snap? Wing: Uh...I don't know Referee: You're buying the first round tonight. Maybe the second. Referee (over the stadium mic): prior to the snap, false start on the offense, 5 yard penalty previous spot, repeat 3rd down Without a mic you just see the signal and assume it must have been an illegal formation and wonder why the defense accepted the penalty when 4th and 9 is a better option than 3rd and 6. B's coach is legitimately angry and you have to take the berating you are about to receive.

Theoretically if half the teams qualify most of the teams on the bubble would be 5-5. If you had super competitive sectional it's possible someone with a 6-4 doesn't get in. But if you put in a system like I suggested, that takes Sagarin out of it and you are basing your qualifier on sectional record only. It essentially makes the entire season (at least the sectional regular season games) an all-in format.

I would say the more feeders you have the better. You can keep more kids in the system playing. Some kids develop later than others so the kid in a single middle school system who is small in middle school might opt out of football. But if the district is split into 3 or 4 middle schools he may have more of a chance to play. If he starts to get stronger or faster in 9th grade and he's still playing you still have him. If he quit in 7th grade he's now playing tennis or soccer or running cross country. This has often touted as an advantage especially for the parochial schools. Chatard had 4 or 5 kids who started as QBs in 8th grade while a rural school with a similar enrollment had 1. You go that deep at each position you are going to have kids with more experience.