JustRules

Yes, it would have been a kick out of bounds if his foot happened to touch OOB before he caught it. In NFHS it's now a foul by the receiving team if the receiver INTENTIONALLY touches out of bounds and then does that. It needs to be very obvious he stepped out intentionally for the purpose of creating a kick OOB. NCAA doesn't have a similar rule, and I'm not sure if the NFL does now.

The IHSAA has told officials to not use the "Find the line" mechanic because it's a college mechanic. They don't realize it's not a college mechanic. It's a solid officiating mechanic at any level. It's going to be first and 10 whether you start at the 23 or 23.5 so why not start on the 23 or 24? Statistically they are going to put it on the next year line anyway. If it can allow the officials to use the lines on the field to determine the LTG it makes so much sense. A very wise coach told me he doesn't understand why we use the chains as the official determination of first downs. First, the location of the back stake is an estimation by a volunteer at least 20 yards away from the ball which was placed at an estimated spot by the wing official in the first place. Then you have another volunteer trying to eyeball where the clip goes. If you have a measurement you are bringing the chains out to a ball that was often placed by an umpire who was eyeballing a somewhat estimated spot by the wing official (good crews will have the wing official place the ball). If you use the lines on the field to start each series and it's a well marked field, then use the lines. You can then use the yard lines similar to a goal line to determine if the runner reached the LTG. There will always be exceptions to doing this, but if you do it 90% of the time you are able to much better manage the flow of the game.

John is as good as they get so if he said it was behind the LOS I would tend to believe him. On plays like this there are so many different aspect at play and there is no one official who would have all the information needed. Where was the potential OPI in relation to the LOS? Was it the offensive player initiating contact or the defensive player? When is the ball released in relation to the contact? It what direction was the ball thrown? Where was the ball first touched in relation to the neutral zone? Each of those will impact if there was or wasn't a foul for OPI. If the ball was first touched in or behind the neutral zone (and don't be too technical on that especially if it's an intended screen pass caught very close to the LOS) then everything else doesn't matter for OPI.

Did the referee announce that or was that speculation from the announcers? They will often give the block a healthy yard beyond the LOS so they aren't too technical on that aspect of the foul. The location of the defender in relation to the receiver is not relevant if the offensive player was blocking downfield before the pass ends. The only exception would be if the block happened on one side of the field as the ball is going to the other side. That doesn't sound like this situation though.

I believe the coach thought there was contact which is why he went crazy. Video obviously showed that wasn't the case. There was a close targeting call very early in the game that cost him one of his best defenders, so he was probably still hot about that. This probably should have been flagged for UNS even in an NCAA game. Yes he is on the field, but he's mostly in the team huddle where he is allowed to be. You want to make sure he earns it, so it often has a lot to do with what he's saying as well.

One thing I'll disagree with Bob on is whether we would consider this IP under HS rules. I definitely would. Having that many substitutes (definition of the people who came on during the play) on the field very much could influenced the play. At that point the officials have no idea who the original 11 players were for either team. Similar to BD/WC in 2019 when WC players ran on to the field after a blocked FG they thought ended the game. The crew ruled IP rather than IS because of this very reason (I agreed with their call). I would only go with IS if they came on the field but were nowhere near the play as it happened (say 5-10 yards on and stopped and ran back). I would have IP on both sides and along with the IFP offset and replay the down. The LOD aspect of the IFP doesn't matter at this point. I had heard the ruling on the field was the IFP ended the play. They ruled UNS for the players being on the field but treated it similar to IS in HS (which is entirely in their judgement). Most college officials I've talked to thought it probably should have been treated as an egregious act and ruled it as a double foul and replay the down because they had so many players from both teams on the field. If I hear anything from any training videos I'll try to share it here. Neither call would be "wrong" but one may be more right than another and ultimately decided by the grader in this case. A good friend of mine told me once, some calls aren't right or wrong. They are just calls.

We worked one of their games this year. Both of those players were incredibly impressive. They seemed every bit as good as MIC players and were definitely big enough to play in the MIC. I figured they would do well in the 2A tournament because they didn't seem like your typical 2A program.

The ones I worked this year were. Two of them came down to the last drive and the coaches were all treating it like their jobs depended on it. Lots of talent at the MIC schools I saw.

I've officiated several MIC freshman and JV games over my career. I would say many of them would beat a lot of 3A and 4A varsity teams. We like to have newer officials help at these games because they get more prepared for the varsity games they will eventually work. This year was one of the best I've seen. Teams like LC and Warren were very sophomore/junior heavy on varsity. They mostly kept their freshmen on the freshman team so the JV were the sophomores and juniors that didn't get to play varsity. If the freshmen at those schools played the JV the freshmen could probably win.

I would say both had excellent seasons/careers, both were very deserving of the honor, and you couldn't go wrong with either choice. Picking one over the other is not a slight on the other. I wouldn't have been shocked with either choice.

Covenant did play and beat Heritage Christian this year who was 8-3 and ranked #8 in the last poll. HC lost to WeBo in the regional final by a similar score. I think CC-WeBo could be a very good game. There often isn't a huge difference between the top teams of one class and the top teams of the next class. It depends entirely on the year of course because sometimes there are dominating teams regardless of class.

Unsportsmanlike conduct fouls in NFHS are treated as dead ball fouls even if they are live. So the result is the same. In NCAA you would be correct though. They changed that several years ago to cut down on the number of high stepping or taunting plays that were happening on TDs. They made it a live ball foul so it would take the TD off the board and enforce from the spot. It seems to have worked because you don't see that very often any more. It isn't a major problem in HS football so the rules committee hasn't felt a need to change the rule.

He would have to sell it to the entire rules committee. And the last thing they like to approve is something based on "it works in NCAA." That usually is a kiss of death for a rules change proposal.

I don't see as much justification in high school. With NCAA rosters often having more than 100 players double numbers are very common. The addition of 0 is more justified. I don't expect to see it in NFHS rules.

One third of the crews in the state are in the Indy metro area. 75% of the teams are from Central Indiana. That's going to happen. Lots of schools in Indy metro and most crews have no more connection to them than they do a Fort Wayne or region school.

Agreed. There are 6 categories of DPI when we make that judgement. A cut off is one of them. When I saw it live I didn't there was much there. Then they showed the field level view from the end zone and it was the epitome of a cut off. That category applies when a defender is running down field with the receiver and contacts him in a way that pushes him away from the ball especially out of bounds. It's fair to argue judgement here if that's what happened, but that's what it looked like to me with the benefit of replay. As Bob has mentioned the official who made the call was in perfect position to make the call and because of that I trust his judgement. Rule hasn't changed in a long time. The only way this is illegal participation is if he is knocked out and doesn't come back in at his earliest convenience. He isn't able to do that because he's being ridden out of bounds as the ball is arriving. He would only commit IP here if he goes out on his own and doesn't return or is knocked out by the defender and then runs down the sideline on his own and comes in much later. This crew is from central Indiana and works big games every week in the regular season. They work a heavy dose of MIC, HCC, Cathedral, and Chatard. The BJ worked a D2 national championship game a couple years ago and was available to work with this crew (his original HS crew) because his college season was postponed to Spring. They are an excellent crew and showed it today. They were in total control in a crazy game and made big calls when they needed. There were several crazy things from an officiating standpoint that happened in the last 3 minutes and they nailed all of them. Anybody complaining about the officiating in the game show they know every little about officiating quality. And trust me...the people most critical about the officiating in the finals are usually other officials usually because they are jealous they aren't working.

His goal isn't to be right or wrong. His goal is to generate post counts by throwing things out there he knows will generate opposition because they are so off base people will reply. The internet is filled with people like him and some people think they are the reason sites are interesting. They don't have to believe anything they post, but they get a thrill off the constant banter.

1. I've enjoyed the up and down nature of it. It creates some new and interesting sectional matchups including teams at the bottom of a class that bump down because somebody bumps up. 2. You have a pretty good idea in November what class you'll be in. The only uncertainty is for enrollment splits which happen with or without SF or a multiplier. You know for sure in March/April what class you'll be in and what sectional you'll be in. Your regular season schedule doesn't change at all regardless of your class designation. How much planning are you doing before March/April for your sectional opponent?

If you think he took 2 steps before the snap then you must consider the snap to be when the QB receives it and starts moving. The snap begins when the snapper starts to move it. That is so close to when the guy in motion moves forward you don't want to be that technical. It can be misleading when you see the back move before anyone else. That's not a false start. Early in my career I would have a false start when I would see the receiver move before the line or the T move before the G. Then I would watch video and realize the ball and player moved at the same time, but the rest of the players were slightly delayed. We often get coaches screaming a guy is moving/leaving early, but when you review it on video he's leaving the same time the ball is moving so so close you don't want to be that technical. Even a half second looks like a huge gap.

I often see people say a school shouldn't be "punished" for having a good class by having to bump up for the following class. First, it has no affect whatsoever on the regular season. If we had a system where you play the regular season in your class/sectional then I see this argument. Second, it does affect what sectional you start in, but how much harder that is depends entirely on your location. Some areas may have a tougher 2A sectional than a 3A sectional for example. Related to that. the competitive teams in one class are often competitive with the top teams of the class above them. If you have a down year and don't do well in the tournament a class above you, you probably wouldn't have done great in your regular class either. The luck of the section assignment and draw does play a factor in that though. I think the 2-year cycle makes a lot of sense and I think it's been a success overall. Don't expect it to be perfect. The beauty of if it is is affects public schools the same as private schools. It has changed up some of the teams in each class and created some fun, new match-ups. Look at the profiles of New Pal and Columbus East through these processes. They both have done very well regardless of class. The IHSAA doesn't do much right, but this is one I think they did get right.

If you want officials to be this technical you will not be happy with the 30-40 flags you 'll see in a game. No formation would ever be legal because there is always a "back" who is breaking the waist of the nearest lineman (usually a slot or wing). Every jersey tug would be a hold. Most kickoffs would be stopped because one player is breaking the plane of the neutral zone before kicked. Look at what happened in the NFL a few years ago when the officials were instructed to get more technical on calling holding. It was a disaster and everyone hated watching the games. It led to the famous change at halftime of a MNF game when Tom Brady tweeted blasting the league for this philosophy. This play meets the criteria of too technical to call illegal motion or false start.

The part you are missing though and I've mentioned several times as the core of my point is those districts don't use neighborhood school. Amy Beverland is located near Geist, but it has students from all over the east side of the district. Brook Park is near 56th Street so while not in the middle of the economically challenged areas of the district it is the closest one. If there was a school centered near 38th and Pendleton Pike and only had students from that area and you compared it to an Amy Beverland that only has Geist-area students, I have no doubt the gap would be in the 79% range. It's already 60% with an attempt to spread students throughout the district.

Based on the video and the photo I definitely have this as a correct call. I disagree with Bob to let the runner off the hook if the defender's feet happen to be off the ground the moment he hurdles. You can hurdle someone lying on the ground but that's not what's happening here. This is a safety foul and very dangerous for the runner. The fact it wasn't called previously means nothing. Either those crews missed it or the defender was actually contacting the ground with an elbow/knee/hand when the hurdle took place. These announcers obviously don't know or understand the rule.

All 3. The numbers though will show by school, and I don't believe any of the districts only use neighborhood schools. For example, if there was a school in the Geist area that only took kids from the neighborhood around Geist, the F&R number would be very low. It appears Amy Beverland Elementary is close to the Geist area, and it has a 28% F&R number. Brook Park is one of the elementary schools closer to the south edge of the district, and it has a an 85% R&R number. Both schools will pull students from around the district beyond their local neighborhoods and they area already have a nearly 60 percentage point gap. If both schools only pulled from their neighborhoods I imagine the gap would be closer to that 79 percentage points. You could do similar analysis in Pike and Washington Townships. You have less affluence in the other township districts, but it's still possible to have wide disparities the closer you get to the edges of each district.

I live in one of those districts and I can tell you it's very possible. If there was a school that was based in the neighborhood of the most affluent areas of the district, the F&R numbers would be extremely low. If there was a school that based in the neighborhoods closer to 38th Street (all 3 reach down that far) the F&R numbers would be 80%+. I believe all 3 districts though distribute all students through all schools so the demographics are closer to the make-up of the district with some home school preference.