JustRules

The timing of any restriction is important to a foul occurring. If it happens just as the ball arrives it's not necessarily a foul. Those are referred to as "bang-bang" plays and you usually don't have a foul. If the official got there just as the ball arrived and see a grab, he's going to have to guess if the contact occurred before the ball arrived. If an official guesses and makes a call, they are going to wrong a lot more than they are going to be right. These are the types of things officials have to process all the time every game. If the official is being graded, he may still get downgraded for missing the call even if he did everything right. He could also be downgraded for mechanics if the call was right, but he was out of position or should have been looking at this action much sooner. I haven't seen the play (the 1:25:30 mark is a halftime interview with the coach) but Bob's judgement comment is likely spot on based on the descriptions I've read. Was there a grab that constitutes a material restriction? Did it take a step away or prevent an opponent from moving toward the ball? If it's after the ball was thrown, what category of DPI do you put it in (there are 6)? If there was restriction was it before or after the ball had passed the receiver? If before you have a DPI. If after you don't have DPI but could have a personal foul depending on how late or unnecessary. Those are all judgement decisions the official has to make based on what his or her eyes tell their brain. They will often replay it again in their mind before making a decision. That is what is meant by a "judgement" call. It's not black and white like other things.

I believe they were using schedules provided by Arbiter and Eventlink so it's very possible you showed up that way for the scrimmage teams. All of our votes were from schools we have worked since 2018 so we must not have had any write in votes. A couple of them were scrimmage teams but we also had them in regular season games in the past 3 years. If the scrimmage teams were included in the vote, we got votes from 45% of the schools eligible to vote for us. I'm not sure if the schools were told which game we worked. They aren't going to remember the name of every crew who worked each game. It would be very interesting to see the rates of votes crews received. I'm also wondering if the spread of write in votes was different than non-write in votes. I'm assuming most write-ins were positive. Could be a coach or AD who moved to that school were familiar with you. Or they saw you work. Or they are friends with a coach who suggested you were solid crew that earned a positive vote.

It's not the 1 votes that hurt you. It's the volume of 5 votes and distribution of 2-4 votes. To advance to a sectional final you generally need as many 5 votes as the others combined. At 128 you were very close to getting a first round game. The rating is for the crew and only the crew chief has access to it. The highest and lowest score are thrown out (more based on the volume of votes, but I'm not sure when that starts to increase) so your 1 was thrown out. There are only 140ish crews applying so you are obviously going to see a lot of the same names. From what I can tell there were 10 or 12 crews that worked the first round that didn't work last year so nearly 10% were different from last year. Many of those were likely crews last year with just a crew chief change. In the regional and beyond half the guidelines indicate half the crews are "returning" crews meaning they have worked a state final. Many think that favors the returning crews, but it actually helps the "new" crews. The last couple new crews who get a regional final probably rank lower than the returning crews who don't get a game. As has been stated many times here the crews who advance benefit from positive votes. Previously they also benefitted from a volume of votes. They likely aren't getting the 80-100 votes they did previously, but they are probably getting close to 45-50 votes which helps. The more votes you get the more likely you are getting 5s because more coaches/ADs know who you are. Having the crew chief work deep into the basketball or possibly baseball tournament is a huge advantage. No matter what they do won't change much as long as the coach vote is the primary factor.

In the past a flaw of the coaches voting for all crews is some crews get 80-100 votes and some only get 20-30. The excess votes are usually the result of a crew (especially the crew chief) advancing in other sports and becoming well known there. All those extra votes are most likely positive (aka 5) votes. We were told this year the ballot did only list the crews who were on the school's schedule using data acquired from the assigning siites (mostly Arbiter and Eventlink). I'm not sure if that was true, but if it is, the crews getting all the extra friendly votes are likely less impactful. I have talked with coaches who do not give a crew a vote rather than giving the crew a bad vote. I don't know how common that is, but I do know it happens. I heard about a coach who only gives votes to crews who earned a 5 in his eyes. He learned last year if you only give 5s, the IHSAA will discard all your votes because they feel you were giving positive votes to all your crews. Even with the limited vote there are issues with who can or can't vote for you. Let's say you had Fountain Central last year but they changed head coaches this year. Fountain Central can vote for you even though the current coach has never seen you. And that coach goes to West Lafayette. He has seen you work, but you haven't had West Lafayette in the last 3 years so this coach that knows you can't vote for you. If used the coach vote should probably be Tuesday-Thursday the week of the game.

They only had 3 and they were all 2001-2004 against Carmel. Another interesting fact. The teams with the most non-MIC losses in the last 25 years were Carmel and Center Grove with 12 (Pike also but that's not surprising). Warren Central has only lost 3 times to a non-MIC school in the playoffs and 2 of them were 24 (Arlington) and 25 (Richmond) years ago.

Did some quick analysis and found the following data points (considering Pike and LC as MIC the entire time): In the last 25 years, a MIC team has won state 20 times (could be 21 this year if CG or BD wins); 3 of the 4 were were 1997-200) In that same time 66% of the games the MIC lost were to other MIC teams Of 59 instances where a MIC team lost to a non-MIC team, the following teams won: Avon 8 (Pike 4 times), Bloomington South 7 (Center Grove 5 times 1997-2006), Fishers 5, and Cathedral 4 (LN and LC both in 2015 and 2016) Surprising teams that knocked out MIC teams were Lafayette Jeff (2002), Noblesville (2000), Northrop (1999), and Homestead (1998)over Carmel; Columbus East (2010), Columbus North (2008), and Terre Haute North (2005) over Center Grove; and Richmond over Warren Central (1997) In the last 9 years since Pike and LC joined the MIC, a MIC team has won every year, 75% of the MIC losses were to other MIC teams In that period MIC teams lost to non-MIC teams only 14 times; 4 were Cathedral and 8 were HCC teams (Avon, Fishers, Brownsburg, Zionsville); Penn had the other 2 The MIC domination of the playoffs has existed for 20+ years but has definitely been greater the past 9 seasons.

The ones I talk understand it. Many of them take it very seriously but also express frustration in seeing crews they like not being able to advance. I believe starting this year they only saw the crews that worked games at their school in the last 3 years (including this year). There are still flaws with that I'm sure you'll address in your next post, but it at least removed the mass of "friendly" votes some crews would get because they know a lot of ADs, especially because they have had success on the basketball side. Most of the crews who previously advanced deep would get 80+ votes while most crews only got 20-30 votes. Those extra 50+ vote are usually all 5s which greatly increases your average. It's a completely unscientific analysis and mostly anecdotal.

Most coaches I've talked with do not like the voting process. I'm not sure they are bought in entirely to having the voice they do.

This is a common complaint and a little myopic. Of the 9 crews working their first sectional final, only 1 is from Central Indiana and they actually worked a sectional final last year with 3 from southern Indiana and 5 from northern Indiana. It may appear that central Indiana crew advance more than others but one third of the licensed officials are from central Indiana. About one third of the assigned crews are from Indy metro so fairly standard representation. This year I count 17 Indy metro crew but I had to include Pendleton, Shelbyville, and Greenfield in that count. You could argue Indy metro is under represented based on percentage of officials. The Region has 5 with 3 from Valpo alone. I also count 4 from the Evansville area and 5 from Fort Wayne. The rest are scattered from around the state. There are no perfect systems. No matter what is done the crews who don't advance will feel slighted. Having the coach vote being the primary basis for the rating though is probably the worst method. I think the reason the IHSAA does it is because it's easy and don't require significant effort. The observer program has been a nice addition, but the fact it has little or no impact on your ability to advance is frustrating. Our crew hasn't advanced as far as we would like and we've been told by several observers we should advance as far as possible, but I have learned to control the things we can control. There is no reason for the IHSAA to change their method because they are generally getting good crews working in the later rounds. This seems to have improved over the past several years. I understand those who say we will lose officials over the rating system, but as another official told me if the system is changed the same number of officials will feel slighted. It may just be a different group. There are only so many spots. I like to hear they are holding back returning state final crews to give more crews an opportunity to work a sectional final. This isn't necessarily to give them extra points in the rating system but to make more crews eligible to advance next year. There are 9 new crews eligible for the regional round next year. As many as 6 of them wouldn't have been eligible if they used the 2020 state final crews. There have also been crews assigned this year who didn't work the previous week. I'm wondering if that is also intentional to give more crews changes to work. I have heard the same rumor Yucca mentioned. Curious to see if it happens. There is no favoritism or politicking taking place. There is a flawed rating system and the IHSAA follows those numbers to place crews in games. You can only manipulate it by adding members to your crew that can give you more tournament experience votes or making the referee be someone who advances deep in the basketball tournament. Otherwise you are at the mercy of how the vote turns out each year.

Hard to say without being there. Official probably had but gaffed on the flag and whistle at the time. He maybe went to R to explain what he had and that he failed to throw his flag. If they decide during the discussion that he should have killed it and it was definitely a foul they probably could drop a flag but it's more of a formality at that point. If this is what happened a possible discussion included the question "are you absolutely certain you had him in the neutral zone before the snap because this is not going to look good if we do this?" But it's better to look bad and be right. This is just one hypothetical.

It doesn't matter how many ball boys you have. It's more about how many bags to do you have to keep the balls dry. A smart team will have multiple balls checked before the game and keep many of them someplace where they'll stay dry. I would take some to the locker room and bring them back at halftime. Or have a case that will stay dry and put it under a tent many teams seems to have on the sideline.

The video wouldn't play for me, but if the slot guy moved up before the snap and got set then the formation is legal. He's covered which is legal. He just can't go downfield if there is a legal forward pass that crosses the neutral zone. Agree with Yucca that the R has no responsibility for counting the number of backs on any play. Almost always at least 1 or 2 of the backs are receivers outside the tackles. This is 100% on the wings. We don't have a signal for confirming both wings have 4 in the backfield. We have a signal if one of them has 5 in the backfield (tap flag). If they both have 4 there is no reason to do anything. In this case they would signal each other they both have 4 as neither had a flag per what's been reported. This post is a good example of why still photos often can't be used to determine if a foul has been committed. There was additional movement after this photo and before the snap which potentially changes the legality of the formation. You can share thoughts with a lot of caveats.

At the point of this photo I would consider this to be an illegal formation if the ball is snapped. We have no idea what the formation was at the snap though. One challenge here is the near wing may not see both of the backs near the interior linemen. The wing on the top has no idea if the slot is being ruled on or off. I've seen similar formations and the slot receiver is either supposed to be on the LOS intentionally being covered up or the end on the other side of the formation.

Some years the observers are asked to vote and some years they aren't. Some years when they vote their vote is factored in. We've had observer votes appears when we weren't observed by that observer. I love and respect the observer program, but it has little or impact on your rating and little or no impact on your advancement. We've been observed twice in a tournament game and given a 5 but didn't work the following week. Why would they observe us if they knew in advance we wouldn't have another game. There is a ton of potential for the observer program to have a greater input on crew ratings. The risk there though is many of the observers know and have worked with many of the crews they are observing. There is a potential for favoritism in that process if the rating has more value.

We generally work at the same pace regardless of how fast the team wants to go. The ball is placed and ready for play with 28-32 seconds on the play clock. Very rarely is a team ready to go when I step away. Some are faster than others after that, but very rarely is the ball snapped above 25 seconds. When most coaches are asking that question they are more worried about having a very slow crew.

In some cases yes, but not as much as some people think. It will probably have a bigger impact now that they've limited votes to crews you've seen in the last 3 years. That will likely compress the difference the coach vote portion will have between crews. I do think some weight needs to be given to those crews who have worked late in the tournament previously. That has to mean something.

That's the only time we've worked at Delta. I believe I was told later the visitors rarely go back to their locker room at halftime because of the distance. I'm not sure if they use the room you mentioned or just stayed on the field somewhere. Definitely not convenient. I checked our Hudl video and there were only 10 fouls called the entire game. Many were procedural (2 false starts, 1 illegal sub, 1 kick out of bounds, 1 illegal shift).

I've never heard that caveat and from what I've seen it doesn't exist. It's based soley on the history of the crew chief and their history of advancement as a crew chief. There have been instances where the crew chief had worked a state final previously but now have a completely different crew. Because of that the IHSAA considers them a "new" crew rather than a returning crew. I can see the logic in that, especially since it's been several years since that crew chief worked a state final. I know two of the four consisted of officials who had never worked a state final and didn't have a lot of the advantages many of the other state final crew have (i.e. educators, former coaches, highly rated basketball/baseball officials). However they were mostly younger, fit and mechanically very solid crews who work a lot of big games in the Indy area. So it can be done. But it's rare.

I agree this portion of the process is not a major differentiator, but it does play a bigger factor than you are implying for crews that consist of 3 more members who worked the state final previously. You'll eventually get into the new/returning aspect of this for the later rounds but ultimately you are either "competing" with crews who have worked a state final or those who have not. 50% of the crews working regional and beyond fall either side of that difference. Most of the crews who feel slighted by the process are on the "new" side of that. The only way a crew gets all 50 points is if they have at least 3 officials who have worked a state final previously. If they've worked a semi-state they start with 49, regional 48, most of the rest 47. That 3-point difference can make a huge difference between crews who work a second round and sectional final. The crews getting regional, semi-state, and state final assignments are usually in the 48-50 range and have a little head start. This makes it easier for the "new" crews who have state final experience start that advancement faster. There are other factors which you'll get to later I'm sure, but I wanted to share my observations as well Many of the crews that don't get assignments or only get 1 round have multiple officials with less experience or fail to attend the required meetings or fail the test. The fact some crews have a head start isn't what is preventing them from advancing. There is a large group of officials stuck in the 2nd round and sectional final that have a hard time getting beyond those levels largely because their "competition" are those new crews that have multiple members with state final experience. It's not uncommon for 2 or 3 of the 3 "new" crews to have state final experience and not truly be new. Last year was a refreshing change. First, there were 4 new crews, and I believe 3 of them were truly officials working their first state final. 3+68/7

I was an official for that game. If they had a coach on the field communicating with the team he didn't do a very good job. We waited until the time expired and didn't see anyone coming in the distance so two of our officials started for the locker room. Near the back of the building we ran into two coaches walking toward the field. We told them they were already late for the second half and they were surprised. One of them ran back to the locker room with the official to get the team. So it was close to 20 minutes after halftime started and 5 minutes after the time on the clock expired before the team left the locker room. Mississinewa had an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty at the end of the first half so with the foul for coming out late, Delta was kicking off from the +30 to start the second half. We were surprised they didn't try an onside kick since Mississinewa would still have poor field position if they recovered it. That was one of the most miserable weather nights I've worked with temps in the 40s with strong winds and a cold rain. It was Halloween too as I recall. Mississinewa had a good team that year, but it was obvious the players were miserable with the weather.

Pike shows you can't take any team in the MIC lightly. LC gave Carmel a close game as well. A bad MIC team is still a really good team.

Did you have a situation where the crew ruled touchback? I hear that a couple times each season and the crew doesn't realize they got it wrong. If they did it would be considered an inadvertent whistle and the intercepting team can either take the result of the play at the time of the whistle (touchback in this case) or replay the down. They will likely take the result.

Fair is such a subjective term though. Generally in any assignment system I've seen those who don't advance consider the system unfair. States that use observers or association assigners for the post-season are accused of picking their friends or being an old-boys club. That doesn't exist in our system because a mass of people are voting for a mass of crews. A number is assigned to your crew based on those criteria and that number is used to a fault. There is some popularity involved, but it's not a small group of people picking the people they want. They kind of do go through the same process. Just like any new crew they are only eligible for a sectional final the next year. The one difference is they have a little head start on points because of past tournament experience. That's generally not why they advance further though. The bigger reason is because they often get 80-100 votes and you get maybe 20-30. The vast majority of those extra votes are going to be 5s because they are friendly votes from people who know them from various ways (other sports, school administrators, association leaders, assigners, etc.). That increases their rating much more than the 50 the other crew got for previously working a state final. It will be interesting to see if limiting the number of votes this year has an impact for some crews. Don't consider the advancement of your crew as an actual assessment of the time and effort you put into the season and quality of your performance. That's not what the current system is doing. Control what you can control and be happy for those who get to advance. They are working just as hard as you trying to be the best crew they can be. I'm not a fan of the current system at all, but I can't do much to change it.

The crew was notified the game was cancelled but Logansport is trying to find an opponent. I agree Concordia may be a good option.

Good stuff. That is essentially what we do. If a team doesn't indicate if they are taking a knee at the end of the first half or within 8 points at the end of the game, but they get in victory formation. I assume your guidance would be to do nothing? Treat it like a regular play?