JustRules

Agree with Bob. It's a very severe penalty to eject a player from a HS game. I also don't think it's as big of an issue in HS as it is in college. We get maybe 1 or 2 per season. I don't see it as a major issues that needs to be addressed with something more punitive.

Beef House steak = bus granola bars and cheese crackers I may need to work a game there sometime so I can try the Beef House!

Since we are rarely mic'd up for HS games you are often left in the dark on what happened on some plays. There are times we really wish we had a mic to explain what happened.

Then you are fine! Just another strange variation of this play. It's why it's so important to understand the what of the rules and then be able to piece it together on the field so you know how to rule.

A common intentional formation some teams will use is to have the T as an end and two eligible numbers on the other side with one covering the other. Let's say you have the following numbers on the LOS: 82 22 54 57 62 68 71 This is a legal formation. 82 and 22 may be out wide with other players all tight. By definition #22 is an interior lineman even though he's split wide with the eligible number 82.

Exactly! In (a) it's 1st and 10 for K at the K41 and (b) 1st and 10 for K at the K28 (previous spot). It would be almost impossible for either to happen though where there weren't ineligible receivers downfield. If the pass itself was first touched beyond the NZ you'll have a flag. I believe you would have a 5 yard penalty from the previous spot and replay the down. 4th and 30 from the K23.

Thank you Bob! Imagine this scenario. K 4th and 25 from the K28. The ball is topped by R47 just after it leaves the kicker's leg. R21 sees it coming down at the K33 and attempts to field it. He muffs it and the ball bounds back to the K7 where it is recovered by the kicker. I don't think the R coach is going to be too happy when he finds out it's K's ball 1st and 10 at the K7. You have a kick touched by R beyond the NZ (I made it well beyond to avoid any confusion with the expanded NZ) and recovered by K.

Just to add some fun to this, if the ball is recovered behind the neutral zone after being touched by R beyond the neutral zone, K still has all their original options. They can run, pass, or kick the ball. If they run or pass it will still be their ball on the next down because of the touching by R beyond the neutral zone (assuming no other change of possession happens). For example, if the person who recovers throws a pass that is incomplete, it will be 1st and 10 for K at the previous spot! This is assuming the extremely unlikely scenario where K doesn't have ineligible linemen downfield and the pass is thrown beyond the neutral zone. If that happens R would accept the penalty enforced 5 yards from the previous spot and replay 4th down. This is often discussed and debated among officials and a good rules quiz question but extremely unlikely to occur.

It's a weird one that rarely happens (I've only seen it 2 or 3 times in all my years of officiating). Officials will sometimes get confused because it's legal on a punt if there is no R player in position to make the catch. If I had to bet it's probably called correctly 50% of the time it happens so you experience is not surprising. It's always an interesting sequence of emotions when it is called correctly. The coach from elated when his team executes to disappointed when he finds out it's not allowed to angry when he learns not only does the other team get the ball, but they get 15 yards tacked on for a penalty as well.

Let me try to explain this without lawyer-speak. 😎 K can legally touch the ball if it has touched the ground and traveled 10 yards OR has touched a receiving team player.

I would also like to clarify the waist of the snapper is where it in this play, not where it would be if he was standing up where his feet are. You will have situations (especially on punts) where they are so far back you will go directly to foul an skip the warning.

One potential fact is there have been a lot more positive cases but the person remained asymptomatic and were never tested. If that were true the good news is those individuals don't seem to be creating a major outburst to those who are more susceptible and more likely to become critically ill from the virus. The important thing is we have to keep doing what we are doing to make sure this continues. I didn't expect the season to start, and I definitely didn't expect the tournament to start. Now I'm cautiously optimistic. I am curious to see if some districts are as strict with contact tracing and quarantining when playoff games are at stake. It's actually a benefit of the Indiana all-in tournament process. You don't lose anything related to the post season if you miss a couple games during the season. Thank you and good luck to those who have helped make this happen.

A group of universities and conferences that formed the CFP organization. They are all members of NCAA, but this organization is separate. The NCAA as an organization makes nothing from the college football playoff. Some of their members do though.

Not unanimous but like 12-2. I was also told the presidents of 2 universities are physicians who will not be swayed. I did not verify that, but if true it could be a factor. Presidents look at athletics sometimes very differently than other administrators. We'll see how it goes. I don't know how far the vote has to go the other way to reverse this. If it's 7-5 or 8-4 is that enough to have a season?

I'll be curious to see how this turns out. From what I've heard the presidents are still very much opposed to having a season so the threshold to convince them to change their mind has to be very high. One approach they could make though is to start the season in October and change course if the other conferences do start to have issues with spread attributed to football.

Over a 10-year period on more expensive than maintaining a grass field from everything I've heard. And the fact smaller schools can now justify continues to prove that point. The up front cost is much more so you have to be able to do that, but the long term savings offsets it. The replacement cost when the first turf wears out (seems to be 9-10 years) is less while the ongoing cost of maintaining a grass field doesn't change so the ROI is probably even better for future iterations.

If it stays to direct answers of the questions without opinion or conjecture I think this topic is fine so far. It definitely has the potential to go a different direction but hopefully it won't. The follow up question I have is if the students in quarantine were tested or just monitored for symptoms? It's entirely possible some of them would be positive if tested but remain asymptomatic.

I would expect contact tracing would be minimal with opponents unless you have oline/dline. You don't have a lot of sustained close contact with someone else other than there. Everything else is in very small bursts for seconds at a time. When we watch the Hudl video an entire game sometimes only has 20-30 minutes of actual activity. It's reasonable to think two players didn't have 15 minutes of close proximity. But I'm not a medical expert so I defer to those who are. Just tell me when and where my game is and I'll be there.

Looks like Tindley http://scoreboard.homestead.com/football/logsTwinLakes.htm#loaded

When a site has https:// for the domain they have added a security certificate to the site. I'm guessing either this site doesn't have one or the one they had has expired. It doesn't mean that suddenly anyone can get access to your login information. But without the current certificate it could be more at risk. Think of it like leaving your car unlocked in your driveway in the country. Yes, someone could break into it easily if they knew it was there, but it's also not likely. Someone with a lot more IT security knowledge can explain it better than me.

If you had the pick of all the 1A-3A teams and the opportunity for them to work together for several weeks to put in a full offense and defense, absolutely. It's a little different comparison, but many of the D3 schools are loaded with 4A and blow kids and they would easily beat the top high school teams in the state.

If both schools sign off on it then it's generally approved. A large percentage of all transfers every year are approved with no sitting out. It's very rare for the IHSAA to step in when both schools sign off, but it does happen. The Gordon situation at North Central a couple years ago was an example. They must have had compelling inside information on that one. They may be aware of WHY these transfers are actually happening but chose to not interfere since both schools signed off. If I understand how the process generally works, this is really no different.

The system is intended to have the worst team in one class to be better than the best team from the next class. That's a flaw in your expectation. There will always be teams in a lower class that can beat teams in a higher class. Just because you have a larger number of students doesn't mean you will always better. In a macro sense it will be true but not in a micro sense. Sagarin isn't the best measure and may be skewed a little because of their win Friday, but Pioneer would be the 18th ranked team out of 32 in 6A.

As Bobref said there are no restrictions on kicking team players go downfield. But if the lineman released like a normal punt they are likely downfield too far for the punter to legally throw a pass beyond the neutral zone. I believe most rugby punts are done to give the kicking team more time to get downfield for coverage. The punter may decide to run it, but he's likely not going to throw it unless they keep all interior linemen at the LOS.

I expect we'll see things like this all year. Games getting scheduled or cancelled the day before or day of is crazy!