JustRules

This rule change has nothing to do with this part of the rule. It's only changing the requirement from a minimum of 7 linemen to no more than 4 backs. It's ultimately the same thing assuming there are 11 players on offense, but it removes the foul if there are 10 or fewer players and the missing players are linemen. The example Bob gives above is often referred to as No-Man's Land. Receivers and wing backs are very often in this position and it's technically a foul for illegal formation. But the philosophy is as long as there is noticeable separation between the player on the line and the player who is a back, nobody is gaining an advantage and we consider him legal. This is a great example of where you officiate WITH the rule book and not BY the rule book. If you watch the NFL and to a lesser extent NCAA, they refer to a "blade of grass separation". If there is even the tiniest separation by the back then he's legal.

This change was made because under the previous rule if you only had 10 players on offense with 4 backs and 6 linemen you were guilty of an illegal formation even though you were at a disadvantage of having not enough players. This change removes that as a foul and matches the NCAA rule. What both versions are trying to prevent is lining up 10 of your players at ends or backs so they are all eligible. They included the "minimum of 5 on the line" even though that's already covered by the numbering requirement. They really didn't need to mention it here but they did and it's creating a lot of confusion. You could legally snap with 6 players if you wanted (5 lineman and a back to receive the snap). From an officiating mechanics standpoint, wings were usually counting backs anyway. As long as the R/U confirmed there were 11 players, they only had to make sure there were no more than 4 backs. If the R/U counted 10 players, then the wings would make sure there were no more than 3 backs. Now the wings don't have to worry about how many players there are on offense for this formation rule.

I agree completely. We don't have a single source for interpretation here to provide that consistency other than "what does the book say?" It's tough to do that at a statewide high school level so that is not a knock on the IHSAA. Some states are just more structured than others. Unless we have a commissioner focused on officiating only it's very difficult to get to that level of involvement with rules and interpretations.

Yes for NCAA and NFL but not for NFHS. I believe every state that has a mercy rule doesn't stop the clock when the runner goes out of bounds once they are in the mercy rule so there would be no need to start it. It never stopped. And in the NFL and NCAA you'll notice the clock starts well before the ball is even marked. They are usually winding it with 34-36 seconds left on the play clock and the ball isn't usually spotted until 28-32.

I believe it will be reminding everyone that low blocks can only happen in the free blocking zone by players on the line of scrimmage in the free blocking zone at the snap and while the ball is still in the free blocking zone. There may be a clarification on shot gun situations. Technically low blocks should not be allowed in shot gun because the ball definitely leaves the free blocking zone before anyone could initiate a low block. But the case book has allowed for them to happen as long as they are immediate. That usually also includes only blocking a guy head up or the adjacent gap to the blocker. If you have to reach for the defender head up on the guy next to you, that is not immediate. Some states make it even more specific in that you can only low block in shot gun when the offensive lineman starts in a 3-point or 4-point stance. The logic being if I'm in that stance I'm already low to begin with. I heard rumor there could be an editorial change to add that officially to the NFHS rule or case book which could be the source of this POE. Nothing has been released other than what we see in the press releases.

With the outcry from some of my fellow officials in other states having to switch to the 40-second play clock ("it's a solution looking for a problem") I'm thinking several Indiana people could become consultants on how to do this! They have all the same concerns we did here. "We have volunteer clock operators who won't figure this out" (I think it's actually easier). "Our chain crew guys are slow and won't get there in time" (It's really not that much different in pace if you were doing it right already which they all claimed they were). "We have horrible ball boys" (to be fair some states don't allow you to change balls for any reason during a drive so they are chasing down those long incomplete passes for the next play...that's an easy change to ball mechanics). "The offense will be able to go so much faster" (they will still only go as fast as the ball and the officials are ready which is still about the same time; the advantage is on the back end with the end of the play clock being consistent). "The umpire is going to get run over because he's slow" (very rarely is a team ready to go immediately after the umpire steps back). I'm glad to see it passed too!

I believe every state that has a mercy rule starts it in the 3rd quarter. Some will allow it in the second quarter with a higher point differential. At most the clock only stops using an acronym of TIPS (time outs, injury, possession changes, scores). NFL clock rules would also stop for incomplete passes and runners going out of bounds. The main difference between NFL and NFHS on clock status is it doesn't stop on 1st down and it starts on the ready when a runner goes out of bounds outside of end of half situations.

Yes. Pagination now works as expected. Thanks!

I haven't seen final wording on that, but I believe the intent is to clarify what they mean with the 2-yard belt. There has always been some debate on whether the offensive player had to be engaged in a block to expand to the neutral zone and not be downfield. There are 3 statements in the rule. One mentions they are allowed to be 2 yards downfield and the other mentions they be 2 yards if they engage in the neutral zone and then go 2 yards. I believe they were going to try to clarify which one of those is the correct interpretation. If they go with the latter, RPO just got a lot harder to run because your blockers will have to engage with a defender at the LOS or stay at the LOS.

It's also probably not called as much as it should be if you follow the HS rule. If a QB throws the ball intentionally out of bounds but well over the head of a receiver. It should be intentional grounding. If he intentionally throws it at the feet of a receiver it should be intentional grounding. There is no 'in the area" provision in the HS rule. Most referees give the QB the benefit of the doubt though. We had one last year where the QB threw the pass to the track 30 yards downfield and we had flagged intentional grounding. Their coaches went crazy, and I understand why. The 3 previous crews they had probably didn't call it.

I believe something is proposed most years, but the committee feels the defense should be rewarded more for a good play then just an incomplete pass. Robert Faulkens is our rules committee member so he can provide more insight to the details of the discussions.

Some states have a 6-quarter limit. That would be a pretty simple change that could probably help. The only benefit of the no-mercy rule in Indiana is the coaches and officials can do almost anything they want when they want as long as they agree. We had 2 games this past season where the second half took exactly 25 minutes (2 12-minute quarters and a 1 minute quarter break). Most mercy rules stop the clock for at least turnovers, injuries, scores, and penalty administration. We had one game where a player was on the field injured for 5 minutes and the clock kept running. The strange one we had this year was the kicking team was lined up for a kickoff following a TD when time expired. He had plenty of time to kick it, but he chose to let the game end that way.

The definition of tripping is intentionally using the lower part of your leg or foot to trip an opponent. Previously the runner was excluded but now they are. It very rarely happened when it was legal so I doubt we'll see it now either.

I'm glad the 40-second play clock is here to stay. I may try to pick up a consulting fee from the officials in other states who don't think it will work for them for whatever reason. The folks in the press box probably appreciate the numbering changes as much as anyone. When we review video it's often impossible to see numbers and we really don't have a major need to see them. Yes, you can now legally snap with 9 players. I think they confused this by saying at least 5 linemen and no more than 4 backs. Essentially what this rule is doing is no longer making it a foul if the offense only has 10 players and they are missing a lineman. They are already disadvantaged because they are short a player. Why add a penalty on top of it? The 5 linemen part really isn't necessary because it's already covered with the numbering requirements (5 players on the line numbered 50-79). I had my first illegal bat last year and we ended up with 2 on the season. Both were during free kicks and the player was trying to keep the ball from going out of bounds. But I agree they are both rare. The rest are fine and straight forward and don't happen very often. No different than the interpretation you have to make today for non-runners. If the defender lifts his leg as the runner is going through the hole or he does a slide tackle to trip him, it's a foul. It didn't happen very often when it was legal so I don't expect it to happen often now.

I reported it above and DK said he's going to look into it. He's not sure if it's something he can fix.

Based on the administrators and families I've talked with in Carmel, this is not even close to a factor in their decision. If they had 2 or even 3 high schools in the district, they would still likely be very competitive in most activities. They have a building with enough space, lower levels apparently show small class sizes coming up, and they have a great reputation with their current school district. Why should incur the cost of building an entirely new school and then be well under capacity for their current building?

The defensive rule about rushing is interesting. I had not seen that one yet. A key will be in the definition. It says a defender can't rush from more than 2 yards outside the widest offensive lineman. By rule there should be at least 7 offensive linemen on most plays. A receiver wide on the line is a lineman just like the player (commonly referred to as a guard) lined up next to the snapper (commonly referred to as the center). Does that mean someone could rush from 2 yards outside of him? Or more likely inside of him but more than 2 yards wider than the nearest lineman (commonly referred to as the tackle)? Or maybe they just consider the 5 interior linemen (not including the ends)? What about an end lineman aligned directly next to the tackle (commonly referred to as a tight end)? Does the 2 yards start with the tackle or tight end? If it's the TE, what if that player steps out 2-3 yards in either a 2-point or 3-point stance. Does that change anything? I'm sure the rules get much more specific in defining those things than this article. It will definitely be interesting to see. I used prefaced several of my comments with "commonly referred to" because those positions are not listed in the rule book. A player starts as either a lineman or a back. The linemen are are either ends (2) or interior linemen (usually 5). The ends are often WR or TEs, but that's irrelevant to the rule book. The snapper is the only interior lineman further designated and obviously refers to the person who snaps the ball. The QB also isn't mentioned. He's just the back who receives the snap. If the throws a legal forward pass he then becomes a passer. Until then he's just a runner. Officials obviously use the commonly known positions when communicating with coaches and players, but when it comes to rule knowledge, it's critical to know those definitions because they are referenced as such throughout the rule book and have very distinct meanings.

The IFOA did an excellent video a couple years ago to help recruit videos. It's always good to share in conversations like this. Especially if you are a HS senior or current college student, please watch this and ask if you are ready to walk away from the football field yet. The IFOA can help you get started! It's a great way to make some side money during college and if you find out you love it you have tapped into a great network of people and a great avocation you can do for many years. You could even make it to D1 or the NFL! Indiana has produced several NFL officials including Region native and Purdue grad John Parry, who worked the Super Bowl last weekend!

People often think of LN as a weak MIC conference team because their football team has struggled. Their football team is still pretty good. It's just hard to overcome in the MIC. I believe they have around 17 sports and typically win sectional in 8-12 sports each year. Their athletic programs are doing just fine overall.

This would be awesome and I know several other schools who have considered this. Please contact the IFOA if you need any curriculum help with football. I'm sure they would be happy to help provide it. Definitely connect with your local officiating association (likely Western out of Lafayette). I'm sure they would provide assistance as well.

Hey coaches...do you have any funny stories about your get back coach?

When I use the page numbers to navigate within a topic, my screen does a strange scrolling and then displays a page with no content. I have to go back to the topic listing and pick the next page. Does anyone else have this same issue?

It's there prerogative to have the one high school or multiple high schools. I doubt athletic success is a major factor. Even if they had 2 schools I'm sure both would be extremely competitive in most sports. The drawback is fewer students get an opportunity to compete at the varsity level. There is only 1 starting QB, 1 starting PG, 1 leadoff hitter, 1 #1 singles tennis player. They have several swimmers who would qualify for state at other schools, but can't get into the varsity heats for Carmel. I'm not a huge fan of forcing districts to split into multiple schools. That should be a local decision.

No. I don't pay for online forums. I would understand if the administrators did this, but I would likely not participate if this was done.

I don't believe this training has anything to do with how coaches or administrators treat officials specifically. It looks to be more about gender and sexual orientation; race and ethnicity; disabilities; religious tolerance; unconscious bias; and diversity and inclusion. If officials fall into those categories then yes it would include treatment of officials.