JustRules

It does matter but 90% of the comments I've seen arguing about this call are wrong in referencing the applicable rules. If the Danville players had been 5-10 yards closer then their enforcement was 100% correct. It was that close. The outrage from Danville would have been the same in that instance though. That's my point. The fact the crew would have been correct if they had ruled illegal substitution, enforced the penalty, and still ended the game, the outrage would have been similar from the Brebeuf faithful. The same rule ignorance would apply. I've seen comments from fans saying the crew ruled 5 minutes after the game was over (it was 90 seconds). I've seen comments that the runner was down before the ball came out (it was clearly out). I've seen comments saying the QB took his helmet off while the play was still live (it was after the play was over which was perfectly fine). I've seen comments that the whistle blew before the Danville players came on the field (they were on the field while the ball was still live). I've seen comments that the game was over when the whistle blew (the whistle only notified everyone the play was over but not the game). Video clearly shows all of those are false, but people are adamant they happened. Ultimately the crew made an incorrect judgement on the location of the players or the wrong penalty enforcement for a unique situation they may have never seen.

I watched the broadcast and they showed the crew within 40 seconds of the down ending. There was no personnel from either team involved in a huddle. The coaches were near and trying to get involved but the crew did a good job keeping them out and moving away from them and the coaches complied. Just because the AD may have threatened the crew with calling Faulkens doesn't mean that had any influence in their discussion. Agreed an immediate flag would have better, this is an unusual and whoever saw the players on the field (most likely the U or B) wasn't exactly sure there was a foul that would extend the game so wanted to confer with the crew to make sure. Can you imagine the anger the other way if they signaled illegal substitution or unsportsmanlike conduct and correctly still ended the game? Based on the video, that probably would have been the correct call, but it wouldn't have changed the outrage from the game. It would have only changed which team was screaming.

Illegal substitution is also a non-player foul and probably the better call than UNS, but both get the same result. Otherwise I agree with you. This doesn't happen that often and the crew had to piece together what they believe happened. Maybe 1 or 2 officials saw the players come on the field, and they were also focused on action of the play itself while that happened. They wanted nothing more than to get it right and believe based on the information they had at the time they got it right. When crazy plays like that happen, we sometimes get crazy results. Danville stays on the sideline until the whistle blows and none of this is being discussed. I get why they thought the play was over and got excited. But they are not 100% without responsibility here.

They had 2 timeouts but your point is still valid. They take 3 knees and the game is over.

These would only offset if they were both dead ball fouls. The ball would next be snapped at the succeeding spot (end of the run).

Lance does a really good job as an analyst and tries hard to understand the rules. But unless you study and review the rules like an official does, you will never know them as well as you could. He stated on the broadcast the clock starts again when the ball is spotted after a runner goes out of bounds. That is nowhere in the HS rule book, but it is in the NCAA rule book outside of the last 2 minutes of the half. And the play mentioned above was in the last 2 minutes so the clock wouldn't have started in NCAA either in that situation.

You'll often see officiating documentation say it's not a loss of down, but a loss of the right to repeat the down. But Bobref is correct. If you have achieved the line to gain even after the penalty has been enforced, it will still be first down. Similar to if a team does this during a punt return. You wouldn't start the series 2nd and 10.

And it's not called offsides in high school. It's encroachment. Several fouls that are considered live ball fouls in NCAA or NFL prevent the ball from being snapped or free kicked in HS.

We see from video that the players coming off the bench didn't get close enough to participate or influence the play. But in the heat of the moment as the play unfolded, the official who saw them come off (assume the U based on the discussion) may not have been able to ascertain exactly how close they got, because he's also focused on the action in the middle of the field. Or from his perspective they were close enough, and he was hoping to get confirmation from his crew. At that point in their discussion they can only rely on what their eyes told their brain and they can recall. This can sometimes be so much easier when viewing multiple times on video from the comfort of the couch. I believe there were multiple instances where there were ineligible players downfield so it's understandable he got crossed on the play I was talking about.

They had to rekick the try because encroachment is a dead ball foul prior to the snap so the snap never happened. The referee made a mistake when he initially signaled the foul, declination, and then that the try was good. Someone corrected him quickly and he made an updated signal that included replaying the try. Your 2nd and 3rd questions go together. Most crews have radios to communicate with each other. He was queueing his mic to ask for clarification from a member of his crew. The ear pieces are attached to the radio obviously. It can be a great form of efficient communication for the crew during dead ball periods. Many crews have been using radios probably for 6 or 8 years or more. Definitely not new.

We must be talking about a different play. This was in the last minute when Danville down 35-28. The guy who caught the TD was the #2 receiver from the top side. The announcers thought it was illegal touching because he had stepped out of bounds, but he clearly didn't do that. He was covered which is why the H originally signaled ineligible downfield. But they correctly ruled illegal touching, 5 yards previous spot and loss of down.

When Bobby Cox was the football commissioner, the crew didn't work if the R couldn't work. Robert has been a little more flexible in that. I'm aware of several instances where the R was unavailable for whatever reason (i.e. injury or personal conflict), but the crew was able to replace them. I'm not aware of a crew had a game pulled or never assigned because the R wasn't available, but it's definitely possible. It's my understanding the R in this case was an existing member of the crew. I have no idea how much R experience they had. The sub on the crew would have been replacing him in his normal position. It happens every week with multiple crews in the tournament. If they wanted to get another white hat to take his spot, they could have found one easily, but for some reason they chose to do it the way they did.

If you are referring to one that brought back a TD near the end of regulation, that was a foul because the inside receiver was covered up by the wide guy. If he was supposed to be off then they were guilty of an illegal formation because he would have been the 5th in the backfield. The H dropped a flag back toward the LOS and then signaled to the R it was ineligible downfield. There must have been a brief discussion that resulted in the correct call of illegal touching when the R realized the covered receiver downfield was the one who caught the ball. Good job the crew on that play to get the right call. The yardage enforcement is the same, but illegal touching also caries a loss of down which they did.

If there were appeals, I doubt they would win if what the crew ultimately ruled was illegal participation. That's a judgement call. It's no different than appealing a holding call or a pass interference call. If an organization were to allow appeals, they create a bad precedent if they allow appeals of judgement calls. If the crew ruled illegal substitution or unsportsmanlike conduct (two different options also possible in this type of situation), that would be a different situation. As Bob explained, both are non-player fouls and treated as dead ball fouls. Thus they would have not extended the OT period and the game would have been over. If they ruled either of these and then allowed one more down, that would be a mis-application of the rule. I'm not sure what they ruled because I was told the signal the referee gave was illegal forward pass. I assume that was because the referee wasn't sure of the correct signal. It obviously wasn't an illegal forward pass. One possible conversation they had was if the actions of the Danville team was illegal substitution (IS) or illegal participation (IP). Both would involve players coming on the field while the ball was still live. The difference is if the bench players influence or participated in the play while the ball was live. They obviously didn't participate in the play, but if they influenced the play, then IP would be a valid judgement. They would need to rule that in order for Brebeuf to get another play. They had to make that decision based on they observed or remembered from the play. The referee would have no idea since they Danville players were behind him. The line of scrimmage of officials probably wouldn't have a strong opinion since they would be focused on the action around the ball. The umpire and back judge may have got a glimpse of the players coming on, but I'm not sure if they would be able to tell how close they get to the action. I hope that helps those understand what may have happened. Again, I have no idea what they actually ruled, and i have no idea what they discussed. It's definitely an unfortunate ending to an otherwise great game.

The play is ruled dead if the RUNNER still has possession of the ball when he loses his helmet. I just re-watched the play and he did not lose his helmet during the play. He took it off after the play was over thinking the game was over. That would not be a reason for a player to have to leave the game. If it's during the game it could be unsportsmanlike conduct for removing his helmet, but in those circumstances I would not flag him for it. Everyone thought the game was over at that point.

Exactly! No official has worked a perfect game. And not every official has a clear understanding of every rule. You can read a rule 1000 times and until it happens to you on the field, it's not going to committed for immediate retrieval in your memory when you need it. This example is pretty pretty straight forward, but a lot of people don't get all the nuances of penalty enforcement committed to memory if they haven't worked R. That's why I always encourage new officials to get some experience at R in their first season.

It could also be a situation where they just didn't think about the starting point and just went 15 without realizing they should have been half the distance. Not acceptable, but maybe just a lack of concentration rather than lack of rules knowledge. That is correct for NCAA enforcement unless the flag was within 15 yards of the LOS.

The main benefit for the schools is they only have to find half as many officials. Instead of Carroll hiring a crew of 4 for the freshman game they are hosting and Snider hiring a crew of 4 for the JV game they are hosting, they can do a double header and hire a crew of 4 to do both games. The pay from I hear is worth it for the official to do both games (assuming they are physically able), and collectively the schools don't have to find as many officials. Win win for both.

This is how many states do it. You qualify for the state tournament based on your district record. Seeding and qualifying is easy because everyone plays everyone so it's decided on the field. #4 from one district travels to #1 of the next district. and the highest seeded teams host each week. As someone else said, this does require the state to get involved in the schedule game for the district contests but that wouldn't be difficult if you had a formula and applied it to each district. The schools could then schedule their 3-4 non-district games (assuming 10-week seasons with 1 fewer tournament round). This would also likely result in a centralized assigning system for officials which also would not be a bad idea. It would eliminate the occasional scrambling for schools or crews to find last minute officials for games. Fans would be surprised how many games are almost cancelled or postponed on Friday afternoon because they don't have enough officials.

Likely an association having an additional meeting that isn't required by the IHSAA.

This is one of those things not specifically covered in the rule book. As you describe it though if the holder is making no attempt to continue the play and the defense has started to leave the field, it would be OK for the covering official to rule the play over. However, the defense/receiving team would get the ball 1st and 10 at the spot where the holder was when the down was declared over. I can't say if the crew handled the situation in your game correctly or applied good judgement, but it would be a judgement call on them. Ultimately this is something the crew should clear through the IHSAA though, as they are the ultimate rule interpreter for the state.

Carmel has a relatively down year but they are still a good football team that will beat a lot of other good 6A teams. Brownsburg can win in the tournament, but many of the 6A teams in Indy play really good teams each week, and it only takes one bad week to get beat. What Center Grove did winning 3 in a row is an amazing accomplishment. They could have won last year and could win this year. But there are a lot of other really good teams in their path. Just because they could lose in the sectional or regional doesn't mean they aren't a good team. Westfield has proven the last 3 years they are good enough to compete with the big boys and could be looking at 3 straight state titles coming into this year. There are probably 5 or 6 teams that could win state in 6A this year and it wouldn't surprise me.

Both plays clearly look to have been snapped at the 4. Not sure where you are seeing the ball was snapped at the 5.

If they don't have hashes marked on the field, the crew should place the ball 3 yards outside the hash if it's a hash spot.

The first thing I realized when I became an official was I had previously gotten most of my rules knowledge from announcers on games. And while they don't intentionally do it, they give out a lot of bad information. Many I know try to get it right and ask a lot of questions when scenarios happen. But if they don't know they are wrong they will continue to give bad information. This happens at all levels, even with the best announcers.