Bobref

FYI, the crew that had this game is on the 4A state final, their first. What do you want to bet that onside kick mechanics is a part of their pregame? 😂🤣

I discussed the holding calls in the postgame debrief of the crew. I can assure you, they are well aware of the proper components of a holding foul, including the fact that it has to have an impact on the outcome of the play.

Agreed, grabbing and restricting a pass receiver behind the line is holding.

Historically, I was very concerned with this issue. Then, in 2017, I was selected to work the North/South all star game in July. I was going to work back judge. I had never worked 7 man mechanics before, let alone as a back judge. And I hadn't worked as a 5 man back judge in many years. But I was pleasantly surprised at how easy it was to pick up the 7 man mechanics. There are some different coverages and keys, but there are also significant reductions in responsibilities simply because you have two extra officials. From that experience, I concluded that the advantages of working 7 officials greatly outweigh the potential complications of asking people to pick up some mechanics with which they are unfamiliar in the week before the game. Plainly speaking, it's just not that difficult.

The process that comes to mind is you take the 120 officials who worked a sectional final, and create an approved list of all of those officials with, say, at least 5 yrs. of tournament experience, and let each Regional crew choose 2 from that list.

I strongly favor the expansion of crews to 7 from the Regional level onward in the Tournament, for several reasons, both obvious and subtle. First, this sort of increased officiating presence is standard practice in some other sports. In basketball, they used 3 officials in their tournament long before it became standard in the regular season. It’s also been done for many years in baseball. Second, there really is no dispute that a 7-man crew provides superior coverage compared to the traditional 5-man crew. The Tournament is the IHSAA’s showcase event. Unfortunately, there have been a few embarrassing officiating failures in the past, including in the Finals. Better officiating coverage won’t completely eliminate mistakes, but should reduce their number. Finally, there’s a reason you probably haven’t considered, but which takes on increasing significance these days. Having increased opportunities for officials in the Tournament is a retention tool. That there is a shortage of football officials in Indiana is beyond dispute. Efforts to remedy that situation focus on recruiting new officials, and that’s appropriate. But retention of officials is equally part of that equation. We have well-qualified officials who are getting out of officiating because they are frustrated by what they perceive as barriers to advancement in the Tournament. There are 24 Regionals that currently use 120 officials. Expanding to 7 would provide Tournament opportunities for an additional 48 officials who would otherwise be sitting home that weekend. That’s 48 more officials who are reaching a level they otherwise would not. Increased opportunities in the Tournament provide a powerful incentive to stay in officiating.

While we don’t have the numbers to use 7, or even 6-man crews on Friday nights, by the time we get to the Regional level, we have adequate numbers of qualified officials to transition to 7-man crews. A number of states do this. Indiana also does this in other sports, e.g., baseball. In Major League Baseball they add two more umpires during the playoffs, so it certainly is not without precedent. Would you favor this, and why or why not?

I certainly acknowledge that my memory may not be accurate as to the timing. I was much more concerned, at the time and afterward, with the mechanics of the call and an understanding of why the line judge didn’t see it better, since I didn’t care who won the game.

I’ve been an official for 42 years, I’m a professional at being unbiased. And if I were, it wouldn’t be for Valpo. A 1 pt. loss to them my senior year ruined an otherwise perfect season.

There is a recent thread concerning use of video replay at the state finals. You should chime in there.

He’s talking about a single play early in the game last year in which a backward pass was incorrectly ruled an incomplete forward pass. Had it been ruled correctly, it likely would have been an Eastbrook recovery, and it’s possible they would have even scored on the play. The play has been dissected on the GID. It was the wrong call but, under the circumstances which, again, were discussed extensively, it was a difficult call. It was one play - a big play, no doubt - but only one play early in a game that ended up 34-20. The only people who can blame that outcome on officiating are either blindly biased fans, people unsophisticated in the ways of football, or people only interested in stirring the pot. Don’t know which category he belongs in. As far as selection of officials for the tournament is concerned, this document explains the process: http://www.ifoa.us/Resources/Documents/H-8 IHSAA Policy for Selection of Officials for Football Tournament Series AMENDED 71113.pdf If you have specific questions about the selection process, I’ll try to answer them. But it suffices to say that the process is quite controversial, and the subject of much debate in the officiating community, primarily because of what is viewed as disproportionate weight given to coaches’ rating of officials.

Disagree, certainly. “Absurd,” is a ... well, absurd overstatement. It’s an opinion. You have yours, I have mine. I had no rooting interest. I doubt you can say the same.

By my count, Valpo had 3 red zone possessions, 2 of them goal to go, in which they came away with 0 points. Dwenger’s defense deserves some credit for that, but from where I was standing - which was pretty close - Valpo shot themselves in the foot with penalties, bad decision-making, and poor execution. They should have won this game by a comfortable margin, say, 27-7 or so.

They better establish a running game. Because from what I saw last night, their passing game is not going to be of much help.

You’re talking about what has generally been characterized as “negligent infliction of emotional distress,” which was, traditionally, subject to the “impact rule.” Here’s something of a summary of the development of the rule ... and it’s exceptions. https://www.theindianalawyer.com/articles/29650-negligent-infliction-of-emotional-distress Here, I have no doubt that there’s a sufficient “impact” in the application of potentially unsterilized instrumentation to the patient’s body. The question becomes whether that is an impact that is objectively likely to cause emotional distress. The “distress” is the product of fear of infection. The incubation period of most infections is measured in days, not weeks or months. So, I think it’s highly unlikely a court would find that fear of infection from an inadequately sterilized instrument — that took place 6 months ago — would be objectively reasonable. Having said that, this is a pretty murky area. Now, if you have a patient who actually developed a nosocomial infection, i.e., hospital acquired, in connection with a procedure, that’s a whole different ballgame. But still very hard to prove. My opinion is that Goshen Hospital has more exposure of a regulatory nature, than from civil liability.

A kick ends when a player possesses the ball, or when it becomes dead by rule, e.g., goes out of bounds. So, on a punt, the receiving team gets the ball at the spot the kicking team possesses it. Since the kicking team player possessed the ball before the ball broke the plane of the goal line, the kick ended, and it was the receivers’ ball at that spot. Once the kick is possessed, everything that happens after that is irrelevant.

He was Valpo’s MVP, no doubt.

I agree that the effort by both teams was terrific. Execution, not so much. But a great atmosphere for football. I have always felt that the semistates are the best in HS football.

I beg to differ. I was on the field the entire game. That officiating crew had a fabulous game. Too bad they’re not eligible to work a final this year.

I actually thought the Valpo - Dwenger game, although characterized by great effort on the part of both teams, was pretty sloppy. Untimely penalties by both teams. Numerous trips into the red zone without scoring by both. Turnovers, etc. Either one of these teams would be cannon fodder for New Pal. And, for what it’s worth, the officiating crew had a very, very good game. Their first semistate, and I was very impressed.

Valpo line dominating on both sides of the ball.

I was there. I understand what you’re saying. I saw that play. And I saw the rest of the game, too. Just my opinion.

I have no experience with that variation of positioning, so I am reluctant to offer an opinion. Don’t look so shocked. 😂🤣 Seriously, I have also heard the opposite argument, back when the push for 3 officials in basketball started: more officials will call more fouls. From what I understand, it hasn’t worked out that way at all. For me, the bottom line is whether a change improves the chances that we’ll get more calls right. When I started working varsity football, we used 4 officials. When we moved to 5, the officiating got better. With the increased emphasis on the passing game and spreading the field, 5 officials simply aren’t enough anymore. 6 would be better, although there are still issues with 6 man mechanics. But for now, we simply don’t have enough officials to go to 6 on Friday nights, much less 7. And, of course, there would be pushback from schools who would have to spend more $$ on officials. But going to 7 at, say, the Regional level and beyond is certainly doable, and is something the IHSAA should strongly consider. And there is plenty of precedent for that. I know what you’re talking about and I wholeheartedly agree that the particular call you’re talking about would most likely not have been missed if we had both short wings and deep wings. As far as changing the outcome of that game ... I strongly doubt it.

I think there’s a different question you should be asking. Why shouldn’t we be doing everything we can to make sure we get it right? There is technology and resources available at the state finals that we don’t have at other levels. While we’re at it, I firmly believe we should be using 7 man officiating crews in the upper levels of the playoffs. Talk amongst yourselves.

It is not unheard of for the box to be inaccurate after penalty enforcement, although either the linesman or the line judge should correct that. But it sounds like nobody was shorted a down.