Bobref

Gary Roosevelt has a stadium ... unless they knocked it down since I was last there. I confess, it’s been a while.

Forfeit.

And I was glad to see that Coach Curtis finally has his offensive line setting for a second before the snap. 😀

I suppose he could have asked the kid to show him a mouth guard.

Calling back a TD for a block in the back well behind the play should only happen if the contact was significant enough to rise to the level of UNR. Ordinarily, a block in the back is not considered a safety foul, and therefore, should only be called when it places the defense at a disadvantage. My suggestion would be if the contact is sufficient to warrant a flag, call it UNR, not a block in the back. There is plenty of rules support for this. 9-4-3 “ART. 3 . . . No player or nonplayer shall: b. Charge into or throw an opponent to the ground after he is obviously out of the play,” I think 30 yds. behind the runner qualifies as “obviously out of the play.” On the forum where I got this play, you would not believe the number of officials who said the block in the back should be flagged and the TD called back.

This interpretation is an example of applying common sense to the black and white of the rule book. The purpose of the rule prohibiting low blocks except in the FBZ while the ball is in the FBZ, is risk minimization. Blocks that occur between players on the line while the ball is still in the FBZ are considered OK because those restrictions do not allow the players to create the momentum that increases the risk of leg injuries. Thus, a block that occurs right at the snap is consistent with that philosophy. Any delay allows the players to generate more momentum, making the blocks more dangerous.

Here's a part of a post I copied from another officials' forum that I frequent. Love to hear some officials comment on this … fans, coaches, too. "Score at half time in 9-3 with this particular coach’s team having the 3 points. They take the second half kick off and from about their own 40 break a TD run down their sideline. As I am trailing the play one of the offensive linemen blocks a defensive guy in the back about 30-35 yards behind the ball. Easy call no question. Drop the flag and my head coach comes unglued."

You're right about that. But IO is right on this one.

The blocking rules don't change on a scrimmage kick, which is what a PAT is. The only blocking below the waist allowed is by a player on the line, against an opponent on the line, in the free blocking zone, while the ball is in the free blocking zone. Since a kick try is a long snap, that means the block must be instantaneous at the snap. Any delay and it's a foul.

I was at Concord. It was a tale of 2 halves. Concord came out with a great passing attack and jumped out to a big lead. It was 34-7 at halftime, and Warsaw looked stunned. But the 2nd half was all Warsaw as they scored 21 unanswered with a power running attack, and had the ball at the end, but got stopped on downs near midfield. Very impressed with the Concord QB and their well-conceived passing attack. But most impressive on both sides were the place kickers. Both hit the end zone on kickoffs regularly. Great high school football game.

Oh, he’s a well-documented whack job, but very entertaining.

The “Law of Unintended Consequences” is always in effect ... although this consequence was perfectly predictable, if unintended.

Interesting. These kids today ... SMH.

Thank you. I’ll take a look at it.

I’m not really sure what I’m looking at here. The mouth guards with the “teeth” depicted on them have been in use for a few years now, and are perfectly legal. But I can’t tell what that is above the mouth guard in the nose area. If it’s some sort of face paint, that is illegal.

Yes, the Mercy Rule applies in the tournament.

I think anyone planning on a coaching career would benefit greatly from some officiating experience.

PHJ, you know I have immense respect for you. I can’t comment on whether any particular fouls were justified or not. My only point is that sheer numbers don’t say anything about whether the game was well-officiated or not. You don’t complain about officiating, so I take what you said very seriously. If there’s video available, I’ll be happy to look at it and tell you what I think. But until I see it, I’m giving the officials the benefit of the doubt, numbers notwithstanding.

WHAT???? You can’t mean the webcast team got that wrong! Blasphemy! Sacrilege! In fact, of course, I didn’t say either of those things.

And the down is replayed unless the targeting enforcement takes the ball beyond the line to gain, in which case it is a 1st down.

I couldn’t care less what fans say. It’s not a popularity contest, and they’re not on the field. Maybe we should officiate the game from the stands, or impose quotas on flags?

A flawed analysis. There’s no such thing as “excessive” where personal fouls are concerned. Every play is a separate play. You don’t see something that meets all the criteria for a flag, but stop and say “I’ve already called 3 of those, so I won’t call this one.” Criticize individual calls as warranted or unwarranted. But the sheer number is meaningless. You call what needs to be called without regard for numbers.

Geez, if the webcast crew said it, it must be true.

He’s got all 3 attributes you want from an OL: great technique, immense strength, and he’s just nasty mean.

Exactly.