If I am wrong please correct me

[Footballking16]

6 minutes ago, Slobberknocker said:

Now I am very confused. I was at the game and watch the video multiple time and I did not see receiving (CG) touched the ball first. Mybe I am just blind

You aren’t blind, you just aren’t biased towards officiating. It was a blown call that deserves to be called out. That ball hit at the 16 yard line and was rolling aggressively towards the end zone until it was thrown back by the Westfield gunner to prevent a touchback.

[Irishman]

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

The back judge uses a beanbag to mark the spot where the kick ends. This is usually a contrasting color bag, not the usual blue most crews use. A beanbag is also used to mark the spot of first touching. When during the game did this play occur? I’ll look at the Hudl video.

Had not considered the officials thought it touched him. The beanbag was thrown immediately, but the video quality is not good enough to see if it did touch. I would say the returner did not react like a player would if it had touched him. 

That said, the ball still crossed the plane of the goal line, before the Westfield player batted it back. And I still think it should have been CG's ball on the 20. 

[Trojanmp52]

The first touch was the Westfield player knocking it back from going into the endzone great play by him, and if the official from the game told you the cg player touched it first he lied to cover that they did not the rule or he blew that part of the call.  

[Irishman]

1 hour ago, Slobberknocker said:

Now I am very confused. I was at the game and watch the video multiple time and I did not see receiving (CG) touched the ball first. Mybe I am just blind

The ball first hit the field about 3 feet to his left

[Slobberknocker]

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

I’ll bet you $100 it was explained to both sidelines at the time. The crew is equipped with radios. I’m sure the R explained it to the wing officials, who explained it on their respective sidelines. If a team doesn’t like the explanation, and wants to burn a timeout to discuss it further, that’s on them.

I do know why an official is trying to make bet with a fan that is just trying to understand officiating process. I was at the game and did not see an official within 10 yards of a center grove coach after the play. Usually on calls like this official go to each sideline and discuss the call. I did not see that happen. So, then I see CG call timeout and cg coach approached the official on that side of the field and was just ignored so then cg coached headed to middle of field to talk to other officials. So, to me it looked like the official were blowing them off. Maybe I just missed the communication.

If the Officials could have made it clear that their ruling was the player that touch the ball was player that was back receiving the punt and not the touch of the by player at the one-yard line in would not have even posted the link. That is a judgment call, and I have no problem with it even thou I might not think it is correct. To me and other fans around me thought the call was for the touch on the one-yard line and my interoperation of the rules would be that was an incorrect call. Maybe I should know the meaning of the beanbags but, I am guessing me and most of the 6000+ fans have no I deal.

I have nothing but upmost respect to all official and never blame them for a loss.  

[oldtimeqb]

2 hours ago, Bobref said:

The back judge uses a beanbag to mark the spot where the kick ends. This is usually a contrasting color bag, not the usual blue most crews use. A beanbag is also used to mark the spot of first touching. When during the game did this play occur? I’ll look at the Hudl video.

In the YouTube linked video above. At the 1:45:00 mark, on the punt in question the backjudge appears to throw what looks like a white bean bag forward to around the 13-14 yard line. 

Which is why I was asking. If he threw a bag what that might have indicated. 

[cloudofdust]

2 hours ago, Bobref said:

It was not. The ball was touched first by the receiving team. The call was correct.

I’m certain there is no way we are both talking about the play in the video slobberknocker posted between Westfield and Center Grove at the 1:44 mark. 

First touching is clearly visible by K redirecting the ball backwards resulting in contact with R. 

That is what the video and incident that this thread regards.

 

[Footballking16]

31 minutes ago, Slobberknocker said:

If the Officials could have made it clear that their ruling was the player that touch the ball was player that was back receiving the punt and not the touch of the by player at the one-yard line in would not have even posted the link. That is a judgment call, and I have no problem with it even thou I might not think it is correct. To me and other fans around me thought the call was for the touch on the one-yard line and my interoperation of the rules would be that was an incorrect call. Maybe I should know the meaning of the beanbags but, I am guessing me and most of the 6000+ fans have no I deal.

The ball didn’t come close to hitting the punt returner’s foot/leg on the initial bounce although if I had blown a call that egregious with the hindsight of video replay that’s what I would have gone with while talking to a former colleague. Much easier to justify a judgement call than a complete misapplication of the rule (which is what I believe honestly happened).

Either way, that should have been CG’s ball at the 1-2 yard line at the very worst case and still not so sure the punt didn’t break the plane of the end zone which would result in a touchback.

Edited August 24, 2024 by Footballking16

[Slobberknocker]

4 minutes ago, cloudofdust said:

I’m certain there is no way we are both talking about the play in the video slobberknocker posted between Westfield and Center Grove at the 1:44 mark. 

First touching is clearly visible by K redirecting the ball backwards resulting in contact with R. 

That is what the video and incident that this thread regards.

 

I think Bobref saying the official said ball was touch by receiving team at around the 13-16 yard line. maybe off the foot of player back receiving the ball as he was moving away from catching the punt way before it was touched by K team batting it out of the endzone

[Footballking16]

14 minutes ago, cloudofdust said:

I’m certain there is no way we are both talking about the play in the video slobberknocker posted between Westfield and Center Grove at the 1:44 mark. 

First touching is clearly visible by K redirecting the ball backwards resulting in contact with R. 

That is what the video and incident that this thread regards.

 

He is talking about the same play. He’s saying the official ruled the ball hit the CG punt returner on the initial bounce making it a live ball right there…which would also be incorrect as the ball didn’t come close to touching him. The reaction by both teams confirm this.

Edited August 24, 2024 by Footballking16

[Slobberknocker]

19 hours ago, Bobref said:

As described, there’s no fumble, since the receivers never had possession. It’s a “muff.” The result is the same, though.  The kickers’ touching constitutes “first touching.” This entitles the receivers to choose to put the ball in play at the spot of first touching, or accept the result of the play. That’s provided there are no fouls during the play. If there are, it can get pretty complicated.

Sorry to bother you but I am just trying to understand the rules so I can be a better fan. I would look up the rule for myself, but it is my understanding that I would have to pay for it, and I am just too cheap to do that. Could you explain the Kick/punt Rule of the ball breaking the plane of the endzone? I thought that if the receiving team touching the ball would not matter because as soon as it breaks plane of the endzone it is dead ball resulting in a touchback. Is that not, correct?

[Irishman]

11 minutes ago, Slobberknocker said:

Sorry to bother you but I am just trying to understand the rules so I can be a better fan. I would look up the rule for myself, but it is my understanding that I would have to pay for it, and I am just too cheap to do that. Could you explain the Kick/punt Rule of the ball breaking the plane of the endzone? I thought that if the receiving team touching the ball would not matter because as soon as it breaks plane of the endzone it is dead ball resulting in a touchback. Is that not, correct?

That is correct; if the ball did cross in this instance, it's the momentum of the kick that got it there. As stated earlier, in the high school game, when it comes to kicks and the goal line, it's where the ball is when touched, whereas college and pros it's where the player is when they touch it. 

[cloudofdust]

26 minutes ago, Slobberknocker said:

I think Bobref saying the official said ball was touch by receiving team at around the 13-16 yard line. maybe off the foot of player back receiving the ball as he was moving away from catching the punt way before it was touched by K team batting it out of the endzone

If that is what is being claimed then the ruling would be unfortunate for CG but correct. That’s not what was described in the X post at the top of this thread though. 
I can’t see the ball hitting R and would imagine it surely would have been deflected if the first thing it hit was a foot. Looks to bounce straight to the EZ. 
 

[Footballking16]

11 minutes ago, cloudofdust said:

If that is what is being claimed then the ruling would be unfortunate for CG but correct. That’s not what was described in the X post at the top of this thread though. 
I can’t see the ball hitting R and would imagine it surely would have been deflected if the first thing it hit was a foot. Looks to bounce straight to the EZ. 
 

Reactions tell it all.

1. CG punt returner doesn’t flinch. Doesn’t even attempt to go back and retrieve the ball. If he thought for a second it touched him, his reaction would have been entirely different.

2. #27 for Westfield attempts to save the ball from going into the end zone rather than trying to recover a live ball.

3. There’s 6 Westfield players all pointing at #14 in red (who wasn’t the punt returner) indicating he was the person to touch the ball making the ball live.

Edited August 24, 2024 by Footballking16

[Slobberknocker]

8 minutes ago, cloudofdust said:

If that is what is being claimed then the ruling would be unfortunate for CG but correct. That’s not what was described in the X post at the top of this thread though. 
I can’t see the ball hitting R and would imagine it surely would have been deflected if the first thing it hit was a foot. Looks to bounce straight to the EZ. 
 

Yeh I still confused why Bobref said this was a correct ruling because it is my understanding that on a kick if the ball crosses the plan of the goal line, touched or not touched, it is a dead ball at that point which means it would be touchback for CG.

[Bobref]

4 hours ago, Slobberknocker said:

Yeh I still confused why Bobref said this was a correct ruling because it is my understanding that on a kick if the ball crosses the plan of the goal line, touched or not touched, it is a dead ball at that point which means it would be touchback for CG.

I hadn’t seen the video, but was simply going on what the back judge told the referee, i.e., that the receivers touched the ball first. The video, however, shows that they did not. A clean miss by the back judge. Very unfortunate.

[superjay]

If this play is legal, then any tapped or touched ball by punting team into returning team is legal.  Imagine if this was a rolling punt anywhere on the field.  This was a blown call.  

[miner_35]

On a play like this it, the back judge has to do his best to hustle back to the goal line as well to be able to rule on a touch back or not. Mistakes happen, it sucks, but they happen.

[Bobref]

1 hour ago, miner_35 said:

On a play like this it, the back judge has to do his best to hustle back to the goal line as well to be able to rule on a touch back or not. Mistakes happen, it sucks, but they happen.

That’s what you’re stuck with on a 5 man crew.

[miner_35]

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

That’s what you’re stuck with on a 5 man crew.

Completely understand, but being a licensed official over the last several years, the back judge clearly came up too close to the action. There was not much urgency until it was too late to get back to the goal line. Especially considering he didn't need to to worry about touching by R where he dropped the beanbag originally. The kick had not ended yet and it was not first touching yet. Like I said before, mistakes happen, but the lack of urgency until it was too late made it look worse.

[Bobref]

2 hours ago, miner_35 said:

Completely understand, but being a licensed official over the last several years, the back judge clearly came up too close to the action. There was not much urgency until it was too late to get back to the goal line. Especially considering he didn't need to to worry about touching by R where he dropped the beanbag originally. The kick had not ended yet and it was not first touching yet. Like I said before, mistakes happen, but the lack of urgency until it was too late made it look worse.

No question that the back judge committed more than one mechanics error on the play.

[crimsonace1]

On 8/23/2024 at 8:52 PM, Trojanmp52 said:

On a punt if the ball hit the ground and the kicking team touches it then a member of the receiving team touches it the ball still goes to the receiving team. 

You are correct. 

It's technically an illegal touch - there is a scenario where a player from the kicking team can touch the ball but not "down" it. In that case, the receiving team can pick it up and have the option of taking the ball where the play ended *or* taking the ball where it was touched by the kicking team. 

In the NFL (not sure about NFHS), the "illegal touch" is considered a "penalty" for no yardage, which led to a somewhat hilarious Bob Lamey moment a few years back. Colts downed a punt with no time left, but by NFL rules, the opposing team got one untimed down due to the defensive infraction, leading to Lamey (who apparently didn't know the rule, and also had a tendency to offer his opinions on the officiating) going nuts about the untimed down ... which ended in, I think, an incomplete pass and the game ending. 

[miner_35]

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

No question that the back judge committed more than one mechanics error on the play.

It happens and I guarantee he is beating himself up over it and will do it right the next time. 

[JustRules]

1 hour ago, crimsonace1 said:

You are correct. 

It's technically an illegal touch - there is a scenario where a player from the kicking team can touch the ball but not "down" it. In that case, the receiving team can pick it up and have the option of taking the ball where the play ended *or* taking the ball where it was touched by the kicking team. 

In the NFL (not sure about NFHS), the "illegal touch" is considered a "penalty" for no yardage, which led to a somewhat hilarious Bob Lamey moment a few years back. Colts downed a punt with no time left, but by NFL rules, the opposing team got one untimed down due to the defensive infraction, leading to Lamey (who apparently didn't know the rule, and also had a tendency to offer his opinions on the officiating) going nuts about the untimed down ... which ended in, I think, an incomplete pass and the game ending. 

Bob Lamey probably contributed to more incorrect rules knowledge for Colts fans than any other announcer ever. I loved him as an announcer, but he was so frustrating this his knowledge of the rules and horrible judgement on other calls. I would listen to him while mowing the lawn and think the crew must have a horrible miss on a holding or PI call as he described it. And his descriptions often involved the firing of the official, possibly incarceration and banishment of any immediate family member. Then I would see the call and it was 100% obviously correct. How could someone who has watched football that long be that wrong about the rules or understanding of the rules? But fans always think the announces know the rules so many fans think he's right. But other than that, I loved listening to him doing Colts games.

[Bobref]

2 hours ago, JustRules said:

Bob Lamey probably contributed to more incorrect rules knowledge for Colts fans than any other announcer ever. I loved him as an announcer, but he was so frustrating this his knowledge of the rules and horrible judgement on other calls.

Remember, you can’t say “Lamey” without saying “lame.” Not a fan.

3 hours ago, crimsonace1 said:

It's technically an illegal touch

Not in the NFHS. In high school it is referred to as “first touching.”