Jump to content
Head Coach Openings 2024 ×
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target
  • 0

Unnecessary Roughness? Disqualification? No foul?


Bobref

Question

22 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
3 minutes ago, Bobref said:

OK, I can’t figure out how to copy the clip from Facebook to here. But it’s a very interesting play, so if anyone has any technical suggestions, I’m all ears.

https://www.facebook.com/john.burkhart.77/videos/1845780988941600

Edited by gonzoron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Just now, Bobref said:

So, you’re going to provide the clip, but not clue me in on how to do it myself? Knowledge is power. 🤣😂

I clicked on the video in the group which takes you to the video page. Then copied the link in the address bar, then pasted into comment here.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, Impartial_Observer said:

Opinions of the group, is this an ejection?

 

IO, I would have to have had an understanding of the offending player PRIOR to this foul in order to assess if it would have warranted an ejection.  

On just a basic, look at the play...and the tone/tenor of what we look for in HS FB...  I'd send him to the showers, and hope that he learns a lesson for 2 weeks.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Had I been observing this game, in the post-game review with the crew I definitely would have asked them if they talked about disqualification at the time and, if so, what their thought process was in coming to a decision. There are a lot of factors that go into that decision, as @Yuccaguypointed out, some of them pretty subtle. It’s not one to make lightly. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
2 hours ago, Bobref said:

Had I been observing this game, in the post-game review with the crew I definitely would have asked them if they talked about disqualification at the time and, if so, what their thought process was in coming to a decision. There are a lot of factors that go into that decision, as @Yuccaguypointed out, some of them pretty subtle. It’s not one to make lightly. 

Agreed, WE have ALWAYS taken USC on coaches and ejections very serious. I tend to agree with @Yuccaguytone and tenor of the game plays into this particular decision. Just curious others’ take on just the tape we’ve seen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, PCFan1996 said:

What are the consequences of an ejection or disqualification of a player?

Ejection is pretty obvious, losing the remaining game time plus the next one is a pretty stiff penalty. Also not necessarily known by most fans, schools lose sportsmanship points which can come with differing penalties from the IHSAA, depending on the amount of penalty points lost. 
A player being ejected once could have ramifications from the team or school as well. Back in the day, a second ejection could include a trip to Indy for the athlete, coach, AD, and or principal. 
I’ve just always felt these are very serious fouls and should not be handed out without some consideration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
5 hours ago, Impartial_Observer said:

Ejection is pretty obvious, losing the remaining game time plus the next one is a pretty stiff penalty. Also not necessarily known by most fans, schools lose sportsmanship points which can come with differing penalties from the IHSAA, depending on the amount of penalty points lost. 
A player being ejected once could have ramifications from the team or school as well. Back in the day, a second ejection could include a trip to Indy for the athlete, coach, AD, and or principal. 
I’ve just always felt these are very serious fouls and should not be handed out without some consideration.

I agree.  We had this happen a few years ago to a JV player and I thought that he was also disqualified from the next game and required to take a sportsmanship class online.  He wasn't the aggressor but he lost his cool as a 15 yr old might be inclined to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
41 minutes ago, PCFan1996 said:

I agree.  We had this happen a few years ago to a JV player and I thought that he was also disqualified from the next game and required to take a sportsmanship class online.  He wasn't the aggressor but he lost his cool as a 15 yr old might be inclined to do. 

Exactly. There is a point system involved and the young man taking the sportsmanship class online is one of the ways you can regain points. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 9/25/2021 at 10:24 AM, Yuccaguy said:

Absolutely a UR in my opinion.  I can't understand why its even a thought otherwise...

I'll be that guy, for discussion reasons.

I've seen plenty of actions similar to this that have not been flagged. Some way worse. What makes this UR. Does history of the particular player have anything to do it? Has he made this type of suplex style tackle earlier and been warned? Was the whistle blown before the foul occurred? I faintly hear what sounds like a whistle and suspect this is the case.

What exactly constitutes UR during an effort to get a runner down that wont seem to just go down? 

Hopefully the young man involved is recovering well.
 

  • Sit and spin 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
19 minutes ago, cloudofdust said:

I'll be that guy, for discussion reasons.

I've seen plenty of actions similar to this that have not been flagged. Some way worse.

Unfortunately, that is probably true. Hopefully though, enforcement is becoming more consistent as the emphasis on player safety and risk minimization becomes more ingrained in players, coaches and officials. But that’s not a reason to hold the flag on this play.

What makes this UR?  Does history of the particular player have anything to do it? Has he made this type of suplex style tackle earlier and been warned?

All of those could be factors in determining whether to disqualify the tackler. But the fact that it is a foul depends only on the nature of the contact. Here, the contact was late (see below), unnecessary, and carried a high risk of injury. This is always a foul, regardless of the presence or absence of other mitigating or aggravating factors.

Was the whistle blown before the foul occurred? I faintly hear what sounds like a whistle and suspect this is the case.

Can’t tell from the video, and it really doesn’t matter. The whistle doesn’t kill the play. The ball is dead when it’s dead. The defensive player is responsible for knowing when the play is over, whether the whistle blows or not. However, the whistle and the lateness of the foul may be a factor in deciding whether to disqualify.

What exactly constitutes UR during an effort to get a runner down that wont seem to just go down? 

Be nice if there was some sort of a chart, wouldn’t it? But there isn’t, and never will be. There are just too many factors involved for there to be a bright line test. Unnecessary roughness is like obscenity: I can’t specifically define it, but I know it when I see it. The rule book gives very little guidance, simply saying no player shall “make any other contact with an opponent, including a defenseless player, which is deemed unnecessary or excessive and which incites roughness.”

Hopefully the young man involved is recovering well.

Agreed
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, Bobref said:

 

Bob...I would a whistle here does change thing because it would only occur if the official is ruling forward progress stopped. That's something the defender isn't necessarily going to know on his own. This wasn't a progress situation, but if it was and this suplex came well after the whistle, I'm more inclined to consider ejection. If it's live, he's just trying to make a tackle. If it's dead, he's doing something that is even more unnecessary and flagrant. I'm slow to eject so I doubt I would ever determine this ejectable if t's a live ball foul. The rest of this game plus another game is a huge penalty, and I want to make there is no doubt what he did was flagrant. This doesn't happen often so I can see a player not knowing a suplex is consider UNR. This specfiic act is not discussed much because it's rare so I assume there are a lot of officials who wouldn't know it either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, JustRules said:

Bob...I would a whistle here does change thing because it would only occur if the official is ruling forward progress stopped. That's something the defender isn't necessarily going to know on his own. This wasn't a progress situation, but if it was and this suplex came well after the whistle, I'm more inclined to consider ejection. If it's live, he's just trying to make a tackle. If it's dead, he's doing something that is even more unnecessary and flagrant. I'm slow to eject so I doubt I would ever determine this ejectable if t's a live ball foul. The rest of this game plus another game is a huge penalty, and I want to make there is no doubt what he did was flagrant. This doesn't happen often so I can see a player not knowing a suplex is consider UNR. This specfiic act is not discussed much because it's rare so I assume there are a lot of officials who wouldn't know it either.

I don’t disagree with anything you said. We agree that this is a foul 100% of the time, and that other factors play into the decision as to whether it should be considered a “flagrant” personal foul and thus, a disqualification offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...