BTF Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, Bobref said: Why? You said he knocked the holder over trying to get to the ball. Did he get to the ball, i.e., touch the kick? http://summitcitysports.com/live-video/ Scroll to the -1:03 mark toward the end in the 3rd quarter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazed and confused Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 (edited) 26 minutes ago, BTF said: http://summitcitysports.com/live-video/ Scroll to the -1:03 mark toward the end in the 3rd quarter. 2:16 mark of 3rd is where i find didnt look like ball was touched to moi Edited October 10, 2021 by dazed and confused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTF Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 33 minutes ago, dazed and confused said: 2:16 mark of 3rd is where i find didnt look like ball was touched to moi The rule reads that if contact is unnecessary or excessive, then it's a penalty. It looked "necessary" to disrupt the kick from happening. I'm curious to get an officials opinion on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazed and confused Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 he sure got plowed over !!! thanks for the link, gives me more games to watch ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTF Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, dazed and confused said: he sure got plowed over !!! thanks for the link, gives me more games to watch ! I don't understand the rule, hoping Bobref will clarify. Yep, he got smoked. A lot of that goes on when Snider and Dwenger get together. No problem. Snider/Luers will be a good one to watch. You should be able to catch it on Summitcitysports.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 5 hours ago, BTF said: http://summitcitysports.com/live-video/ Scroll to the -1:03 mark toward the end in the 3rd quarter. You’re kidding, right? That is the most obvious roughing the holder foul I have seen in 44 seasons of officiating. Remember that the holder gets exactly the same protection as the kicker. If this contact had been against the kicker, would we be having this discussion? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 4 hours ago, BTF said: The rule reads that if contact is unnecessary or excessive, then it's a penalty. It looked "necessary" to disrupt the kick from happening. I'm curious to get an officials opinion on it. That is not what the rule says … or means. Here’s the rule: “ART. 5 . . . Running into or roughing the kicker or holder. A defensive player shall neither run into the kicker nor holder, which is contact that displaces the kicker or holder without roughing; nor block, tackle or charge into the kicker of a scrimmage kick, or the place-kick holder.” There are 4 instances cited in the Rule where contact against the Kicker/Holder may be excused: Where it is not reasonably certain a kick will be made. where the ball is touched near the kicker. Where contact is slight, and partially caused by the kicker’s movement. Where the defender is blocked into the kicker. In each of these 4 scenarios, the contact by the defender must be unavoidable. The burden is always on the defender to avoid contact if it is at all possible. If there is contact against the kicker/holder, who is displaced by the contact, it’s going to be a foul unless one of these 4 applies. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuccaguy Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 I have had issues with these 2 BUFFOONS that are the announcers for Summit City Sports in the past. It's frustrating when coaches use these guys as their impedance for an argument. They are wrong on penalty administration and penalty calls. Having said that, it is good that these games are broadcast for all to see. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTF Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 4 hours ago, Bobref said: That is not what the rule says … or means. Here’s the rule: “ART. 5 . . . Running into or roughing the kicker or holder. A defensive player shall neither run into the kicker nor holder, which is contact that displaces the kicker or holder without roughing; nor block, tackle or charge into the kicker of a scrimmage kick, or the place-kick holder.” There are 4 instances cited in the Rule where contact against the Kicker/Holder may be excused: Where it is not reasonably certain a kick will be made. where the ball is touched near the kicker. Where contact is slight, and partially caused by the kicker’s movement. Where the defender is blocked into the kicker. In each of these 4 scenarios, the contact by the defender must be unavoidable. The burden is always on the defender to avoid contact if it is at all possible. If there is contact against the kicker/holder, who is displaced by the contact, it’s going to be a foul unless one of these 4 applies. Good call then. Thanks for your insight. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 43 minutes ago, BTF said: Good call then. Thanks for your insight. This is the biggest reason I started posting on the GID. You left that game the other night, probably along with other people like @psaboy,thinking that the officiating crew screwed up. In fact, their call was absolutely correct. A little education goes a long way. I appreciate people like you who are open to being educated. Not everyone is. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHJIrish Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 6 hours ago, Bobref said: You’re kidding, right? That is the most obvious roughing the holder foul I have seen in 44 seasons of officiating. Remember that the holder gets exactly the same protection as the kicker. If this contact had been against the kicker, would we be having this discussion? Reminds me of George Sefchick back in the 1960's, Joe Perkowski missed a field goal against Syracuse and the Orange are flagged for running over little George the holder. I'm guessing that was 1962. I hate trying to work from my old memory, but I was in ND Stadium that day. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gridiron_Junkie Posted October 11, 2021 Share Posted October 11, 2021 9 hours ago, BTF said: I don't understand the rule, hoping Bobref will clarify. Yep, he got smoked. A lot of that goes on when Snider and Dwenger get together. No problem. Snider/Luers will be a good one to watch. You should be able to catch it on Summitcitysports.com. I hope not. SCS don't want to come to Luers to broadcast a home game all season, but now because Snider will be coming in to whip Knights for at least a share of a championship, they think that they should just be allowed in to do a broadcast from LuersField? I say F that! Go somewhere else. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psaboy Posted October 12, 2021 Share Posted October 12, 2021 On 10/10/2021 at 8:18 PM, Bobref said: This is the biggest reason I started posting on the GID. You left that game the other night, probably along with other people like @psaboy,thinking that the officiating crew screwed up. In fact, their call was absolutely correct. A little education goes a long way. I appreciate people like you who are open to being educated. Not everyone is. Just thought it was a bad call, my mistake. Bobref, can you tell me more about the intentional grounding call in end zone? I'm I also screwed up on that one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted October 12, 2021 Share Posted October 12, 2021 6 minutes ago, psaboy said: Just thought it was a bad call, my mistake. Bobref, can you tell me more about the intentional grounding call in end zone? I'm I also screwed up on that one? Describe the play and I’ll try to help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psaboy Posted October 12, 2021 Share Posted October 12, 2021 2 minutes ago, Bobref said: Describe the play and I’ll try to help. The Dwenger QB was under heavy pressure, forced back into end own end zone. Instead of getting sacked, threw ball away with no receiver in area and was called for intentional grounding. I can't recall if he was in or out of pocket, think out of pocket, but since he got flagged for intentional grounding not sure is that matters. So, I thought that should have been ruled a safety? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psaboy Posted October 12, 2021 Share Posted October 12, 2021 On 10/10/2021 at 10:13 PM, Gridiron_Junkie said: I hope not. SCS don't want to come to Luers to broadcast a home game all season, but now because Snider will be coming in to whip Knights for at least a share of a championship, they think that they should just be allowed in to do a broadcast from LuersField? I say F that! Go somewhere else. It looks like SCS will not show game. So, anyone know where to view? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustRules Posted October 12, 2021 Share Posted October 12, 2021 8 hours ago, psaboy said: The Dwenger QB was under heavy pressure, forced back into end own end zone. Instead of getting sacked, threw ball away with no receiver in area and was called for intentional grounding. I can't recall if he was in or out of pocket, think out of pocket, but since he got flagged for intentional grounding not sure is that matters. So, I thought that should have been ruled a safety? Doesn't matter if he's in or out of the pocket in regards to intentional grounding in high school rules. What was the previous spot? Where did they next spot the ball? If the foul was in the end zone the result is going to be safety whether the defense accepts or declines the penalty. They either enforced it from the wrong spot or felt he released the ball outside the end zone. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazed and confused Posted October 12, 2021 Share Posted October 12, 2021 (edited) 11 hours ago, psaboy said: The Dwenger QB was under heavy pressure, forced back into end own end zone. Instead of getting sacked, threw ball away with no receiver in area and was called for intentional grounding. I can't recall if he was in or out of pocket, think out of pocket, but since he got flagged for intentional grounding not sure is that matters. So, I thought that should have been ruled a safety? checked game video(thanks SCS) and this play happens at the 1:08 mark of 1st qtr....2:23:15 mark of video counter looks bad to me ! Edited October 12, 2021 by dazed and confused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuccaguy Posted October 13, 2021 Share Posted October 13, 2021 3 hours ago, dazed and confused said: checked game video(thanks SCS) and this play happens at the 1:08 mark of 1st qtr....2:23:15 mark of video counter looks bad to me ! It was ruled as illegal touching. The Dwenger QB is shoved at the 1 yard line (into the end zone), while attempting to throw the ball. It it is then touched by the BD Right Tackle (dropped). I am not sure that IG is the correct interpretation of what happened. Illegal touching seems more likely, therefore eliminating the Safety as the adjudication. No matter what, it was a tough call in the immediacy of the situation for the crew to work through. I am convinced that they (the crew) talked through the scenario and arrived at the correct interpretation of the play. Following the explanation to Coach Tippmann, he showed no argument to the adjudication. That tells me, that he was in agreement (acceptance) of what was called. Eliminate the pontification of the announcers... I have had issues with these guys before, and have said that in other postings. Far too often, it seems that they are just 'fanatics' with a microphone . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted October 13, 2021 Share Posted October 13, 2021 6 hours ago, Yuccaguy said: I am not sure that IG is the correct interpretation of what happened. Illegal touching seems more likely, therefore eliminating the Safety as the adjudication. There is some controversy over this type of scenario. The rule says this is IG: “A pass intentionally thrown into an area not occupied by an eligible offensive receiver.” The critical word is “intentionally.” One interpretation is that the QB must know that there is no eligible in the area, and throw it anyway. The fact that it’s not a foul if the receiver slips down, or cuts the wrong way, and the pass goes into a vacant area, would seem to support this interpretation. If that’s the case, the QB under duress could mistake an ineligible for an eligible receiver and throw the ball in his direction. If the ineligible purposely touches the ball, it’s a foul for illegal touching, which is enforced from the spot of the touching, not from where the pass was thrown. If he doesn’t touch it, it’s just an incomplete pass. I can’t get the video to play anymore. But if @Yuccaguyis correct and it was actually ruled illegal touching, not IG, then all of this could have been avoided by giving a proper preliminary, and then final, signal. In this case it would be signal 16, not signal 36. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobref Posted October 13, 2021 Share Posted October 13, 2021 (edited) OK, I did get it to play, finally. It’s clear that @Yuccaguywas correct: the ruling on the field was illegal touching, not intentional grounding. You can tell because the flag was not thrown by the Referee, as it would be for IG, and at one point the Referee clearly starts to give signal 16, illegal touching. The video is supportive of the call. Also, the QB is not just under duress. He is going down as a result of contact. The errant throw was likely affected by the contact, so I would be extremely reluctant to call IG in this situation. From what I can see in the video, the crew handled a difficult play well. As an observer, my only criticism would be that when the crew gets together to discuss, or the official goes to the sideline to talk to the coach, keep your hands to yourself. Nobody needs to be hugging anybody to discuss the play. Looks creepy. Maintain a professional demeanor out there. Edited October 13, 2021 by Bobref 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.