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

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

Week 8 Scores


Recommended Posts

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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: 

  1. Where it is not reasonably certain a kick will be made.
  2. where the ball is touched near the kicker.
  3. Where contact is slight, and partially caused by the kicker’s movement.
  4. 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.

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.   

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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: 

  1. Where it is not reasonably certain a kick will be made.
  2. where the ball is touched near the kicker.
  3. Where contact is slight, and partially caused by the kicker’s movement.
  4. 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.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by dazed and confused
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 .   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by Bobref
  • Like 1
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
Reply to this topic...

×   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...