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

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

On the field rule changes


Recommended Posts

On 12/14/2022 at 8:04 AM, Titan32 said:

The biggy I see in SW Indiana is the ref who stands over the ball until the defense is basically set....as if he is waiting for them before allowing the ball ready for play.  This makes tempo offenses not so tempo.  

@Bobref Bob, what are your thoughts on inconsistency regarding making the ball ready for play (every down not just first down)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Impartial_Observer said:

There can’t be DPI in A’s EZ. DPI in B’s EZ would be 15 yards from the previous spot, replay the down. 

"Your" being the defense's EZ.

1 hour ago, Impartial_Observer said:

There can’t be DPI in A’s EZ. DPI in B’s EZ would be 15 yards from the previous spot, replay the down. 

What rule do you think should be changed or should be considered for change in high school?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Titan32 said:

I am a little surprised more guys on this thread haven't seen this one.

I know that with my crew, the ready for play starts as soon as the box is set. The only time we are over the ball for an extended time is when it is needed (After timeouts, change of possession, etc.). We try not to interrupt the flow of the game, if at all possible. This is actually part of our pregame talks with the coaches. If they say they like to go fast, we try our best to not slow down either side. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the initial post. Not all FG attempts are spotted on the 20.  If the FG attempt does not cross the goal line, it is an A) returnable ball and B) Can be downed by the kicking team.  So if people are dumb, you can line up for a FG from 45 out and kick it short. All you have to do is down it before it goes in the end zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Coach Dowell said:

On the initial post. Not all FG attempts are spotted on the 20.  If the FG attempt does not cross the goal line, it is an A) returnable ball and B) Can be downed by the kicking team.  So if people are dumb, you can line up for a FG from 45 out and kick it short. All you have to do is down it before it goes in the end zone.

A FG attempt can also be fair caught, correct?

15 hours ago, Titan32 said:

I am a little surprised more guys on this thread haven't seen this one.

It's because they are old. They don't see so good no more. Have to bribe them with beef jerky and decaf Folgers.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/14/2022 at 7:49 AM, Punttheball said:

Honestly, this is a terrible answer.  Defensive coordinators set coverages and defenses based on formations and receivers.  It is important to identify ineligible receivers as a defense.  This is why a covered TE is allowed to go down field and catch passes.  Shouldn't 5 men in the backfield be important?  It is terrible on so many levels.  You are allowing the possibility of 6 eligible receivers!  I'm guessing that if you are not "nitpicking" on vs. off then you don't care if teams have 5 ineligible numbers on the field either? Officials are more worried about the sidelines, if they are being observed, reading the scripted card before the game, if the balls have enough air in them, are they the correct balls, then applying simple on the field basic rules!

I already know your reply will be something in line with not enough eyes, or we do what Mr. Faulkens says, or go to the IFCA, or there is already a shortage of officials "and guys like you are why!"

This is bad to me.

You are bringing up two different situations and combining them into one. The general philosophy is "put them where they are supposed to be" if it's close and you can prevent a foul. If your options are to put the receiver as a back, but it results in an illegal formation (5 in the backfield) or put him on and it covers the TE (meaning you have an ineligible lineman on the other side or 8 on the LOS), you will put him on and then monitor the TE for going downfield. Teams that intentionally cover a TE are trying to pull coverage or go heavy on one side. Usually when you give the wideout the benefit of the doubt and rule him off, he's the 4th back.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JustRules said:

You are bringing up two different situations and combining them into one. The general philosophy is "put them where they are supposed to be" if it's close and you can prevent a foul. If your options are to put the receiver as a back, but it results in an illegal formation (5 in the backfield) or put him on and it covers the TE (meaning you have an ineligible lineman on the other side or 8 on the LOS), you will put him on and then monitor the TE for going downfield. Teams that intentionally cover a TE are trying to pull coverage or go heavy on one side. Usually when you give the wideout the benefit of the doubt and rule him off, he's the 4th back.

We see more and more of teams covering the TE. When running unbalanced you either flip an OL with a TE or you cover the TE. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Impartial_Observer said:

We see more and more of teams covering the TE. When running unbalanced you either flip an OL with a TE or you cover the TE. 

Even in the youth league, we'd run a lot of double TE sets.  Made for some interesting plays at that level; especially once the counter was mastered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, JustRules said:

You are bringing up two different situations and combining them into one. The general philosophy is "put them where they are supposed to be" if it's close and you can prevent a foul. If your options are to put the receiver as a back, but it results in an illegal formation (5 in the backfield) or put him on and it covers the TE (meaning you have an ineligible lineman on the other side or 8 on the LOS), you will put him on and then monitor the TE for going downfield. Teams that intentionally cover a TE are trying to pull coverage or go heavy on one side. Usually when you give the wideout the benefit of the doubt and rule him off, he's the 4th back.

You are correct. I was bringing up two different situations.  It was more of a reply directly to Bobref because of the nitpicking comment as if neither situation was something of importance to the crews anymore.  

Each instance though is happening more and more without recognition from sideline refs.  Covered up TEs are going out for passes more and more.  END OF SITUATION!  And 5 men in the backfield is going uncalled more and more.  END OF SITUATION.  In my opinion, not emphasizing these calls compromises the defenses more than it seems to appear to those in the refereeing world.  

Are these both situations in which crews are being told not to nitpick about?  Or is one less important to crews than the other?  Because they are both important to coaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Punttheball said:

It was more of a reply directly to Bobref because of the nitpicking comment as if neither situation was something of importance to the crews anymore. 

What is and is not important to crews is dictated by our Manual and the guidance of our boss. It’s not my call, or any crew’s call. And I have a hard time believing that a slot receiver who is supposed to be in the backfield, but is 6 inches too close to his line of scrimmage, affects the defensive coverage and assignments at all. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Bobref said:

What is and is not important to crews is dictated by our Manual and the guidance of our boss. It’s not my call, or any crew’s call. And I have a hard time believing that a slot receiver who is supposed to be in the backfield, but is 6 inches too close to his line of scrimmage, affects the defensive coverage and assignments at all. 

The point is...if that slot receiver declares as being on the line of scrimmage and is covered.  This makes him ineligible..if he is allowed to go out for a pass, it certainly affects coverages and assignments.  

If there is a flexed TE and a receiver flanking him on his outside that declares on as does the TE, our defensive backfield would communicate to each other that the TE is dead.  We would ignore him if he went out for a pass.  We would expect the crew to recognize that also, but it gets by many officials.  

It is probably not a great place to talk about this or these situations because there are so many scenarios that could happen.  I'm not sure that I am expressing myself well enough in the post.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Punttheball said:

The point is...if that slot receiver declares as being on the line of scrimmage and is covered.  This makes him ineligible..if he is allowed to go out for a pass, it certainly affects coverages and assignments.  

If there is a flexed TE and a receiver flanking him on his outside that declares on as does the TE, our defensive backfield would communicate to each other that the TE is dead.  We would ignore him if he went out for a pass.  We would expect the crew to recognize that also, but it gets by many officials.  

It is probably not a great place to talk about this or these situations because there are so many scenarios that could happen.  I'm not sure that I am expressing myself well enough in the post.  

What I am concerned about is your feeling that this is a fairly common occurrence. That has not been my experience. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Punttheball said:

The point is...if that slot receiver declares as being on the line of scrimmage and is covered.  This makes him ineligible..if he is allowed to go out for a pass, it certainly affects coverages and assignments.  

If there is a flexed TE and a receiver flanking him on his outside that declares on as does the TE, our defensive backfield would communicate to each other that the TE is dead.  We would ignore him if he went out for a pass.  We would expect the crew to recognize that also, but it gets by many officials.  

It is probably not a great place to talk about this or these situations because there are so many scenarios that could happen.  I'm not sure that I am expressing myself well enough in the post.  

Since this has happened so often can you provide video of some of these plays? This sounds like something that is a huge issue and I’m sure some video would help show what you mean. 
thank you 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2022 at 8:18 AM, Punttheball said:

You are correct. I was bringing up two different situations.  It was more of a reply directly to Bobref because of the nitpicking comment as if neither situation was something of importance to the crews anymore.  

Each instance though is happening more and more without recognition from sideline refs.  Covered up TEs are going out for passes more and more.  END OF SITUATION!  And 5 men in the backfield is going uncalled more and more.  END OF SITUATION.  In my opinion, not emphasizing these calls compromises the defenses more than it seems to appear to those in the refereeing world.  

Are these both situations in which crews are being told not to nitpick about?  Or is one less important to crews than the other?  Because they are both important to coaches.

If the covered TE puts 8 on the LOS and 3 backs and there is any gap between the wideout and TE, you put the wideout as a back. That's what is meant by not nit picking it. If the wideout is slightly back and the next guy in is the T then put him on. But if putting him in the backfield creates 5 in the backfield, you have a potential foul either way. Put him on to avoid the illegal formation foul, but then flag the TE for ineligible downfield if he goes downfield and there is a legal pass beyond the LOS.

That's why I said you had two different situations. You were describing the first two situations. I was trying to get you to the third situation which would likely result in a foul if there is a legal forward pass beyond the LOS. I'll also add if it's obvious the 5th player is back (especially a T who has been warned they are too deep) or the wideout is closer to the LOS than the TE, you are not nitpicking. Contrary to popular belief, good officials don't look for reasons to throw flags. They let the obvious situations jump out at them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2022 at 9:36 AM, Bobref said:

What I am concerned about is your feeling that this is a fairly common occurrence. That has not been my experience. 

There are 2 teams in the HCC that do this A LOT!!

I’m not saying they do it illegally.  But running unbalanced or Y over formations is becoming a common thing for some teams.

  • Thanks 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...