The Pigskin
Page
2013 Week 4 Clips
TECHNICAL NOTE: For those not aware, when viewing these videos in the You Tube window, you can adjust the resolution for a sharper view. Notice in the lower right hand corner of the video player window a setting icon that looks like a gear. Click on that and you can adjust the setting up to 360p, 480p or even 720p in some cases. This will give you a sharper image.
The video page will continue bringing you clips each week which are good teaching material as we all work together to understand and enforce the sometimes complicated NCAA football rules. The videos are not meant to demean or belittle any official. They are used so that ALL officials can learn from the situations and issues other officials encounter in their games. No official has ever completed a career error-free. But by sharing our errors with others we help them avoid the same pitfalls. NCAA football officials at all levels exhibit incredible rule knowledge week in and week out. We can always get better and this page hopes to serve in that effort.
Last week's survey play was a punt play wherein a substitute came on the field during the play, apparently thinking he was supposed to be in the game at that point. The question was would the penalty for this be enforced from previous spot or the Post Scrimmage Kick Enforcement spot (end of kick). Of the 170 respondents, 67% chose previous spot enforcement, 19% said PSK , 14% said give Team A the choice of previous spot or PSK enforcement. One of our group made in interesting comment. He said that by rule, enforcement should be at previous spot, but by philosophy it should be at the PSK spot. This year's rule change regarding PSK enforcement has caused some confusion because on one hand, it seems to be designed to making more fouls qualify for PSK enforcement (i.e. foul no longer has to be 3 or more yards beyond the NZ), on the other hand it makes more fouls ineligible for PSK enforcement because now they have to happen during the kick and not just the "kick play." We here in the cheap seats are really not sure what the intent and philosophy are now on scrimmage kick plays but is the foul considered to have happened at the moment the player came on the field or is it a foul that continues throughout the down so that it is also a foul after the kick?
Illegal Blocking Below the Waist As all officials know, this year's blocking below the waist rule changes included a change made well after the rule changes were first announced. That tweak brought back (sort of) the prohibition against a restricted blocker blocking back in towards the original position of the ball at the snap. As the tweak was taught around the nation, it became clear the intent was not to make the rule as restrictive as it had been previously but rather to just eliminate those quick fast "crack backs" that happened immediately after the snap and very close to the line of scrimmage. There was no specific distance from the line of scrimmage nor time after the snap when the normally illegal block back to the inside would no longer be a foul. Officials were told to use their best judgment and try to determine if the blockee had a reasonable chance to see the block coming so he could defend himself. Perhaps it will make a CFO training tape and we will receive some more definitive guidance. But for now, please view the video and take the poll below. (Please remember to scroll down and click on the DONE button after making your choice.)
Helmet Off and Zap-10 A mistaken assumption by many in the sports media, fans, and possibly some officials, is that in a "helmet off " situation inside the last minute of a half, if it is an offensive player, the defense will elect the runoff but if it is a defensive player, the offense will not as they want as much time as possible to score before the end of the half. This play example proves how faulty that assumption is. At times, the offense is just trying to run time off the clock and get to halftime to regroup and possibly to prevent the opponent from having another chance to score. This video also shows how complicated enforcing the "helmet off" rule might be at times. In addition to determining of one team wants the Zap 10 or not, the crew also has to determine if the opponent will use a team timeout to avoid the Zap 10. It may not always be in the offense's favor to avoid the Zap 10.
Illegal Batting During a Scrimmage Kick Frequent viewers will recall last year's late season game that featured a scrimmage kick play where there was an illegal batting by the kicking team that was not flagged. Early this season we have already seen another scrimmage kick play with batting involved, but this time it may have been a legal batting that was judged to be illegal. Recall that in order for the batting of a scrimmage kick in the field of play to be illegal, the bat has to be deemed to be forward (and forward is defined in relation to which direction the team that bats is attacking). Illegal forward batting by Team A would be for bats made in the opposite direction as illegal forward bats by Team B. The batting in this play is very slight and may be too marginally forward to merit a flag. You can decide. But it was flagged here, so unless someone talks the flagging official off the call, it has to be enforced. Batting is a "Basic Spot" foul. That means it could qualify for Post Scrimmage Kick enforcement if done by Team B at certain times during the play. If by A, it could qualify for the "tack on" in many scenarios. In some scrimmage kick situations, the only option will be to enforce from the previous spot if the penalty is accepted. In the video play, the bat was by Team B (although it appears a Team A player may have tried to bat it forward similar to last year's play but he could not reach the ball). The fact that the bat (spot of the "foul" ) is on the same yardline as the end of the kick spot (out of bounds spot) might be a hint that it really was not a foul. It is not clear what the lengthy crew conference was for. Illegal batting in this situation has to be a PSK foul.
Targeting It seems unlikely we will go a week this season without some discussion of the targeting rule. This first one, requires little explanation. When Webster adds football "targeting" to the dictionary, there may well be a picture of this hit. The offender launched and lowered his helmet high against a defenseless player. The second video may be subject to a bit more discussion. But the play is also an example of what should be done when fouls occur before a play actually starts. When there are personal fouls in those situations, the penalties are enforced, unlike lesser fouls which may see themselves disregarded. In the final video, there is no flag for targeting. However, viewers should observe the actions of B49 who throws a blindside block at the numbers on about the A-45 yard line. Is this a blindside targeting? It is not clear what foul the U flagged as it was simply announced as a personal foul by Team A.
Bad News and Worse News "Coach, you know that offside you were screaming for? Well, you are not going to get it. But hold on...there's more. You were flagged for an illegal formation" That conversation will likely not go well, but facts are facts. Team A is clearly in an illegal formation. The defensive player who made the play was clearly NOT offside. One or more other defenders may have been but they even look close enough to be judged on their side of the line of scrimmage.
Offside on Kickoffs Players on the kicking team during free kicks are usually given latitude with regards to their restraining line on kickoffs. If the kick is deep, most officials will not put a flag down for offside unless the player is clearly beyond the restraining line when the ball is kicked. Obviously on pooch kicks and onside kicks, the restraining line must be called much tighter as a player gets a significant competitive advantage during those short kick plays if he is even slightly offside. How do you handle the restraining line on very deep kicks that clearly will become touchbacks? What advantage does a Team A player get by being even slightly offside in that situation? Officials will recall there is even one rule in the book (the illegal wedge formation on free kicks) that is , BY RULE, not a foul is the kick ends as a touchback. Perhaps something even less dangerous (offside on kickoff) should also not be a foul on touchbacks.
He May Not be a Timex.... but he takes a licking and keeps on ticking. Hopefully Umpire Jim Krogstad is suffering no after effects from the big block he threw {oops, mean the big hit he took :-) } this past weekend. The Umpire position is tough work, and as Jim proves, only tough guys need apply!