The Pigskin
Page
2013 Week 8 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 poll play featured a roughing the passer situation. We expected there to be some differing opinions as the call was a close one. However, the results were not that close. 68% said no foul on the play. 25% said there was roughing the passer. 7% said there was targeting (it is noted that 7% likely includes some who also called it roughing the passer).
DPI ? This week's poll play is a real life example of a hypothetical situation that officials frequently discuss over a cold beverage. When the pass is intercepted before it even gets to a receiver, does that receiver still get pass interference protection? Does the timing of the contact on the Team A receiver matter? Recall that after a ball has been touched "anywhere inbounds by an inbounds player", pass interference rules do not apply (7-3-9-h). Also, if a pass is uncatchable, there can be no DPI (7-3-9-c-1). Please view this play video and take the poll. (Please remember to scroll down and click on the DONE button after making your choice.)
Airborne Ball Carrier and the Pylon This example of an airborne ball carrier trying to get the ball to the goal line plane at a pylon should generate some good crew discussions. Most officials working NCAA football rules do not have the benefit (or burden) of Instant Replay review. Rule 8-2-1-a and the AR's 8-2-1-I-III, & V - IX cover these potential TD plays at a pylon. If the airborne ball carrier can get a body part to either touch the ground in the end zone or touch a pylon, he is able to take advantage of a goal line plane that extends outside the sidelines.
Unsportsmanlike Conduct or Personal Foul Play 1 Play 2 Dead ball contact fouls (pushing, shoving, striking, etc) that occur clearly after the ball is dead and which are not part of "game action" are supposed to be called unsportsmanlike conduct this season (9-2-1-j). Officials still seem to struggle with this change. The intent of the change was to make that extracurricular dead ball action a more costly foul. Since a player is automatically disqualified after two unsportsmanlike conduct fouls, calling it unsportsmanlike conduct instead of a dead ball personal foul puts that player in imminent danger of disqualification should he commit any other unsportsmanlike act during the game. In this final example, the officials correctly charge the extracurricular as unsportsmanlike conduct on the players from each team. It is noted the Zap-10 is NOT an option as these were offsetting fouls.
Kick Catch Interference In recent years there have been countless examples of officials NOT flagging kick catch interference because the kick receiver managed to complete the catch even with the interference. The rule makers have tried to make clear that just because the kick is caught, the kicking team players should not be excused for kick catch interference. Some conferences and officials have tried to justify the lack of the flag by claiming the fact the receiver caught the ball "proved" he was not truly interfered with. That is not the intent of the rule. This play shows a clear act of kick catch interference being flagged despite the receiver's ability to complete the catch. Officials are reminded of the old saying..."Sloppy language leads to sloppy thinking leads to sloppy officiating." The penalty for KCI is enforced from the spot of the foul, not the "dead ball spot" as was announced here. In this specific play, that is not a real difference but could be in another KCI situation.
Fumbles Forward and the Pylon It is hoped the covering officials in this play did not completely report what they observed to the R. Yes, they had a fumble that went forward out of bounds, but it was out of bounds because it struck the pylon. That is a critical piece of information the R needs to be told. Such a play should not require a great deal of crew conference , much less assistance from the instant replay booth. 4-2-3-b says that a ball that touches the pylon is out of bounds behind the goal line. 7-2-4-c says that fumbles out of bounds behind a goal line are a safety or a touchback depending on impetus and responsibility. In this play, Team A is clearly responsible for the fumble out of bounds so a touchback should be ruled immediately.
Another Fumble Forward (and a Chop Block Call) Plays are sent in from time to time and this one came in from Texas where high school football is played according to NCAA rules (with some minor exceptions). The L flagged what appeared to him to be a chop block. He also had to deal with a fumble near his sideline which ended up going out of bounds there. So he had his hands full (and no F to help him out). The left tackle appeared to start to make contact with the defender high and then went low. If that is what happened then it would not be a chop block since a block that starts high and goes low is not considered to be a low block. From our viewpoint high in the sky, it appears although the tackle may have wanted to block high at first , he actually missed the defender and then went low immediately. That WOULD be a low block and would then make this a chop block. Good quick explanation by the R regarding the fumble forward out of bounds to include succeeding spot and clock status.