The Pigskin Page  

"Upon Further Review"

2013 Week 9  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 looked at one of those "it will never happen" - type plays.  A pass was intercepted in one part of the field while a defender was possibly illegally contacting a receiver a bit further beyond where the pass was intercepted.  76% of the crew had no foul on the play. 21 % had a foul.   The remaining 3% had "other."   Most of the "others" said there was a foul for defensive holding.   

Forward Progress or Fumble ? One of the more difficult situations we are frequently asked to judge is the forward progress spot of a ball carrier.   It is even more difficult when the ball carrier does not maintain possession through and after the down.  The applicable rules are 5-1-3-a and 4-1-3-a.  Officials are reminded of the "when in question" rule also which says that when in question, the ball is dead.   Please view this play video and take the poll.   (Please remember to scroll down and click on the DONE button after making your choice.)

Coffin Corner Punt     This play presented a serious challenge to the on-field crew.    The affected officials were well-placed to make the call but still required Instant Replay to help them "get it right."  Perhaps the gunner was too close to the S for the S to judge on both the ball and the position of the gunner's feet.  It does appear the H had a perfect view of the feet and could have helped the S get the call correct initially. Another aspect of the video worthy of note is the very unusual display of CORRECT rules knowledge by the broadcasters, extending to their recommended correction to the Referee's announcement.   Some observers might see the ball touched by the gunner and then go forward and judge that to be a bat.  Since touching precedes batting, even if it had been "batted"  forward, it was a dead ball at the moment the out of bounds player touched it so most officials would not flag that act anyway. 

False Start or Defense Offside  The quickness of today's athlete can challenge officials as they attempt to determine if a defender committed an offside foul or if an offensive player committed a false start.  Officials know that when a defender is in or beyond the neutral zone, his presence can threaten up to 3 Team A linemen and if any of them react immediately, the foul is on the defense. Watch this video and then pause it after the whistles are blown and officials prevent the snap.  What would you rule at that point?  Then watch the slow motion replays and pay particular attention to the right tackle's head.  How do you rule now? 

Personal Foul or Unsportsmanlike Conduct  Officials continue to become accustomed to the rule change that makes certain dead ball fouls unsportsmanlike conduct instead of personal fouls as they have been since before this site's owner ever stepped on a football field.  In this video, the act is properly classified as unsportsmanlike conduct. However, the announcement should not include mention of "personal foul".  We normally do not comment on the "validity" of the flag for the dead ball action unless the action is blatant or flagrant.  Each official has his own "line in the sand".  Furthermore, we usually do not know what previous actions have gone on in the game and what previous warnings a player might have received.  Maybe the crew is on top of a situation that is about to explode.  In that case they might be stricter than normal.  There are varying degrees of pushing and shoving after a play. This is a physical game and players are in contact all the time. But understanding when that contact crosses the line is not a precise science.  

The Band  Rule 1-1-6-b makes band members "persons subject to the rules."  9-2-1-b prohibits persons subject to the rules, including bands,  from creating any noise that prohibits a team from hearing its signals.  This Referee chose to ask for compliance before penalizing immediately.  This is not the first time this action has had to be taken for a band but it is certainly one of the very few times it has been.  Perhaps the affected conference had issued some guidance on this situation leading the Referee to act.  Ultimately it is the Referee's decision and is not left to a team to decide if it can hear its signals or not.  

Re-spot and the RFP  Common sense would suggest that when a ball is re-spotted after it has been placed on the ground and made ready for play that a new ready for play signal should be given and a 25 second play clock started anew.  In this play, it is not clear if the re-spot was due to a request from Team A or for a crew decision.  The previous play was a kickoff that ended in a touchback.  By rule,  the ball should be spotted on the B-25, on or between the hashes (8-6-2).  It is spotted in the center if the field unless Team B designates a different position before the ready for play.  Why did the U initially spot the ball at the hash?  Was it because the ball had become dead in the end zone close to that hash?  That would not be a correct placement.  If Team B noticed the ball was incorrectly spotted (or a crew member noticed) and then the U was asked to relocate it, why wasn't a new play clock established?  If Team B initially told the U they wanted to snap at the hash and then changed their mind, perhaps the Referee decided to honor the request (even though he should not have) but not give a new play clock.   Since the play clock was about to expire, the team had to take a timeout. 

A Game of Inches  This video shows an example of just how true that adage is.  The F is in great position to rule on the play and appears to rule the ball was fumbled forward (he had a bean bag down).  The L signalled to stop the clock so may not have seen the fumble or may have "thought" the ball carrier stepped on the sideline before losing possession.  Since the ball was fumbled forward here and went out of bounds BEFORE the goal line, the ball is correctly taken back to the spot of the fumble and belongs to Team A (7-2-4-b-1).  Had the ball gone a few more inches forward and either hit the pylon or crossed the goal line in front of it before going out of bounds, a touchback would be ruled and the ball would go to Team B. 

INFORMATION:

Rom Gilbert / rom.gilbert@sfcollege.edu/ October 30, 2013