The Pigskin
Page
2014 Pre-Season Clips (4)
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 which are good learning 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 once again at the illegal blocking below the waist rules, specifically "peel back" blocks. 53% said foul as blocker was blocking back towards his own goal line. 47% said no foul, with the overwhelming majority of that group judging that the ball was still in the low blocking zone so there would be no foul for blocking below the waist. ( And they say we are not consistent ! ? ! ? ;-) )
Editorial changes to 6-3-11 and the associated AR's have generated considerable discussion in recent weeks. The rule itself saw the removal of what many officials believe to have been significant language in the rule with regard to Team A batting of an untouched scrimmage kick in Team B's end zone. In this play the covering official apparently ruled "touchback" and there was no flag for the illegal kicking of the loose ball by Team A. How would you rule on the play? If you believe there was a foul, how would it be enforced? Please view this play video and take the poll. (Please remember to scroll down and click on the DONE button after making your choice.)
Scrimmage kicks continue to be one of the
most exciting plays of the game and one of the most challenging situations for
officials. This video clip of a play that features critical calls by
officials at the start and the end of the play. The non-call by the R for
the contact on the punter is a great example of 9-1-16-a-6 as the defender made
contact with the punter after touching the kick. At the other end, the
returner signalled his teammates to stay away from the kick before he grabbed it
after a bounce and tried to advance. Once again, misinformed game
announcers do an injustice to the officials and to the viewing public by making
ill-advised proclamations on things of which they clearly are not informed.
The covering official properly stopped the "return." The "returner" is
fortunate he was not flagged for the illegal advance. 2-8-2 and 2-8-3
describe valid and invalid fair catch signals. 6-5-2 and 6-5-3 cover
advances after signals and AR 6-5-3-V is right on point with this video clip.
It is noted many officials will not flag "returners" in this situation for the
illegal advance. Perhaps they are giving the player the benefit of the
doubt for not realizing they had made an invalid signal.
Coach Behavior
We have been instructed to be more cognizant of coach conduct along the sidelines in an effort to reduce the volume and intensity of unsportsmanlike conduct by coaches and assistants. This play from last season shows an instance when a crew did penalize a coach for his outrageous conduct. It is not clear or known if the coach actually struck the official with his hat but it was an act that was still worthy of being flagged. Our viewers can decide for themselves if they would disqualify a coach under 9-2-4 (intentional forcible contact with a game official).
While team B has to be given an unmolested opportunity to catch a KO, they have to be in a position where they could do so and also be trying to do so. There was no flag for KCI on this play as there were no Team B players in a place where they could reasonably be expected to catch the kick. If there had been, then this catch by Team would have been KCI, with or without contact between players.
Inside the last minute of each half , a false start by Team A when the game clock is running qualifies for the 5 yard penalty but also for a 10 second subtraction from game clock. This crew did a good job of getting coach's options and moving the game along. While the acceptance or declination of the penalty is typically a no-brainer, the offended team has to be given the Zap-10 option. If they choose it, the the offending team has to be given the option of burning a charged team timeout to avoid the runoff.
Unfortunate play but these things happen. When back judges are focusing on a player coming fast and going deep up the middle of the field, it is easy to lose sight of the possibility another receiver may be coming to same general area but from the other side. That is way they keep their heads on the proverbial "swivel". Realistically, was the QB even passing to the receiver picked off by the back judge? Probably not.