Funny how no credit is given to the opponent and how hard they played against a team as good as T, but that's just how you private school people are on here. Will be interesting to see how your team looks next year...very interesting.

 

I think Male's D played exceptionally well and could have made the game alot more interesting if the O could've capitalized on T's mistakes. But. They didn't. Good Effort by Male though.

I thought Male well coached especially on defense and defended T's bubble screen very well.

I thought Male looked well coached, also. We really do want better competition, so it is good for us when opponents are on an upswing. Who could not want to have the games we used to play with Male.

They had 1 first down in the 1st half; but in pre-game quick was dropping passes on purpose running sloppy routes and not preparing mentally in terms of a champion. It perplexed me that he could do that in pre-game and come out mentally ready, i didnt think he would play too well. But they won so it doesn't matter.

H had zero first downs in the first half and negative 18 yards on 18 offensive plays. here are the game stats: Male High School vs Trinity High School (Oct 12, 2012)

However, officiating notwithstanding, Male defended T VERY well, and after they fumbled the second half kickoff and quickly fell behind 21-0, they put together a really nice scoring drive. Male probably has talent equal to Manual right now, but Male's coaching staff is much better - especially defensively.

H had zero first downs in the first half and negative 18 yards on 18 offensive plays. here are the game stats: Male High School vs Trinity High School (Oct 12, 2012)

However, officiating notwithstanding, Male defended T VERY well, and after they fumbled the second half kickoff and quickly fell behind 21-0, they put together a really nice scoring drive. Male probably has talent equal to Manual right now, but Male's coaching staff is much better - especially defensively.

 

I know im not crazy. I witnessed a 1st down pass on 3rd down in between mid-field towards the T side line. Maybe it was in the 2nd half? :confused:

I think Male's D played exceptionally well and could have made the game alot more interesting if the O could've capitalized on T's mistakes. But. They didn't. Good Effort by Male though.

 

Male D'fense wasn't impressive, They were aided by some very suspect penalties. On T's 1st drive they marched right down the field when Dawkins broke off a 50 yard TD only to have it called back, Quick also had a 40 yard gain nullified. There were several other calls the stalled T's O. The only thing Male D did well was defending T's bubble screens.

Here's an example of how the officiating went. Trinity Ball 3rd and 21 at the -20. Quick catches a pass and runs by several people. A flag is thrown and the +40. Quick get to the +20, goes out of bounds and is horse collared down. Flag. Officials confer. Calls hold on Trinity, Horse Collar on Male penalties offset replay the down. Male actually benefited (and their sideline cheered) from being flagged. HOWEVER since the horse collar happened out of bounds it should have been a DEAD BALL personal foul for a late hit. The hold should have been stepped off from the spot of the foul which would have given Trinity a first down, then the dead ball foul should have been enforced. As I figure Trinity would have had the ball first down on the plus side of the field. The referee has been doing it for years and he's just not good I cringe whenever I see him. I really want to call him out by name but I don't know if that allowed.

 

Also I now remember why I really don't like Male or their fans. I've never seen a team that's getting thumped talk as much trash as they did. And their fans had the stones to complain about the officiating.

 

AT

 

I think you are absolutely correct - from the little that I know - that if the play you were talking about is deemed to be a Dead Ball - Personal Foul; then think it would have to be assessed after the live ball.

 

But you might want to check the rule book - and I could be wrong - but I think - Horse Collar penalties are treated as 'live ball fouls" - regardless of where they occurr - and if that in fact was what was called then it would offset the Hold -- doesnt seem like a fair result but think maybe that's what the rule may be.

AT

 

I think you are absolutely correct - from the little that I know - that if the play you were talking about is deemed to be a Dead Ball - Personal Foul; then think it would have to be assessed after the live ball.

 

But you might want to check the rule book - and I could be wrong - but I think - Horse Collar penalties are treated as 'live ball fouls" - regardless of where they occurr - and if that in fact was what was called then it would offset the Hold -- doesnt seem like a fair result but think maybe that's what the rule may be.

 

Jim--While you're cogitating over the rules and laws of HS football, do you (or anyone) know whether it is possible, in an offsetting foul situation, for one team to decline the penalty the other team committed and absorb the penalty it committed. For example, the Defense is offsides while the Offense completes a 70 yard pass, which would net only 45 yards, let's say, because of a block in the back commmitted by the O downfield. If the O declined the offsides penalty and the D accepted the block-in-the-back foul, then the O would be 45 yards to the good. I can't recall a team ever being given the option to decline a penalty in an offsetting foul situation. It seems that the play is always a "do-over." What is the rationale behind this? It seems that the fairer way would be to net out the yards penalized against each team and gained/lost on the play, although this would present a problem if the play resulted in a score.

Jim--While you're cogitating over the rules and laws of HS football, do you (or anyone) know whether it is possible, in an offsetting foul situation, for one team to decline the penalty the other team committed and absorb the penalty it committed. For example, the Defense is offsides while the Offense completes a 70 yard pass, which would net only 45 yards, let's say, because of a block in the back commmitted by the O downfield. If the O declined the offsides penalty and the D accepted the block-in-the-back foul, then the O would be 45 yards to the good. I can't recall a team ever being given the option to decline a penalty in an offsetting foul situation. It seems that the play is always a "do-over." What is the rationale behind this? It seems that the fairer way would be to net out the yards penalized against each team and gained/lost on the play, although this would present a problem if the play resulted in a score.

 

T

It is my sense that very topic and "outcome" is often debated by those far knowledgeable than I. The end result surely appears to be unfair.

 

If my understanding is correct - the only time a team may decline Offsetting penalties - accept their own and negate the opponents = is WHERE THERE HAS BEEN A CHANGE OF POSSESSION ON THE PLAY - and the team now in possession must decline the other in order to keep the ball. All other situations where there are offsetting but no change of possession -- there is no option. I am ready for my undertanding to be corrected - but that is the way I think this particular rule is applied....

Male D'fense wasn't impressive, They were aided by some very suspect penalties. On T's 1st drive they marched right down the field when Dawkins broke off a 50 yard TD only to have it called back, Quick also had a 40 yard gain nullified. There were several other calls the stalled T's O. The only thing Male D did well was defending T's bubble screens.

 

Which is the crux of the T offense. Regardless give Male's D credit, based on pre-judgements the score should've been a lot worse. Male's D played with a lot of heart and i respect that. Also if you don't want penalties don't hold, simple as that.

Which is the crux of the T offense. Regardless give Male's D credit, based on pre-judgements the score should've been a lot worse. Male's D played with a lot of heart and i respect that. Also if you don't want penalties don't hold, simple as that.

 

A Ref a can a hold on any given play, some holds calls warranted, While others holds are very questionable. C'mon man, don't try to act like they're never any bad calls. Bottomline here is Male Defense certainly played hard but they were no match for T.

A Ref a can a hold on any given play, some holds calls warranted, While others holds are very questionable. C'mon man, don't try to act like they're never any bad calls. Bottomline here is Male Defense certainly played hard but they were no match for T.

 

Of course there are bad calls. And don't you act like there isn't holding on nearly every play. Bottomline is Males's D played exceptionally well in respect to who their opponent was and what they were able to do.

Of course there are bad calls. And don't you act like there isn't holding on nearly every play. Bottomline is Males's D played exceptionally well in respect to who their opponent was and what they were able to do.

 

That's my point, there is Holding on nearly every play during any game whether it's T, X or whom ever. Let me remind you of what you said

( if you don't want penalties don't hold, simple as that.)

So you see, It's not as simple that.

 

Bad calls can change the score's in games, meaining keeping the score closer than it should be but great Teams don't let those bad calls change the out come of the game. So, that's exactly what T did put them away, Inspite of questionable calls.