Sam is a good guy, a MLB umpire. Do you know if Sam was to work a high school game here and no one knew who he was, fans and coaches would disagree with his calls!

 

We are always to blame, for every loss, every blown call, every injury, our fault.

 

UTL, thanks you do have all the criteria for being a good referee

Sam is a good guy, a MLB umpire. Do you know if Sam was to work a high school game here and no one knew who he was, fans and coaches would disagree with his calls!

 

We are always to blame, for every loss, every blown call, every injury, our fault.

 

UTL, thanks you do have all the criteria for being a good referee

Refinstripes, I do appreciate you and all the officials. I have to admit that I do disagree with some calls, and think some officials have room for improvement, but I appreciate what you and all officials do. Thanks.

I know from experience FBRULES really knows football. I'm assuming HeyRef is an official and knows football too.

 

The fact that there is at least SOME difference in opinion between them points out what I believe the original poster was referencing: that there are differences in INTERPRETATION (or in this case, maybe APPLICATION) of this rule from one crew to another.

 

With this kind of interpretation discrepancy between different crews how should we coach our Linebackers? (Reminds me of when I used to teach OL they couldn't "hold" because that's what the rules and that previous crew says...then we play a "Zone" team that grabs cloth all night and this crew now says that's not really holding "as long as he keeps his hands inside the frame of the defender").

 

One week we get a crew that applies the rule as FBRULES does (virtually impossible to tell when a receiver is a receiver or a potential blocker) and our receivers get "re-routed" the entire game and it ruins our underneath passing game. So the next week in practice, we tell our LB's to do the same but we get a crew that believes like Hey-Ref does and we're flagged so we have to tell them to play completely opposite how they were taught all week.

 

Open question to my striped friends out there...what should we teach?

This is an interesting point of view. The rules don't change-I would teach and coach the strictest interpretation of the rules. I sense that if you know the referees aren't going to enforce a rule, then you can coach to take advantage of the referees non-calls. Example- 11 people on the field at one time. 12th man getting off the field like the Giants in the Super Bowl. It seems like you are asking officials to tell you at what point you will flag the 12th man-at the numbers, outside the numbers, behind the outside referee -meanwhile if you coach to have 11 on the field at all times, it shouldn't be a problem. In the NFL, there was no grey area. But ask yourself this-if you are the special teams coach and the ref throws a flag on your team on that play in a Friday night game, how many coaches would of jumped all over the ref for calling too tight?

How would you feel if on senior night all 30 seniors go out for the coin toss and the referee only allows the legal limit of 4 in the middle of the field? That's the referee's fault? Coach to the rules.

This is an interesting point of view. The rules don't change-I would teach and coach the strictest interpretation of the rules. I sense that if you know the referees aren't going to enforce a rule, then you can coach to take advantage of the referees non-calls. Example- 11 people on the field at one time. 12th man getting off the field like the Giants in the Super Bowl. It seems like you are asking officials to tell you at what point you will flag the 12th man-at the numbers, outside the numbers, behind the outside referee -meanwhile if you coach to have 11 on the field at all times, it shouldn't be a problem. In the NFL, there was no grey area. But ask yourself this-if you are the special teams coach and the ref throws a flag on your team on that play in a Friday night game, how many coaches would of jumped all over the ref for calling too tight?

How would you feel if on senior night all 30 seniors go out for the coin toss and the referee only allows the legal limit of 4 in the middle of the field? That's the referee's fault? Coach to the rules.

 

I agree wholeheartedly with this, but what do you do when you have different interpretations of the same rule? When one week guys going across the middle are being planted on their backsides and the next when you do the same your team is flagged for it? I think coaches, players, fans (whom I could really care less about), and officials just want to know exactly WHAT is the correct interpretation. There is not, and should not be, room in the rules for gut feelings, personal thoughts, "the way its called around here", etc, etc.

Sam is a good guy, a MLB umpire. Do you know if Sam was to work a high school game here and no one knew who he was, fans and coaches would disagree with his calls!

 

We are always to blame, for every loss, every blown call, every injury, our fault.

 

UTL, thanks you do have all the criteria for being a good referee

 

Sam is a GREAT guy. And an even better official to boot. Coaches and especially fans know it all, didn't they tell you that in official school? :lol::lol:

 

In my experience many of the most unpopular calls are usually.......correct. And for the calls that aren't, it does happen, I say don't judge the man until you walk a mile in his shoes. People act like HS officials are paid professionals (which is hilarious and comical), yet they wouldn't even sniff at giving up their time and self proclaimed knowledge to better the sport. You want HS officials to call games as well as professionals?? Then pay them on par with those guys.

 

Ref, good luck to you this upcoming season. :thumb:

I agree wholeheartedly with this, but what do you do when you have different interpretations of the same rule? When one week guys going across the middle are being planted on their backsides and the next when you do the same your team is flagged for it? I think coaches, players, fans (whom I could really care less about), and officials just want to know exactly WHAT is the correct interpretation. There is not, and should not be, room in the rules for gut feelings, personal thoughts, "the way its called around here", etc, etc.

This is what most people want, is consistency. And, not jumping on officials, but many times you do not get it.

 

For example, the free blocking zone. This is interpreted very differently by many people. I have had officials tell me that you can not block below the waist, while in the shot gun, because once the ball leaves the free blocking zone, there is no free blocking zone. This is true to an extent, but I have had other officials tell me if the block is began immediately after the snap, it is ok.

 

All, we want is consistent.

This is what most people want, is consistency. And, not jumping on officials, but many times you do not get it.

 

For example, the free blocking zone. This is interpreted very differently by many people. I have had officials tell me that you can not block below the waist, while in the shot gun, because once the ball leaves the free blocking zone, there is no free blocking zone. This is true to an extent, but I have had other officials tell me if the block is began immediately after the snap, it is ok.

 

All, we want is consistent.

 

:thumb::thumb: Yep. This would be the 2nd (the 1st has already been mentioned) rules interpretation that I consistently see called differently in different areas. Both can have a major effect on how the game is played.

If it were only that simple. Agree, there are a lot of situations that we can all be exactly the same, but there are areas that we will never exactly be the same.

 

Take, pass interference for example, the rule in high school says the defensive players are prohibited from interfering with the receivers (again, that undefined term for you all keeping score at home) ability to move towards, catch or bat the ball. Does all contact constitute interference? Of course not. Thus, the amount of contact is going to vary to some degree on the judgment the official has to make on whether or not the actions actually interfered with his ability to move towards, catch or bat the ball. And, we've not even touched "receiver's ability."

 

I understand everyone's desire for consistency (though I have to admit they are snickering a bit when they say that's really ALL they want, come now, be honest), that it all be the same, but as long as human beings are involved in the game making judgments there will be some sort of variation. Thus, even we exactly agree on the rule, there's still going some gray area on whether or not something actually is a foul and should be called.

 

A good rule of thumb to me is that if I have to rewind the film three or four times to find the foul or even if it really is a foul, then it should not have been called. And, you want it to be this way. After all, how many major college bowl games did you see stopped because a mouthpiece was out? Or, regular season games? What's easier? Tell him to put the mouthpiece in or call a 5 yards foul (in high school)? You can win the battle, but lose the war.

 

Could you imagine, "Sorry coach, the lineman was .25 yards past the line and therefore downfield illegally." "Coach, the quarterback looked to be barely in the neutral zone when he threw the ball." "Coach, part of his hand was in the neutral zone, encroachment, five yards."

 

What we need to be consistent on the most is letting the minor stuff go--always---and not interjecting ourselves into the game without really good reason. The longest Friday night on the field are when you are working with someone who has to call something because he saw it. And, that's coming from someone who when he first started learned the hard way.

I agree with you FBRULES, I know it is a difficult task to officiate a football game. I know many officials who do an unbelievable job, I even have several that will ask me (a spectator) after the game if they missed certain controversial calls during the game. And I tell the truth, if I saw they missed it for sure, I tell them. If they nailed it or it was to close to call, I tell them they made the right call. But, for every 10 great officials, there is one who does not try as hard, and that is what make the good ones look bad.

I'm not going to go on and on about it. I disagree agree with the case book just because A1 could still potentially block for the runner like I illustrated above. What matters is the rule book though, not what I think, and how it has been interpreted in Kentucky.

 

I know what the case book says. I've read it 100 times, too. All I can tell you is check in with the state on this one. The rule book always supersedes the case book.

 

Any time we are calling something "technically" we are on thin ice.

 

FBrules, I think we agree. If you read the key things I take form that ruling, you'll see that I said A1 may not be a potential blocker on B1, but may be on B2. And I have never said that all contact is a foul. The question before us now, is what contact constitutes a foul. Here is where our judgment comes into play.

If it were only that simple. Agree, there are a lot of situations that we can all be exactly the same, but there are areas that we will never exactly be the same.

 

Take, pass interference for example, the rule in high school says the defensive players are prohibited from interfering with the receivers (again, that undefined term for you all keeping score at home) ability to move towards, catch or bat the ball. Does all contact constitute interference? Of course not. Thus, the amount of contact is going to vary to some degree on the judgment the official has to make on whether or not the actions actually interfered with his ability to move towards, catch or bat the ball. And, we've not even touched "receiver's ability."

 

I understand everyone's desire for consistency (though I have to admit they are snickering a bit when they say that's really ALL they want, come now, be honest), that it all be the same, but as long as human beings are involved in the game making judgments there will be some sort of variation. Thus, even we exactly agree on the rule, there's still going some gray area on whether or not something actually is a foul and should be called.

 

My problem with this assessment is that I don't see the two situations we've discussed (free blocking zone and contacting the receiver) as judgement calls. IMO there SHOULDN'T be any judgement as to whether the ball is in or out of the FBZ in a shotgun situation. Same with the contacting of a receiver before the ball is in the air. I understand completely that the rule book leaves this in a situation of ambiguity. I would just like to see someone have some correspondence with the KHSAA to see how they want it called, and then apply that across the board. Surely someone can provide some kind of clarification, anything has to be better than week to week not knowing. IMO asking officials to make "judgements" in the situations described only leads to the huge variances we see in HS officiating today. No doubt, you guys are in a tough position with the setup the way it is.

 

And of course that's not ALL we want........

Yes, there is a FBz on a shotgun, yes it is immediately following the snap. I would love to see this rule changed, NO blocking below the waist at all... That will make it a lot easier plus the big benefactor, save the knees. I do think week to week we know, it is just how our judgement allows it.

 

Did the contact create the receiver not to catch the ball, did it factor in? Yes, flag it.

 

Another thing that does get missed, B hitting below the waist on A blocker..... That is a foul and is missed. I think we should go to 7 man from the 3rd round to the finals. Just don't have enough officials to cover this. Please, anyone out there monitoring this, please, we invite you to join this incredible, honorable position.....

Having been a baseball umpire for 20 years and a football coach for a couple of years, I am going to add only this...

Officiating is hard because it really relies on the one thing that no one can ever agree on...one's judgment. Umpires are always taught from day one "always answer a coach or manager beginning with the words 'in my judgment' ". Unfortunately, when it comes to officiating any sport, it relies heavily on the human element and since no one is perfect...there will never be a perfectly called game...i dont care who you are.

Having said that, being on both sides, I always tell my players and coaches...I WILL HANDLE the officials....you worry about your job whether its playing or coaching your position. I understand that an official is going to make a call based on his judgment and what he saw...therefore, I can not argue that. I can only ask "what did you see?" Many times, I already saw it and wont disagree too much. However, the only thing I have EVER asked any official...is to be consistent on both teams. Too many times I have seen officials clearly tolerate violation of rules from another team but flag the hell out of the opposing team. Case in point...when I was coaching at Iroquois, a St. X player blatantly kicked our QB in the ribs AFTER the play and i KNOW that the ref saw it because he gave the kid a warning...no flag. I didnt like it...but so be it. At least he said something. 2 quarters later, our DB was hit with a "questionable" late hit flag. Yes, the timing was questionable as to whether or not it was actuall late...but again...its a judgment thing. However, I didnt appreciate the ref coming over to our sideline and giving us a warning. WHAT THE HELL FOR??? You didnt give the ST.X sideline a warning...but you did us. I raised the point that I didnt think they were calling it fair both ways. I dont care if its St.X, Male, PRP, or Shawnee...officials are responsible for making sure the game is played fairly by BOTH teams. Too many times...Iroquois was the subject of having an unfair "tag" as being undisciplined and thugs...and we got hosed. I think we are the ONLY team in history to ever get a flag for "Ineligible player downfield on DEFENSE?!??!" HUH??? I am not kidding!!!

I know the job is hard...I dont ever complain...unless I feel the game is not being called fairly and evenly. I dont expect perfection...I know calls get missed (Lord knows Ive missed many as an umpire)...however when i feel it is obviously lopsided in the flag tossing...I only raise hell to protect my kids. They say that you can call holding on just about every play...if thats true...I expect to be flagged for holding the same amount of time as the other team. If we get flagged for 10 and they get only 1...something is wrong.

 

"See them like you call them"