Rule 9-3-4g... No player or non-player shall make any other contact with an opponent which is deemed unnecessary and which incites roughness.

 

This is a very open ended rule which leaves a lot of leeway for officials' interpretation and judgement. Here are some situations which will likely, but not always, draw a penalty flag.

 

1. rough hit out of bounds

2. rough hit on unsuspecting opponent or a player not protecting himself or unable to protect himself (ie. blind siding, head hunting)

3. rough hit on an opponent who not involved in the play

4. non football related contact (ie. head slap)

5. Late hit after the play ended

6. shoving or throwing a player to the ground in any of the situations above

 

It is also important to note that unsportsmanlike conduct and personal fouls for unnecessary roughness are very different. Unsportsmanlike conduct fouls do not involve contact, and generally involve words or gestures, while personal fouls do involve contact.

 

A player can be ejected for any especially rough act, or unsportsmanlike behavior. Two USC fouls will be an automatic DQ for the pllayer or coach.

Rule 9-3-4g... No player or non-player shall make any other contact with an opponent which is deemed unnecessary and which incites roughness.

 

This is a very open ended rule which leaves a lot of leeway for officials' interpretation and judgement. Here are some situations which will likely, but not always, draw a penalty flag.

 

1. rough hit out of bounds

2. rough hit on unsuspecting opponent or a player not protecting himself or unable to protect himself (ie. blind siding, head hunting)

3. rough hit on an opponent who not involved in the play

4. non football related contact (ie. head slap)

5. Late hit after the play ended

6. shoving or throwing a player to the ground in any of the situations above

 

It is also important to note that unsportsmanlike conduct and personal fouls for unnecessary roughness are very different. Unsportsmanlike conduct fouls do not involve contact, and generally involve words or gestures, while personal fouls do involve contact.

 

A player can be ejected for any especially rough act, or unsportsmanlike behavior. Two USC fouls will be an automatic DQ for the pllayer or coach.

 

This has to be one of the toughest calls for refs to make/ not make for the reasons you mentioned. What is a "rough hit"? Who is "not involved in the play"? Is it someone 30 yds behind the play but still in pursuit? Does the blocker not block that player, just to see that player continue his pursuit and make the touchdown preventing tackle after the runner breaks tackles? Who is an "unsuspecting" player? Maybe this penalty is like pornography: hard to define but you know it when you see it.

For starters, the official MUST see the whole action in order to call a foul. If you see a player go down and an opponent standing there next him, it is not enough to call this foul. Officials need to be sure to see the whole thing before calling a foul.

 

Rough is generally described as charging into or running into. As stated before, not all contact is a foul, not all contact is rough either.

 

A player who is out of the play is fairly easy to judge. We see many times when a teammate of a scoring player is looking for someone to hit and he cherry picks an opponent standing at the 30 yard line when the runner is at the 5. If a player in pursuit has a reasonable chance of catching the runner, or contributing to the play, this foul would likely not get called. If he is being a spectator instead of a player, there is no need to contact him, so this would be a foul.

 

The pornography analogy is correct in this regard. A rule many officials subscribe to is that if you have to think about whether it's a foul or not, it probably is not.

For starters, the official MUST see the whole action in order to call a foul. If you see a player go down and an opponent standing there next him, it is not enough to call this foul. Officials need to be sure to see the whole thing before calling a foul.

 

Rough is generally described as charging into or running into. As stated before, not all contact is a foul, not all contact is rough either.

 

A player who is out of the play is fairly easy to judge. We see many times when a teammate of a scoring player is looking for someone to hit and he cherry picks an opponent standing at the 30 yard line when the runner is at the 5. If a player in pursuit has a reasonable chance of catching the runner, or contributing to the play, this foul would likely not get called. If he is being a spectator instead of a player, there is no need to contact him, so this would be a foul.

 

The pornography analogy is correct in this regard. A rule many officials subscribe to is that if you have to think about whether it's a foul or not, it probably is not.

 

Agreed. My point is that this penalty has a lot of leeway and I was agreeing with your post to that affect. For example, it can often be difficult to determine if a player in pursuit has a reasonable chance of catching the runner. Under the example you gave, I agree that it's an easy call. If in doubt, the penalty is not called. I've got zero problem with the way the refs have called (or not called) this penalty and hope you didn't think I was implying I did. I wasn't.

Agreed. My point is that this penalty has a lot of leeway and I was agreeing with your post to that affect. For example, it can often be difficult to determine if a player in pursuit has a reasonable chance of catching the runner. Under the example you gave, I agree that it's an easy call. If in doubt, the penalty is not called. I've got zero problem with the way the refs have called (or not called) this penalty and hope you didn't think I was implying I did. I wasn't.

 

Mostly you can tell by the pursuing player's body language. If he is running hard and staying alert to other players around him, he is almost always in the play. If he is jogging, or walking, with his head either straight ahead or down a bit, he is out of the play.

 

Here is an example of a cheap shot on a player who not involved in the play, unsuspecting of the contact about to come upon him. Watch the video for Blue 27 hit on white 48. This was not called a foul in the game, but certainly should have been.