http://network.yardbarker.com/high_school/article_external/high_school_football_player_penalized_for_tribute_to_dead_friend/6499402?linksrc=mb_main_col_8

Two distinct issues to me:

 

1. The rule itself

2. The enforcement of a subjective rule

 

I like the concept of the rule. However, it puts the official in a tough spot. I am not a football official so I do not know the wording of the rule and the general ideas on how to enforce it. However, I didn't see anything there that seemed to violate the spirit of the rule. By the way the article was worded I expected to see him drop to a knee or both knees and point skyward with his head back . All I saw the kid do was raise his finger to the sky as he was walking off the field. I do not believe that type of action is why the rule was put into place.

We like to say that rules are balck and white / cut and dry. But they are not. Many rules are open to the interpretaion of the official. For instance; pass interference has a rule to go by, but it is up to the determination of the official if he believes it fits or not. The same can be said for unsportsmanlike conduct, holding, etc. This is one of those cases that (in my opinion) could have been interpreted to be a good no call.

We like to say that rules are balck and white / cut and dry. But they are not. Many rules are open to the interpretaion of the official. For instance; pass interference has a rule to go by, but it is up to the determination of the official if he believes it fits or not. The same can be said for unsportsmanlike conduct, holding, etc. This is one of those cases that (in my opinion) could have been interpreted to be a good no call.

 

Officials get paid to make subjective calls. No question.

 

This one leaves a bad taste in the mouth due to a)kid not doing anything most would consider excessive and b)his actions have zero impact on a play unlike holding/PI/etc.

Wow, I thought all the kids around him were celebrating more than he did. Maybe the penalty was on the whole team?