Vangelis

I always have fun with the boys, Vanny-G. Without the chain crew I'd have never:

 

Got shot by a cannon.

 

or Found out how to mix a cajun martini on a tailgate. (Evidently, a potent recipe).

 

or Broke my arm.

 

or Learned to say first down in Spanish.

 

I know it's gonna be a good game if I have a good chain crew. And I know it's gonna be a fun game if I have some characters behind me.

:ylsuper::ylsuper::ylsuper:

Until the ADs decide to pay for netural officials, you have expect a bunch of dads to be supporting their team. I can't imagine a coach having a problem with that.

Per the National Federation of State high School Associations (NFHS), 1- members of the chain crew are actually considered officials, not fans. 2-The chains and the official down box shall be placed opposite the press box or "the designated sideline." 3-The crew must refrain from showing any partisan reaction to events taking place on the playing field. 4-Complete concentration of the crew is absolutely necessary. 5-Operating the equipment 6 feet off of the sideline is for the protection of the players, coaches, and all persons who are part of the game.

Actually, I like having the chains 2 yards off of the field. It gives me room to work. I also don't have to worry about running into the chain crew and the chains while I am officiating a play. If the players and coaches get in my way during the game and prevent me from carrying out my duties, I have no problem with giving a sideline warning. It usually works like a charm the first time! :thumb: Also, I would not have a problem removing a chain crew member if they happen to cross the line. We have had several officials who have had to actually do that during a game. Right Offside? :devil:

Rule 9-1, Helping the Runner: An offensive player shall not push, pull or lift the runner to assist his forward progress. 5 yard penalty.

 

It's gonna need to be egregious to get called. I kind of agree with the ND/USC "no call". (It looked pretty bad on replay, though...)

Do you mean it better be "BIG AND OBVIOUS!!" I have actually seen that foul called! :eek:

I don't think anyone said he did signal TD, he verbally called out "he's in, that's a TD, roll off easy." I don't care what the officials said later or what they said after reviewing the film, they messed up from the first whistle to the last whistle no matter how anyone looks at it. It's sad that some of the BHS coaches ran into a few CCH parents on Sat and they said their sons even said Elliott was in and they were playing "D" for CCH and were right there. His knee wasn't down, period. When Bankemper hit the pile from behind it moved at least 2 yds forward which put all of them in the end zone. If you watch the replay, watch when the BHS player picks Elliott up off the ground, look where he is laying and you can see clearly his body, minus from the knees down, is laying in the end zone.

 

Like I said earlier, a more experienced crew should have been scheduled to do this game not a bunch of rookies w/a few yrs of experience. Shame on the man who schedules the refs.

I will defer and support the officials who worked the game. With all due respect, they have probably forgotten more about officiating football than most experts like you will ever know. :argue: Are they a good crew? Yes. Were they perfect? No they were not, but what officiating crew is. Were they as bad as everyone is alleging? No way! Did the officiating impact the outcome of the game? NO it did not. Time to move on! Good luck to both Cov Cath and Beechwood the rest of the year. :thumb:

I was once told (by an official) that any ref on the field who is able to see something should call it. I guess different officials say different things.

On plays near the end zone, it's really hard for the back judge (who should be on the end line at least 10 yards away), the referee (who is usually at least 12+ yards away depending on the referee), or the umpire (who is usually behind the defensive linemen and linebackers) to tell if the "ball" crossed the plane of the goal. The officials on the wing have the best vantage point. The other officials might be able to tell if the player ended up in the end zone, but not whether his forward progress was stopped before the ball crossed the plane or whether the runner was down when his knee hit the ground before the ball crossed the goal line. When there are 22 bodies congesting the middle of the field, it can be a very, very tough call to make.

Beechwood got robbed. Those refs need to be fired. Beechwood's Cody Elliott was four feet in the endzone. The back ref called it a touchdown but the side judges ignored him. Then the refs didn't get the ball set until 15 seconds had ran off the clock. This game was not won by Cov Cath. It should have been a tie and gone to OT. Worst reffing I have ever seen. Beechwood, you did not lose this one, don't let it get you down!!!!!!

It's not the back ref's call! It's the wing officials' call! :confused:

Vanny-G's got his dander up again :laugh:. But I agree that CoachBucket is incorrect in his assessment.

 

As Vangelis and Old Ref previously stated, an immediate "cut block" by an offensive lineman, even when the ball is snapped from "shotgun", is legal provided it's against a defender who's intial position was inside the free blocking zone.

 

There is an interesting discussion about this on another thread: High School Football Rules started by Frank329. BBW is a rules difference between college and high school rules. Wouldn't it be a lot simpler if the NCAA rule was adopted in NFHS?

:D:D

The key is you can cut in the free blocking zone (neutral zone) as long as the ball is in the zone.

 

Bad thing is NO OFFICIAL has the GUTS to make this call on a consistant basis due to the number on teams running a shotgun offense. Because the moment the ball leave the center the ball is out. I see so many teams get away with it.

 

This is one rule the KHSAA should work with their officials on.

If the QB is in a shotgun formation and his offensive linemen cut block as soon as the ball is snapped, that is legal. However, if the linemen delay the block and cut when the ball is out of the zone, then you have a problem. (See my previous post regarding the rule on blocking below the waist)

With regard to your GUTS statement, I strongly disagree. :mad: Eventhough most of the officials that I know do have big guts, (especially the umpires that work for local TV stations :thumb:) they do have the "cajones" to call the foul if, and when, they see it. :fight:

I have read the rule book, repeatedly. I know what it says, but my post was based on what multiple officials have told me as to how the rule is interpreted. The rule book is great, but you have to go on the officials making the calls, the letter of the rule is great, but the officials go on the what they are told in clinics, and they enforce the rules. I have argued many times with the rule book in my hand, and the official always says, "that is not the the way the rule is interpreted". I no longer teach cut blocks and I infaticly encourage that no cut blocks are delivered.

 

I have had linemen flagged for cut blocks while the ball is in the neutral zone, against DL who were in the neutral zone, I was told by the official this was illegal.

 

I have had my DL cut blocked by RB when the ball was not in the neutral zone, and neither the DL nor the RB were in the neutral zone, I was told by the official this is legal because the DL started in the neutral zone.

 

I have had LB cut blocked by OL, and I was told this was legal because the LB entered the neutral zone.

 

I have had LB cut blocked by RB, and told this was legal because both entered the neutral zone.

 

I have had my OL cut block LB, and was told this was illegal.

 

I have had my RB cut block a DL and told this was illegal.

 

So to answer a simple question, with a complex answer, it depends what officials are calling the game, and how well they know the rules and how they interpret that rule.

Maybe this will help. This is what we teach our officials:

BLOCKING BELOW THE WAIST

Blocking below the waist is making initial contact below the waist from the front or side against an opponent other than a runner.

Blocking below the waist applies only when the opponent has one or both feet on the ground.

Blocking below the waist is ILLEGAL except:

When the block below the waist is in the free blocking zone AND

All players involved in the blocking are on their lines of scrimmage and in the zone AND The contact is in the zone.

Otherwise, blocking below the waist, by the offense or the defense is illegal unless it is against a runner or a player pretending to be a runner. Also once the ball leaves the zone, blocking below the waist is illegal. :thumb:

Continuing on from the end of the HHS-Dixie thread:

 

There is no 5 yard chuck rule in high school. I'm not an official but my understanding is that once the player is no longer deemed a potential blocker, he cannot be hit even if the ball is not in the air. This, for example, means that the TE cutting across the middle cannot be blindsided by the LB.

 

I think the challenge is in determining at what point the player crosses into the "receiver" mode.

A defender may legally contact an eligible receiver beyond the neutral zone before the pass is in flight. The contact may be a block or warding off the opponent who is attempting to block by pushing or pulling him. However, if the receiver is not attempting to block or has gone past or is moving away, it is illegal use of the hands.

Just goes to show that some part time jobs just don't work out and perhaps one should look elsewhere for their calling. That crew would be great as Greeters at the new Wal Mart. Of course the uniforms are not as nice.

Hey, WhoozYoDaddy, you really know good talent when you see it don't you? Why don't you consider joining the local officiating association? I'm sure that the NKOA members would "greet" you with open arms! The meetings are at 7:00 PM at Beechwood. We were going to have the meetings earlier, but a majority of us can't get off work that early. Most of us "part-timers" work at the Greater Cinti Association for the Blind, the Cinti Eye Institute, Lens Crafters, Lasik Plus, the Northern Ky Eye Center, and the Stevie Wonder School of Officiating. Here's the link to our site: nkoafootball.org. I hope to "see" you at the next meeting! :cool:

Don't be seduced by Vanny-G's overtures, SM32. The only benefit to being an official is that the vertical stripes make us look taller.

 

Or maybe slimmer?

 

Would you buy smarter or more popular?

 

Okay, you got me. There ain't much glamour in it.

 

Thanks for having an objective view of the game administration for this contest. In return, we're always happy to answer or clarify any rules questions you might have. All anybody has to do is ask.

Vanny-G?? :laugh:

:confused: Isn't that what I said?

Sandman32, we could really use you on Friday nights!!! How about it?

It wasn't Matt, he was probably in the OVC. It was Mr. Frank and yes, he was either the Official of the Year in Kentucky either last year or the year before.

If I am not mistaken, Northern Ky is very fortunate to have at least 3 or 4 current football officials who have previously been awarded the KHSAA Football Official of the Year. The ones that I know of are:

Chuck Smith

Joe Frank

Matt Young

That's pretty impressive! :thumb:

BlueChip got it, the white hat was Joe Frank who was the Official of the year in KY two years and his crew is considered the #1 crew in NKY. Great guy too (I have to throw that in because Joe reads the forum from time to time).

That's why he is known as "Joe the Pro" or "Number 1."

I played for Ludlow in 1975, and I think our special teams may have given up more touchdowns than our defense did.

The good old days of Randy Reese and CONK!

Let's get the discussion back to the Campbell Co. and Pendleton Co. game.

No problem here! I'm just defending my boys in the stripes from an unwarranted pot shot! :irked: I wish both teams well the rest of the season. :thumb:

It could have been a bad call. Given who the officiating crew was (the group you will not see at Highlands or CovCath or Beechwood).

Boy you hit the nail on the head! That "group" apparently had an off night from the working some pee wee games. They're bottom of the barrel. Usually, they're "out of town" if you know what I mean. I heard that one of the officials has an RV that the "group" frequently uses since the crew never works a local game. Although, if you think that you can do a better job than the above-mentioned "group" why don't you consider joining the local officiating association (NKOA). They meet on Tuesday nights at Beechwood at 7:00 PM.

Most of the teams in NKY have moved Friday night kick-offs to 7 PM versus 7:30 which was the standard.

 

After a heat delayed starting times first week, last Friday was the first with most teams kicking off at 7 PM.

 

I'll say this. The sun was brutal from 7 to about 7:45 because it was so bright and so low in the sky.

 

So which start time do you prefer considering all factors?

7:00 PM is fine with me!

I agree with you. Players do often times become spectators behind the play. Therefore, if they would still be able to legally earhold, it would reinforce the coaching aspect of never becoming a spectator on the football field. If a clean hit is dangerous, we wouldn't be allowed to play the game. No player is defenseless. They are all wearing equipment and they all have the ability to keep their field awareness at a heightened level.

"No player or nonplayer shall charge into or throw an opponent to the ground 'after he is obviously out of the play' or after the ball is clearly dead either in or out of bounds; pile on any player who is lying on the ground; position himself on the shoulders or body of a teammate or an opponent to gain an advantage; throw a helmet to trip an opponent; or make any other contact with an opponent which is deemed 'unnecessary' and which incites roughness." (9-4-3a-g) Like it or not, it is a foul for illegal personal contact when a player charges into or throws an opponent to the ground after he is obviously out of the play.

It is a penalty that is only a few years old that simply takes away another opportunity for contact on the field. If a hit is clean between the whistles, it should be allowed. However, it was a penalty. It was a penalty that I think is one more thing that is making the game softer, but it was a penalty.

Players that trail a play, typically ease up and become spectators. More often than not, they usually walk, jog or stand still in the middle of the field and watch the play unfold before them. Whenever that happens those players become easy targets since they don't expect to get hit by an opposing player. They are defenseless players. Officials are not only charged with the duty of administering the rules in order to make sure that contest is fair and balanced, but we also have the ultimate responsibility for player safety. Each play is different. Slight contact that does not knock a player down might not warrant a penalty, but rather some preventative officiating. On the other hand, contact 10 yards behind a play that causes another player to fall down, well, that is different story.

Right, I agree that a kid shouldn't make that hit, but all the same, kids are taught to "hit to the whistle" and it was a clean hit...I just think that is a rule in football that needs to be looked at.

It's a safety issue nothing more, nothing less. There was no need to hit a player 10 yards behind the ball carrier. I imagine that particular "hit" had no impact on the play.

The penalty was called on a completly clean hit that took place 10 yards behind the ball carrier...a rediculous call.

"10 yards behind the ball carrier"-That's probably why it was called.

Great pictures Guru! Did you have to use a wide angle lens when you photographed the white hat? He's definitely not a back judge anymore.

Yes I would, unless of course they want 1st and 2nd year officials working. Even if that is the case, I would assume they would not want a 1st or 2nd year official as a white hat. I could be wrong, but I don't see it happening.

I don't think that you have anything to worry about. :thumb: