View Single Post
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 23, 2003, 09:24pm
Ed Hickland Ed Hickland is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,130
Quote:
Originally posted by TXMike

One thing to add to the scenario that I didn't mention before, there was under a minute of clock time remaining in a game that was 35-34.

Obviously, the call went against us with the 3rd down. But even if it had been called correctly, the clock starting on the ready or the snap does matter.

Cause if it starts on the ready, I have to spike the ball...if it starts on the snap, I can run a play.


And what is really scary Tom is that Ed (and other excellent officials like him) are teaching guys around the country. I don't do Fed rules but I know from reading Ed's stuff that is pretty sharp on them. If he had told me, before I read all the other responses, that the clock started on the snap under Fed rules, I would have bought it, no question (even though it would be on the ready in our (NCAA) rules.

And Coach 2cents....1 play/call does not decide a game. What about the 40 - 50 other plays the team ran that did not result in scores due to errors by the players or bad play calls by the coaches? They bear no responsibility for the out come of the game. Everything has to be taken into totality. It is far too simplistic to just say 1 call or even a few calls cost a game when each team is running anywhere from 40 - 60 plays a game.

[Edited by TXMike on Oct 22nd, 2003 at 01:36 PM]
Coach 2cents wants consistency because he can plan around it. Can't blame him a bit and we should give it to him.

As for what to call on this particular play, this situation is what in legal profession is called a case of "first impression" in that there may not be a case that set the precedence. I stand corrected on when to start the clock because there is an NFHS case book ruling. However, without it you have to rely on what you know of the spirit and intent of the rules. If you understand the fundamentals of the rules you can justify about any ruling you make -- scary but true.

When Dick Schindler wrote the revision in 1996 he sought to develop a standard to keep referees from variations in timing based upon game situations. If Coach 2cents situation had occurred in the middle of the first quarter there would not have been reason to hurry. But in the 4th quarter with a team trying to score when the ball is made ready is oh so important. One is left to wonder if Schindler was still rule book editor would be interpretation had been the same.
__________________
Ed Hickland, MBA, CCP
[email protected]
Reply With Quote