Quote:
Originally Posted by bisonlj
I know some officials in your area that work HS, college (small and D1) in your area. I ran this by them as well to see if it is a regional thing and it was unanimous that this play should be shut down. It sounds like you are not only alone on this site but also your geographic peers.
|
I will put it to you like this. I work with two individuals that assigns two large conferences in football and I tend to hear the type of things they get phone calls about. This situation would likely have a phone call and if an official stopped play improperly and a coach raised hell, this might not be something looked highly by certain assignors. I am just going to guess, if you cannot support this by rule (which it has not been) then that would be hard to defend. Just like I said, there are a lot of "that guys" that cannot get certain games or work in certain conferences because they make up rules or situations for some subjective standard that is not supported by rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bisonlj
If you do want to use rule support, Rule 1-5-1 says the helmet must be properly secured. 1-5-3-c-9 says it must be used as intended by the manufacturer. I would guess backward is not the way it was intended to be used.
|
OK, neither rule have anything to do with what we are talking about. And if that is the case, the minute a chinstrap comes off, you better be stopping play right? After all it is not worn the way the manufacturer says right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bisonlj
Let me ask you this question. If a small child gets away from his parents and goes running on the field while the ball is live. Are you going to shut it down? What is your rules support? Sometimes it's better to do the right thing than do things right.
|
The casebook supports situations where spectators interfere with the game. There is 4.1.5 and there is a 9-1 has some coverage and talks specifically about
"A player or nonplayer or person(s) not subject to the rules shall not hinder play by an unfair act which has no rules coverage"
It even sounds like we can do more than just award an IW in that situation that you describe.
So depending the situation you can award all kinds of things and it would depend on what the kid was doing the play might be or might not be. But there are rules that cover this. There are no rules to suggest we invoke another rule to a situation where a player has a twisted helmet. It is going to be illegal if someone hits that player in the head. It is going to be a penalty if the cause of that helmet being out of place is the cause of a foul. But to suggest that doing the right thing is to invoke some standard that is not covered in the very specific rule because I have some fear. I would think the player that is in a bad situation would have more fear and stop. After all, they know if they can see or not. Heck if safety is the standard, then I should stop play anytime a smaller player is about to get hit by a bigger player. After all safety is the standard you are using right?
Peace