Illegal Substitution

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I had a very similar play happen to me in a juco game, where before a throw-in, the C waved in a couple of subs, lost track of how many went off, and pointed to the T to administer the throw-in. The throw-in occured with no pressure, when on the other end of the court, one of the players realized they wern't supposed to be on the floor, and ran off. We stopped play, made sure we were finally correct, and re-started. Afterwards, our supervisor told us we handled it correctly. Of course, it would've been better if that damn C would've counted correctly before letting the throw-in happen , but since it was the crew's fault, common sense was the phrase he used in agreeing we get it fixed, and get the ball back in play as soon as possible without issuing a penalty.

How does that mesh with the philosophy espoused here?

9.2.5 SITUATION: Thrower A1 inadvertently steps through the plane of the boundary line and touches the court inbounds. A1 immediately steps back into normal out-of-bounds throw-in position. The contact with the court was during a situation: (a) with; or (b) without defensive pressure on the throw-in team. RULING: A violation in both (a) and (b). COMMENT: Whether or not there was defensive pressure or whether or not stepping on the court was inadvertent, it is a violation and no judgment is required in making the call.

BTW the NCAA says the same and even issued a bulletin a couple of years ago specifying this point.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Rut, since you are an experience football official let me ask you a serious question that relates to this thread.

Would you have called the offside penalty against the player from Louisville on the FG attempt by Rutgers at the end of that game?

The player clearly crossed the line of scrimmage prior to the snap of the ball, but he didn't touch anyone, nor did he continue to rush. He stopped and actually backed up as the offense snapped the ball and took the kick, which they missed. Did he affect the play?

Let me first clarify my football experience. I do not work college football (at least not varsity game) at this point of my career. I have worked many JV games this year because our area is soon going to 7 man for many college games and there are evaluating officials for the future. I have not been in a position very often to rule on such a call in a actual game.

Secondly, I definitely would have called an offside penalty in the play you described (The play would have been shut down in NF Rules by rule). I saw the play live and I called this penalty before the penalty was announced or before ESPN let you know in their graphic that there was a flag. Not only was it obvious, it was the expected call and the very common call in the game of football. Calling offside and false start penalties are some of the easiest calls in the game of football to make because everyone sees them. Offside penalties in football are not any different than a FT shooter clearly stepping into the lane before shooting the ball. It is obvious to everyone and not a close call.

I really do not know what you are trying to imply with this question (but I will play along). In my opinion of what a T is in basketball is much more similar to an unsportsmanlike penalty/personal foul in football. If we can prevent these being called we do everything in our power to do so as football officials. If we are put into a situation where everyone sees the infraction or everyone knows what the common call is, then you apply the rules accordingly. This is a fine line, but this is why you see the rookie apply the rule differently than the long time veteran. Why, because we could literally call this every single game at some time. I think Bob summarized my philosophy to a tee (and what other officials do where I live). I also work some college and calling a T for this would get me and others fired for not preventing a very preventable situation.

Peace

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

How does that mesh with the philosophy espoused here?

9.2.5 SITUATION: Thrower A1 inadvertently steps through the plane of the boundary line and touches the court inbounds. A1 immediately steps back into normal out-of-bounds throw-in position. The contact with the court was during a situation: (a) with; or (b) without defensive pressure on the throw-in team. RULING: A violation in both (a) and (b). COMMENT: Whether or not there was defensive pressure or whether or not stepping on the court was inadvertent, it is a violation and no judgment is required in making the call.

BTW the NCAA says the same and even issued a bulletin a couple of years ago specifying this point.

Seems apples and petunias, but admittedly I'm getting old.

So is what you're espousing that if your partner waves a sub for team A in, and as sub approaches team member he's replacing, you brain-fade and administer the throw in-your remedy for your mistake is call a T on A for 6 players on the floor?

[Nevadaref]

My point with the Louisville/Rutgers play and Case Book play 9.2.5 is that we are discussing a player clearly stepping over a line, but his action isn't really affecting gameplay. There is a rule against this in all of the situations.
Should a call be made by an official?
Some are advocating calling it, some are not.

It seems that both the NCAA and the NFHS want it called whether there is an advantage gained or not, and it seems that most officials are going to call it when it is obvious.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

How does that mesh with the philosophy espoused here?

9.2.5 SITUATION: Thrower A1 inadvertently steps through the plane of the boundary line and touches the court inbounds. A1 immediately steps back into normal out-of-bounds throw-in position. The contact with the court was during a situation: (a) with; or (b) without defensive pressure on the throw-in team. RULING: A violation in both (a) and (b). COMMENT: Whether or not there was defensive pressure or whether or not stepping on the court was inadvertent, it is a violation and no judgment is required in making the call.

BTW the NCAA says the same and even issued a bulletin a couple of years ago specifying this point.

I'm not sure our two plays are equal (I prefer apples and bowling balls), but I see what you're trying to get at.

My point is my supervisor considered how we handled our play correct. I didn't know that until after the fact. He has also said many times if we apply the rules, he has no problem backing us up. Which, obviously, is a slight contradiction because there were 6 players on the floor, and we discovered it, so we could have, by rule, issued the T. So, at least in this specific instance with this specific supervisor, "common sense" trumps "strict rules interpretation". Do all supervisors feel this way? Probably not. Can I use what I feel is common sense instead of strict rules interpretation all the time? Absolutely not. So where is that line drawn? I'm still trying to figure it out.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I'm not sure our two plays are equal (I prefer apples and bowling balls), but I see what you're trying to get at.

My point is my supervisor considered how we handled our play correct. I didn't know that until after the fact. He has also said many times if we apply the rules, he has no problem backing us up. Which, obviously, is a slight contradiction because there were 6 players on the floor, and we discovered it, so we could have, by rule, issued the T. So, at least in this specific instance with this specific supervisor, "common sense" trumps "strict rules interpretation". Do all supervisors feel this way? Probably not. Can I use what I feel is common sense instead of strict rules interpretation all the time? Absolutely not. So where is that line drawn? I'm still trying to figure it out.

Excellent post. That is the problem whenever we talk about common sense. What some feel is common sense, others will not. (JR has even advocated on this forum that following a plainly written rule is common sense! )

What one supervisor believes is the right thing to do, another will say was clearly incorrect.

All I can tell you is that is the human factor in sports. Strange stuff happens, decisions are made by people and that makes the game worth watching. Otherwise a computer could always tell us who would win. What would be the fun of that?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

My point with the Louisville/Rutgers play and Case Book play 9.2.5 is that we are discussing a player clearly stepping over a line, but his action isn't really affecting gameplay. There is a rule against this in all of the situations.
Should a call be made by an official?
Some are advocating calling it, some are not.

It seems that both the NCAA and the NFHS want it called whether there is an advantage gained or not, and it seems that most officials are going to call it when it is obvious.

You are trying to apply a philosophy in one sport to another situation in another sport that has little or no relation. You could easily say that the offsides that was called not only was obvious but maybe affected the kicker in rushing his attempt. Maybe the blocker would be affected because they would have to adjust their blocking to a break away defender. You must have never played football if you think this had no influence on the play. I think you should stick to soccer.

Peace

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

JR has even advocated on this forum that following a plainly written rule is common sense!

And, for the most part, he would be right.

[Nevadaref]

Altered quote! Not really Rut's words. Done by me to make a point.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You could easily say ...maybe this, maybe that, maybe something else... maybe it had no influence on the play.

Seems like you couldn't easily say anything.

BTW I saw a few sports reporters on TV who said that he had no bearing on the play, but they all agreed that he was offside and that it was a penalty.

[JRutledge]

Nevada,

If I have said this before I will say this again. There are a reason why certain officials are considered for the big games and the playoff assignments year in and year out. There is also a reason why some officials will never get a chance. If calling a T on a player that just put a foot onto the floor (by rule this is an automatic T), then go right ahead. I am very confident that this is what people where I live want and will not get the least bit upset if I do not give a T for this action. Considering I have seen some officials much more experienced than I am and have worked multiple state finals and work higher college levels than I currently do. I feel confident in my philosophy of this.

Peace