Words can't describe.... this video.

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Let me get this straight from you. Grabbing the arm is always a foul?

Do you have a rules reference for that ruling?

Peace

Grabbing the arm = hold. The hold was on the right forearm of the offensive player and resulted in a possession consequence (advantage not intended by rule) of white losing the ball.

Never said that grabbing (holding) is always a foul. Those are your words. By that logic nothing is a foul.

I understand where everyone is coming from.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

Grabbing the arm = hold. The hold was on the right forearm of the offensive player and resulted in a possession consequence (advantage not intended by rule) of white losing the ball.

Never said that grabbing (holding) is always a foul. Those are your words. By that logic nothing is a foul.

I understand where everyone is coming from.

But I see what Jeff's saying, too. If the ball was poked out cleanly and there's a subsequent grab of the arm, it may or may not be a foul.

To me, it looked (on the grainy video) that the arm grab led to the loss of possession, which would be a foul. And the official was in a bad place to see it. Happens. The meltdown that resulted is inexcusable, regardless.

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

But I see what Jeff's saying, too. If the ball was poked out cleanly and there's a subsequent grab of the arm, it may or may not be a foul.

To me, it looked (on the grainy video) that the arm grab led to the loss of possession, which would be a foul. And the official was in a bad place to see it. Happens. The meltdown that resulted is inexcusable, regardless.

Rich

I have agreed with everything you said. I also said I understand everyone's points.

Arm grab resulted in loss of possession. The official was in a bad place. I previously stated that the coach should've gotten the boot for his second outburst that involved shoving players, throwing clipboard/notebook, rather than waiting until the end of the game. BTW, reading the scoreboard the home team (in white) was up 3 with 20 +/- seconds to go, the coach was not too bright to get up and complain when he likely knew he had the "seatbelt."

My contention is that just because the distance by the coach is greater than that of the officials is not in itself a reason to dismiss the belief that the coach has a legitimate complaint. How he decided to express his complaint is another issue.

[Red_Killian]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

Rich

BTW, reading the scoreboard the home team (in white) was up 3 with 20 +/- seconds to go, the coach was not too bright to get up and complain when he likely knew he had the "seatbelt."

.

As stated earlier in the thread this game was in MN. We have a few of our own non-Fed rules here in the land of 10,000 lakes. Home team wears dark, visitors wear white and 18 min halves are the most obvious. So his team was behind not ahead at the time of his ejection. The other MN poster correctly stated no real preference on regular or side panels shirts, but they do want the crew to match.

Regardless of +/- 3 pts, I totally agree coach was not too bright in getting his 2nd T and the ejection, the game was not yet decided.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

Grabbing the arm = hold. The hold was on the right forearm of the offensive player and resulted in a possession consequence (advantage not intended by rule) of white losing the ball.

Never said that grabbing (holding) is always a foul. Those are your words. By that logic nothing is a foul.

I understand where everyone is coming from.

Then you do not understand where I am coming from. If the ball is poked out first and in an effort to go for the ball some touching of arms and body takes place, it is not a foul unless someone is put at a disadvantage. If you have the ball stolen from you, there better be more than a simple grab to cause a foul. That player better has been put at a disadvantage. And I am not saying anything goes during a loose ball, but when the ball is lose and bodies are flying all over the place, it is not in my experience a good practice just to call a foul because there is some minor body contact or even very brief contact with the arms unless there is a clear disadvantage. And I am using the incidental contact rules to justify that and common practice. It looks to me like the ball was stolen first and then some contact afterward. That may not be the actual case, but I have seen plays like this before and if the illegal contact did not result in the steal, I have got a play on.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It looks to me like the ball was stolen first and then some contact afterward. That may not be the actual case, but I have seen plays like this before and if the illegal contact did not result in the steal, I have got a play on.

And it may have looked that way to the T too. Illegal contact is always a judgment call.

Or maybe he blew the call(shrug).