![]() |
|
|
|||
Quote:
If he's going to do something other than hold, he doesn't enjoy the exception and NFHS requires he rise, to take his knee off the ground. Under the NFHS code a tackle involving grasping a facemask, applies to anyone grasping an opponent's face mask, which calls for a penalty enforcement from the spot of the foul. Applies to grasping a QB by the facemask whether the foul is committed behind, or in advance of the LOS, as it does for anyone else. How is either gratuitous? |
|
||||
Quote:
The only reason I tackle the QB is because I illegally grab his face mask. And I get the benefit of those yards. The only truly fair enforcement is going back to the previous spot and tacking on the 15 yards. Having exceptions for fouls committed behind the line of scrimmage for BOTH teams is consistent, BTW, and it's what the NCAA does. |
|
|||
Quote:
Remember these rules are not made for you or me, they are made for the masses to understand and the mass of officials that work that level. This entire argument that the NCAA does makes more sense is not accurate IMO. Officials will screw up those kinds of things as not everyone is that knowledgeable about he rules they have in front of them already. And a lot of officials never work college ball so it makes little difference to them what the NCAA might do in some specific situations. Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
The NFHS has plenty of exceptions as well. They just aren't called out as Exceptions. They are in line of the rule using words like "unless" or "except". We had a local official go through the rule book looking for these words and he found the number of "exceptions" in HS wasn't that much different than NCAA.
|
|
|||
The one area that stands out to me as a difference that NFHS must be different on is the blocking rules. I am not an NCAA official but I work with a few and end up being involved in conversations with them or around them.
I don't want to be demeaning but there are a vast group of HS officials that would have difficulty calling some of the low blocking rules that the NCAA allows that we don't. Some of the equipment regulations that the NCAA either allows or ignores (knee pads & mouthpieces come to mind) would be safer if they followed the NFHS' lead. (And I do not wish to begin the debate of the uncovered knee). The Fed is not totally heathen as they do allow the FBZ, adopted PSK, and the restricted area on the sideline. As the Rules committee becomes younger, I'm sure you'll see a move more towards homogenization. |
|
|||
Quote:
Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
Quote:
When the defense has accomplished reaching the QB, or any runner behind the LOS without benefit of ANY illegal act, they are entitled to whatever yardage advantage they have legally attained. Conversely, when the defense has legally forced the offense to retreat 10, or more yards, behind the LOS their is NO CONSEQUENCE to the offence choosing to foul, and in addition to the loss of yardage being the same, or less, (depending on the offensive foul selected) they gain, what some consider an UNFAIR advantage of replaying the down, when the penalty is accepted. In essence, the offense is ENCOURAGED to foul, as the penalty for doing so is negated by enforcing the penalty for fouling from the previous spot. Much like "beauty", "stubbornness" is also, "often in the eye of the beholder. Last edited by ajmc; Tue Jan 26, 2016 at 09:42am. |
|
|||
Quote:
Here's Rich's quote: "The only reason I tackle the QB is because I illegally grab his face mask. And I get the benefit of those yards." (emphasis added) Do we know what would have happened had the illegal act not occurred? No. The offense might have made a significant gain. That's why the penalty administration in this case is considered a "gratuitous difference". |
|
|||
Quote:
You could change the rule to make it a judgment call on that basis if that's the concern. At a rugby match I saw a player reach out & make a neck tackle at midfield, upon which the ref awarded a penalty try, which is supposed to be given if absent the foul play a try would probably have been scored. I had my doubts about that, so I asked the ref & he said indeed that by his judgment of the situation (it was the wing on that side, who was outside the rest of the defense) if the tackler hadn't reached up with his arm like that, he would not have been able to make a tackle. (I still thought he could instead have gone low & grabbed a leg instead, which could as well be said in the case of the face mask grab Rich was referring to.) |
|
|||
Quote:
When an OFFENSIVE foul is committed BEHIND the eventual End of the Run, the NFHS ALL BUT ONE enforcement principle presumes that any yardage gained BEYOND/AFTER the spot of the foul is an "Ill gotten gain", and the enforcement is applied from the spot of the foul RATHER than the spot where the run ACTUALLY ended. ALL BUT ONE does NOT apply to defensive fouls, so I'm not sure what your above reference is intended to relate to. Under the NFHS code, the runner is entitled to any and all yardage he legally gained (without benefit of any fouling). NFHS:10-4-2 defines those instances where the "basic spot" (NFHS: 2-41-1) to be used for PENALTY enforcement is "the previous spot". Sorry, but I have no idea what you are trying to infer regarding, "gratuitous difference" and, to my understanding, NFHS does not consider, "things that might have been"(Thankfully) Last edited by ajmc; Wed Jan 27, 2016 at 03:24pm. |
|
|||
Quote:
In NFHS, if the QB is tackled by the facemask & goes to the ground, it's a running play & penalized from the end of the run. If he passes or fumbles, it's a loose ball play & is penalized from the previous spot. There's no logical reason for such a difference -- therefore, it's "gratuitous". |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
|
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|