2018 NFHS Rules Changes

[ilyazhito]

I guess so. To me, unfair = "illegal by the spirit of the rules". In this sense, strategic fouls = unfair, because they give an advantage not intended by rule to the fouling team, even though the team is punished by conceding yardage. Safety fouls and UNS are also unfair (in that sense, and in the conventional sense), because those fouls cause harm to the victims and/or provoke retaliation. This is why Automatic 1st Downs are assigned to fouls by B that fall into the "unfair" (illegal by spirit of the rules, unsafe, or unethical (UNS)) foul categories in NCAA and NFL rules.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

I guess so. To me, unfair = "illegal by the spirit of the rules". In this sense, strategic fouls = unfair, because they give an advantage not intended by rule to the fouling team, even though the team is punished by conceding yardage. Safety fouls and UNS are also unfair (in that sense, and in the conventional sense), because those fouls cause harm to the victims and/or provoke retaliation. This is why Automatic 1st Downs are assigned to fouls by B that fall into the "unfair" (illegal by spirit of the rules, unsafe, or unethical (UNS)) foul categories in NCAA and NFL rules.

Perhaps the inherent maturity, physical differences, unique objectives and tactical approach and capabilities of both players, and games, played under NCAA and NFL games, as applied to penalty concerns and administration is simply part of the logic and purpose of establishing a unique Rules code for Interscholastic level football.

[ilyazhito]

Apparently, no one thought so initially, because NFHS did not gain a separate rules committee until the 1930s for football.

The fact that NFHS included proposals for an automatic first down on the annual rules questionnaire administered to coaches and officials after the 2017 season is proof that there is debate on the topic, and NFHS is trying to address it. Because automatic first downs are on the table in NFHS, I believe that the argument that automatic first downs are not appropriate in high school does not hold water.

I support adding an automatic first down to all 15 yard personal fouls, DPI, and Unsportsmanlike Conduct by B (the defense/kicking team prior to R gaining possession), because that will simplify enforcement of those penalties. Coaches at the HS level want an automatic first down called on personal fouls/DPI/USC by the defense because they see that at other levels, and officials have to constantly explain to them that this is not the high school rule. If an automatic first down is added to the high school rules for the above offenses , then this confusion will be reduced.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Apparently, no one thought so initially, because NFHS did not gain a separate rules committee until the 1930s for football.

The fact that NFHS included proposals for an automatic first down on the annual rules questionnaire administered to coaches and officials after the 2017 season is proof that there is debate on the topic, and NFHS is trying to address it. Because automatic first downs are on the table in NFHS, I believe that the argument that automatic first downs are not appropriate in high school does not hold water.

I support adding an automatic first down to all 15 yard personal fouls, DPI, and Unsportsmanlike Conduct by B (the defense/kicking team prior to R gaining possession), because that will simplify enforcement of those penalties. Coaches at the HS level want an automatic first down called on personal fouls/DPI/USC by the defense because they see that at other levels, and officials have to constantly explain to them that this is not the high school rule. If an automatic first down is added to the high school rules for the above offenses , then this confusion will be reduced.

As you've stated, repeatedly, You "support adding an automatic first down to all 15 yard personal fouls, DPI, and Unsportsmanlike Conduct by B, because that will simplify enforcement of those penalties.". OK, got it.

No doubt, some number of, "Coaches at the HS level" may indeed agree with your observation, and the NFHS may well be considering this question, likely along with a lot of other "questions", as is their traditional, and appropriate, responsibility.

Equally, traditionally and appropriately, they will give this question the attention and merit it deserves, considering it's value and benefit specifically to the NFHS environment, rather than the specific, and often somewhat different, objectives of other levels.

It will be interesting to see, if any adjustments actually are deemed necessary.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Apparently, no one thought so initially, because NFHS did not gain a separate rules committee until the 1930s for football.

The fact that NFHS included proposals for an automatic first down on the annual rules questionnaire administered to coaches and officials after the 2017 season is proof that there is debate on the topic, and NFHS is trying to address it. Because automatic first downs are on the table in NFHS, I believe that the argument that automatic first downs are not appropriate in high school does not hold water.

I support adding an automatic first down to all 15 yard personal fouls, DPI, and Unsportsmanlike Conduct by B (the defense/kicking team prior to R gaining possession), because that will simplify enforcement of those penalties. Coaches at the HS level want an automatic first down called on personal fouls/DPI/USC by the defense because they see that at other levels, and officials have to constantly explain to them that this is not the high school rule. If an automatic first down is added to the high school rules for the above offenses , then this confusion will be reduced.

For years the rule gave automatic first down for DPI and it was often seen as something they wanted to take off because they felt it was too harsh of a penalty (It was on surveys for years BTW). Then they finally changed it.

Again this is one of over 200 plus rules from college and nearly 300 to the NFL.

Peace

[CT1]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

For years the rule gave automatic first down for DPI and it was often seen as something they wanted to take off because they felt it was too harsh of a penalty (It was on surveys for years BTW). Then they finally changed it.

Actually, it was removed because the NFHS RC felt that the LOD provision for OPI was too severe. In order to keep the balance between offense and defense, they also removed the AFD penalty from DPI.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by CT1

Actually, it was removed because the NFHS RC felt that the LOD provision for OPI was too severe. In order to keep the balance between offense and defense, they also removed the AFD penalty from DPI.

I'm aware of all of this, but the person I was responding to likely does not know the history of all of that conversation (nor was I trying to get into all of that). And does it really matter at this point? Not from where I am standing.

Peace

[CT1]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I'm aware of all of this, but the person I was responding to likely does not know the history of all of that conversation (nor was I trying to get into all of that). And does it really matter at this point? Not from where I am standing.

Well, it matters if you want to be accurate, rather than misleading.