2019 Rules Changes

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not think this is just a state issue, it is a conference issue, an area issue. They could suggest they have ball boys but not have the people available (their claim) to do what they are being asked. We have issues during the postseason to get procedures followed to a letter.

Here is my thing, I really do not care either way. It is what it is. Ball boys even at the college level are often bad. We just have a procedure there to make it work a little better and we also have 7 officials as well to make it work. We have 5 right now at the high school level and unless that changes, ball boys would be a luxury and a problem at the same time. Either way, the NF had to know this when they put in the rule that many states do not have visible clocks and certainly does not have ball boys. I will be waiting as I did during before this current basketball season to figure out if they did not consider all the challenges that will occur with a new rule. We will see what happens when everything comes out for real.

Peace

I think it was ultimately 7 states that did this as an experiment last year and a few of us for 2-3 years. There was a mix of states with and without visible play clocks and various levels of ball boys. None of the states I talked with who did it mentioned any issues with ball boys so it worked.

It was such a glowing success the states who did experiment were very concerned they would have to go back. I'm not sure if we would have given up our seat on the rules committee, but it would have definitely been a consideration. I did not speak with one coach or official who didn't love the change. And until our commissioner proposed the experiment 3 years ago I don't believe there was a huge demand for it.

I have a hard time believing your ball boys are that incompetent they can't figure this out. I know several HS and small college officials in Illinois and none of them have raised the concerns you have at either level so I don't expect it to be an issue in your area. I think you will be just fine.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

I think it was ultimately 7 states that did this as an experiment last year and a few of us for 2-3 years. There was a mix of states with and without visible play clocks and various levels of ball boys. None of the states I talked with who did it mentioned any issues with ball boys so it worked.

It was such a glowing success the states who did experiment were very concerned they would have to go back. I'm not sure if we would have given up our seat on the rules committee, but it would have definitely been a consideration. I did not speak with one coach or official who didn't love the change. And until our commissioner proposed the experiment 3 years ago I don't believe there was a huge demand for it.

If you have figured me out by now, I do not care what other states do. Great, they had no issue with the ball boys. I was just stating it might be a problem in my world or state or where I work games. It is not a tragedy and we will still have to deal with it, but it is just something I noticed with the rule. Again, we have no specifics or if they will take on even most of the NCAA procedures.

Originally Posted by bisonlj

I have a hard time believing your ball boys are that incompetent they can't figure this out. I know several HS and small college officials in Illinois and none of them have raised the concerns you have at either level so I don't expect it to be an issue in your area. I think you will be just fine.

You obviously did not really digest what I was saying to you. If all we have is one ball for the entire team for the entire game and we have a long incomplete pass that is nearly at the fence or past the track, we do not have anyone that typically brings us that football and then goes and gets the ball that was just used. It is one thing to have 4 people in the game that are carrying the footballs of both teams and on both sidelines, comparing that to maybe one "kid" that has to bring the footballs during a change or possession. We have had teams that took time to just give us the ball during a normal change of possession and we had a kid that often was not paying attention to the game or did not have the ball in the first place. Often we have the QB or player bring us the ball because the "ball boys" are not affective in doing their job and that is just on change of possessions.

The rule just came out. So I am not so sure you know everyone that might have raised this issue or talked to everyone that implemented the rule. It is a conversation at this point. It does not mean the world is coming to an end. We are months away from any regular meetings about the topic in most areas so I would suspect many people are doing other sports and probably not fixated on football to even raise some issues. It might be nothing in the end. But I have been doing this awhile and rules like the Horsecollar foul or adding PSK or even putting in how fouls are administered after a score, all had issues when the rule came out and took some tweaking to get to where they are today. We have a rules interpreter that tells us every year, "It takes the NF 3 years to get a rule change right." And part of that statement is the frustration of how a rule is added but does not cover the little things that make it run smoothly and either our state or the NF has to come back to clarify something that was not covered properly.

Honestly, I do not think it was necessary. We play fewer minutes in a game and they could have gone back to other rules they once had to speed up the game, like running the clock after a change of possession. We already have mercy rules that speed up games that are out of hand. It is the rule now, but was it so great of a change? No, not to me.

Peace

[HLin NC]

Considering the :40 sec clock is going to affect the offense the most and it's the offense whose ball has most likely gone out of play to the track or fence, it will be incumbent on them to insure that their ball person(s) are doing their utmost to retrieve it or get another one in play.

I imagine that if there is some inordinate delay, the Referee has the ability to blow it dead and re-set to the :25.

Certainly would seem to be an item that needs to be covered by state offices at the coaches clinics this summer.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

Considering the :40 sec clock is going to affect the offense the most and it's the offense whose ball has most likely gone out of play to the track or fence, it will be incumbent on them to insure that their ball person(s) are doing their utmost to retrieve it or get another one in play.

I imagine that if there is some inordinate delay, the Referee has the ability to blow it dead and re-set to the :25.

Certainly would seem to be an item that needs to be covered by state offices at the coaches clinics this summer.

That's the way I believe all of the experimental states dealt with it. In 3 years I think I think we reset the play clock maybe 3 or 4 times total. And it was usually some egregious issue or discussion that caused it. An inattentive ball boy maybe delayed us 4 or 5 seconds, but it just meant we got the ball placed with 24 seconds rather than 29 seconds. The offense was still huddled or trying to figure out their formation so it really didn't affect them much. But I'd be shocked if you didn't have the option to pump it back to 25 if you felt you inconvenienced the offense enough they could potentially have a delay of game due to the officials.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

That's the way I believe all of the experimental states dealt with it. In 3 years I think I think we reset the play clock maybe 3 or 4 times total.

In college games, I remember way more times we had to do this than just 3 or 4 times total and they ran the clock after scores. And again we had ball boys on both sidelines. So let us not make it sound like there is no possibility for issues.

We will just have to deal with the issue. Heck I am good as when these become problems, likely the teams helped cause them.

Peace