Tipped pass?
 

A forward pass is tipped at the line of scrimmage and goes high in the air. A defender, in an effort to get to the ball or restrict an offensive player from getting to the ball, grabs the offensive player by the back of the shirt and pulls him down. (No horsecollar tackle) Legal?

Holding. Maybe unsporstmanlike.

Unsportsmanlike?????? How so?

Guess.

It may be an unfair act, but how would you get unsportsmanlike conduct from a contact foul? (That used to exist in Fed and NCAA, but I thought they separated those categories years ago.)

The unfair act, if called, would be enforced as a referee's discretionary penalty, most likely possession to the nonoffending side at the spot, as equitable. Otherwise just illegal use of hands on a loose ball play.

NFHS: Pass interference restrictions end for Team B when a legal forward pass is touched by any player. This is no foul.

That's the way I felt about it.

You cannot just hold someone regardless of the status of the ball. The restrictions for passing interference for the defense clearly end on a tipped pass. But unsportsmanlike conduct cannot ever take place with contact in a NF game. There is an instance at the NCAA level, but this would not likely apply here.

Peace

AS ALWAYS, it depends on what you actually see. NFHS: 2-3-5-b "A defensive player MAY ALSO push, pull or ward off an opponent in an actual attempt to get at the runner OR A LOOSE BALL if such contact is not pass interference, a personal foul or illegal use of the hands.

HOWEVER, NFHS: 9-4-g prohibits, "Make ANY OTHER CONTACT WITH AN OPPONENT, including a defenseless player which is deemed unnecessary or excessive and which incites roughness.".

So it really boils down to YOUR judgment as to the specific situation YOU are looking at.

But unsportsmanlike conduct is not unnecessary roughness. Unnecessary roughness is only a personal foul. Why does that matter, because 2 UNC result in an ejection. A UNR only results in a personal foul and does not automatically result in an ejection if more than one is called. You can always have a flagrant personal foul act, but again we are adding stuff to the play that was not asked. You are right there is judgment, but we have to know the difference between a personal foul and unsporting contact in an NF context. Even at the NCAA, there are specific things with contact that can result in Unsporting acts, but that does not involve plays like the one we are talking about. KISS!!!!

Peace

The original situation was stated as, "A defender, in an effort to get to the ball or restrict an offensive player from getting to the ball, grabs the offensive player by the back of the shirt and pulls him down. (No horsecollar tackle)"

"An effort to get at the ball" and "restrict an offensive player from getting to the ball" are treated differently in the provisions on legal use of the hands and arms, so the official has to infer which it is. But pulling an opposing player down by the back of the shirt is hard to imagine as anything other than restricting that player's movement as the purpose of that contact. Who thinks pulling down on someone else's collar is going to enhance your ability to get to the ball? That's why I "see" it from the description as illegal use of hands.

It might be a personal foul, in that similar contact against a ballcarrier is illegal, but the conditions there were determined to be unreasonably dangerous to the knees, given the forward momentum the ballcarrier would have, a situation that does not necessarily obtain here. This one's a "have to see it" judgment as to whether it's UR. And I'll allow as it might be an unfair act penalizable by the "God rule", but again that's a "have to see it", like as if the fouled player were clearly going to gain possession of the ball save that foul, but there are similar situations of contesting a loose ball that are rarely penalized by the discretionary penalty, so it's unlikely here.

The "Penalty" descriptions under NFHS 9-4-4 closes with the advice, "Disqualification also if ANY fouls under those articles are judged BY THE GAME OFFICIAL to be FLAGRANT." (see NFHS 2-16-2-c).

The difference between USC and a (judged) Flagrant Illegal Personal Conduct consequence is entirely semantic and is determined by the judgment of the calling game official and both involve potentially identical consequences

The "Penalty" descriptions under NFHS: 9-4-4 advises, "Disqualification also if ANY fouls under these articles ARE JUDGED BY THE GAME OFFICIAL to be flagrant. (See NFHS: 2-16-2-c).

Based solely on the judgment, of what the calling official observes, the consequences can rise to disqualification for both "Noncontact Unsportsmanlike Conduct by Players/Non-Players" and/or Illegal Personal Contact fouls

I am very aware we can rule any personal foul a flagrant foul, but you have to rule that an individual acts as a flagrant act, not use an accumulation of actions that result in a disqualification. An Unsporting act can also be ruled flagrant, but if you get 2 fouls for unsportsmanlike conduct, you are disqualified from the game. So a player could have 5 personal fouls and not be required to leave the contest. Not the case with multiple unsporting acts. That is why it matters how we call acts with or without contact.

And unsporting acts or conduct is a POE this year. We were told in our area not to go around ejecting players for acts that were not unsporting but PF in nature.

Peace

Not looking to split hairs, and agree multiple USC behavior can produce automatic disqualification, whereas Flagrant PF is judged per incident, BUT individual PF that rise to the level of Flagrant, or if repetitive and repeated, depending on the judgment of the covering official can, and should where appropriate, merit disqualification based on their severity.