I think it would be interesting discussion to talk about on field experiences with officials calls that were discussed and changed duing the game....

How does everyone out there handle it?

Do you discuss in pregame?

How does the crew handle dealing with it, especially from an ego situation?

I had a situation where I was trailing a play down the sideline, the line judge was in front of me by 10-15 yards. As the runner was passing the LJ, he glimpsed over his left shoulder and observed an offensive player with his hands on a defensive players' back. He turned back around and dropped a flag.

As the LJ was turning back around to observe the runner, the offesive player removed his hands from the defensive players' back. The runner scored.

I met the LJ at his flag and asked if he had a block in the back. The LJ replied "yes". I then asked him "what did you see?".....He told me that he had seen the player "with his hands on the defensive players' back"......I then told him what I saw......I then said unless you tell me otherwise we're going to wave it off.....the touchdown play stood.

I immediately went to the defensive teams sideline and presented the discussion to the head coach.

Why didn't you accept the LJ's call? From your description, you didn't see the ENTIRE play.

Bob

The way its usually done in my association, is that if someone sees something differently, he'll come up to the referee, and tell him, then the ref'll call over the calling officail, give the new info, and ask the official if he still stands behind his call. If the official still stands behind the call, it stands, if he doesn't the ref'll wave it off.

Probably just another white hat who thinks his opinion is the only one that matters.

wedickinson,

I'm an amature at this so maybe there's something I don't get that is obvious to y'all who have a better understanding of the rules.

There is something in your story that is not clear to me...

You saw what the flagging official saw, you knew why he threw the flag and what he thought the foul was... but what did you see that made you think it should be waved off?

Just to be clear, are we right in assuming you were the white hat making the executive decision on the play?

-Sean---

A very good point. From what i've read, the play sounds like a textbook example of clipping. That's what i would've called. Why did you wave off the flag??

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ref18

Quote:

From what i've read, the play sounds like a textbook example of clipping. That's what i would've called.

New for 2003, Clipping is a block from behind at or below the waist.

The proper call is illegal block in the back, a ten yard penalty (9-3-5).

well i've now learned something new. Thanks middleman.

Is it really new for 2003?

Anyways this is a common misconception by coaches. :)

Pardon me, my FED is showing!

Yep, the rule is new for FED this year. Until this year, Clipping was "charging or falling into the back ... of an opponent" and specifically included "Pushing by use of hands or arms on an opponent's back." This year they split them "to more clearly differentiate between the two actions." Of course the NFL and NCAA have had IBB for awhile.

Fact is, many of us have been calling it this way for years (mostly because the big boys do). Instead of clipping, which we called when a player charged into an opponents back usually knocking him down, we would call illegal use of the hands for blocking outside the opponent's frame (2-3-2b & 9-2-1a).

The effect was the same - 15 yards for a clip, 10 yards for a block in the back. The NFHS has been "experimenting" with it in several states, and finally codified it in 2003.

REPLY: Personally, I disagree with this technique. I think you stand a better chance of alienating the calling official by going to the R without him. It would certainly make a better case for bruised egos and hurt feelings. It could even undermine the effectiveness of the crew going forward. Both my HS and our college association recommend that the 'questioning' official go directly to the calling official--before he has the opportunity to report his foul to the R--and ask him specifically what he saw. The R will wait, away from that conversation, until the two officials work it out. Then the calling official will go to the R and either report his foul, or tell the R to wave it off. If the two officials cannot reach consensus, then they <u>both</u> go to the R and present their case. Only in this latter situation will the R exercise "executive privilege."

ref18,

There is no such thing as clipping in Canadian rules. It is Blocking From The Rear and it has not been revised - it is 15 yards.

isn't there a push from the rear, but its only 10 yards?? That's what everyone (fans) reffer to as clipping, so i just assumed it was what clipping equated to in the Canadian rules., i had no idea about the below the waist factor.

You can tell everyone watches a bit too much NFL as if that were possible.

Funny story, I was timing a high school game, and the coaches for one team, were yelling because the ref didn't call a "personal foul" on a facemask call. Then the line judge came over and explained to them that there's no such thing in the Canadian rules. I had a bit of a laugh over that.

[Edited by ref18 on Dec 31st, 2003 at 11:12 AM]

B][/QUOTE]

New for 2003, Clipping is a block from behind at or below the waist.

The proper call is illegal block in the back, a ten yard penalty (9-3-5). [/B][/QUOTE]Gentleman, Where you all been? The block in the back provision was instituted in 2002

That's what I thought James... I thought I was going crazy :(

Ref18, Block in the Back is 10, Clipping is 15. :)

I'm talking about Canadian rules, where a block in the back is 15, and a push from the back is 10. Completely different from the American rules.

I don't think there is a 10 yard penalty for block in the back in Canadian.

New for 2003, Clipping is a block from behind at or below the waist.

The proper call is illegal block in the back, a ten yard penalty (9-3-5). [/QUOTE]

Quote:

Gentleman, Where you all been? The block in the back provision was instituted in 2002

You know what ... you are absolutely right. Here I am comparing my 2001 book to 2003 and seeing the difference, brian dead and oblivious to the fact that I had the wrong book out. No wonder the change isn't shaded! DUH! ... now where did I put that 2002?!

Thanks for pointing that out. As I said, we have been enforcing it that way for years, so the actual rule change for us was seamless.

I was working a game last season -- a midweek game with a crew I had never seen before. I threw a flag on a return and went to the crew's white hat to report the foul. IBB, 26, return team.

He signals a clip.

I hear him tell the umpire to mark 15. I stop him and told him that the block was above the waist, that it was only 10 and shot him the right signal. He looked at me like I was from Mars. I swear. In 2003 with a rule change that went into place the previous season. Ugh. Why I normally like to be the white hat, if I can help it :)

Rich

Wow thats not very good. :)

I like when you WH too.

Correct - we do have a 10 yard variety, but it is called an Illegal Block. It is many times called a Push from the Rear.

I believe that Blocking From The Rear is the foul we have that is closest to "clipping". Note that this 15 yard foul is not a UR, so no auto 1D.

I've had the same coach in each of the past 3 seasons in the Sr. OV tell me that his DBs can chuck up to 5 yards downfield. I called a player of his on it last year, and another game I was working of his this year had it called (by another official). The R explained it to him at half-time and I thought to myself, "I had this exact same conversation with you last year." Nice memory. Agreed... there's too much TV influence in some coaches.

Personal Foul. False Start. Touchback. Never heard of 'em!

Everyone seems to agree this should have been *some kind* of penalty.

I'm still curious as to why it was waived off in the original story...

-Sean---

Do I know you?

I don't think so.

Here is my interpretation for what it is worth.

LJ saw a hand on the back and flagged it while continuing to officiate. The trailing R saw the player remove his hand without completing the block and his interpretation was no advantage was gained, wave off the flag.

As the WH I cover in pregame what to do when two officials see different views. If the R is not involved the officials are to determine between themselves what occurred and one will report it to the R. My thought is unless the R was an observing official his involvement might indicate he made the decision. As the R, I only involve myself in the conference when there appears to be disagreement and someone needs to be the arbiter that makes the decision.

If I'm the R, I'm asking the flagging official what he saw. If he tells me he's CERTAIN he had a foul, I'm not going to overrule him even if I think it's not a foul.

He may have seen something from his angle I didn't. Now, if he admits he doesn't know, I may try to get him to come around to my way of thinking -- but I'm not going to overrule him just because my hat's a different color.

Rich

I like your thinking Rich. I agree, if I'm WH I'm not going to be a nazi about it. I'm going to walk over, tell him what I saw, ask him what he thinks. He can decide if its a foul or not.

Had this play in a game this season.

On 1st & 10, QB A1 rolls wide right and throws the ball deep out of bounds to avoid a sack. Obviously intentional grounding, and R had the flag down.

On the enforcement, I am working the chains, telling the box man to set it and it's now 2nd down with loss of down, after I walked off 5 yards from end of run. When I look up I see the ball is placed by U 5 yards from previous spot, not from the end of run, about 4 yards difference. So I give a couple short blows into my whistle to get R's attention. Then I run out to tell them they spotted the ball in the wrong place, a result of improper enforcement. I was the only member of the crew who was certain of this, and consequently R would not reassess the yardage properly, but would leave it as it was. After about 30 seconds of discussion, I said "well if I can't convince you otherwise we should go from here and move on". And I went back to my position and we continued the game.

Once back in the locker room we checked the rulebook, and they were all convinced.

Had just the opposite last season. Fourth and 5. QB rolled out toward the LJ and as he was about to get sacked threw the ball into an area without receivers. LJ tossed his flag (that is a subject for another discussion) for an IG.

I was ready to enforce a five-yard penalty against the offense and then turn the ball over to B when my crew said I was wrong. B could not get the penalty and the ball. I argued the penalty gets enforced with a loss of down the ball goes over to B on downs. I gave in being in the minority.

The halftime discussion was, after the chewing out about an LJ throwing an IG flag, I was right and how to enforce fourth down penalties with loss of down.

Good call Ed, good thing you didn't kick that one. :)

So you observe the offense, player A, with his hands pushing on the back of the defense, player B?

The way I understand the rule is that unless you obseve the actual original contact, then you did not see a penalty.

Because, if the original contact by the offense, is inside of the defenders frame, and the defender turns to chase the ball, but original contact has been maintained by the offense, then the block can legally continue, even though it is now in the back.

Or, as I have observed in little league, a defender will turn his back to an offensive player just as the block is being made. Why did he turn? I don't know, but it happens all of the time. No penalty here either.

So my question is, don't we have to see initial contact to know whether or not the contact is illegal?

Yes we do.

Let me run this by.

Offensive player places hands on back of defender to initiate a block. He suddenly realizes what he is doing is illegal and removes hands into a surrender position, as if, he didn't do it. And, in reality, he did not.

The defender continues to play.

No advantage has been gained. Football is a contact sport and a hand on the back should not affect the play.

However, the official observing the initial contact did not see the result of the contact. But, the trailing official did.

Sorry, a little late with this response, but want to see if I'm in the same field.

What I noticed in this long thread is that wedickinson never said what he saw, much less why he waved the flag off. I was always taught that unless you see the originating contact, then you shouldn't be calling an "Illegal to the Back". When I first started officiating, I remember making this "rookie" mistake. And what I remember best is my WH came and asked me what did I have. When I told him "Clipping" (before rule change), he asked me where the originating contact was. It was then that I replied "uhhh, didn't see it." He then told me he was going to wave the flag off since 1. did not affect the play and 2. we don't know if we had a legal or illegal block. The point was that at least he told me why he waved the flag off and didn't do in a manner that "embarrased" me.

I am very grateful to work with a WH who doesn't let ego get in the way. I learn alot with him.