proposed Federation changes

[joec]

Football is over in Indiana. The State finals were completed yesterday. At the conclusion of the season, I try and go over some of the things that need changing, at least in my opinion. Well, here goes. Let me know what you think. Your imput is invaluable to me
PROPOSED CHANGE #1
LATE HIT BY DEFENSE AFTER COMPLETION OF 4TH DOWN----let's go over a situation. 4th and 9 at B's 20, late in the 4th quarter. A16 runs for a 6 yard gain and is downed at the 14, well short of the line to gain (LTG). After the whistle, B55 piles on. The way the ruling is now is to have B take over on downs at the 14 before the enforcement of the penalty which will be half the distance to the goal (enforced down to B 7, and set the chains). What I would like to see is to have A keep the ball after the enforcement which would be down to the 7 of B. Give A a 1st and goal, the first down gained by distance. I think the late hit SHOULD be part of the 4th down administration. It seems more equitable that way, at least to me.

PROPOSED CHANGE #2
UNSPORTSMANLIKE FOULS; UNEQUITABLE ENFORCEMENT
SITUATION: 3rd and goal at B's 3. A16 tries a QB sneak and gets to the 2. After the play has concluded, B55 calls A46 a ($%*&^%#!!). A flag goes down. Right after this (but NOT immediately), A55 calls B55 a (&^%(*&)(*&$!!). Another flag goes down. By rule, the dead ball fouls are to be enforced in order of occurrence. B55's foul came first and would be penalized half the distance to the goal (down to B's 1). A55's foul is 15 yards and would back the ball to B's 16. Now, it's 4th and goal from the 16. I have had this happen in about the same way, but always have tried to regard these fouls as simultaneuos or nearly so. If someone goes book on this one, we are "rewarding", essentially, B for "bad conduct." I'd like to see the Federation address this in the off season.

PROPOSED CHANGE #3
PERSONAL FOULS (LATE HITS, ILLEGAL PERSONAL CONTACT)
In Federation ball, there are several situations where automatic first downs are awarded. These are (1) roughing the passer; (2) roughing the kicker; (3) roughing the kicker's holder; (4) defensive pass interference; (5) roughing the snapper while in scrimmage kick formation.
I would like to see the above personal fouls merit an automatic first down. This type of contact is occurring more and more and needs to be dealt with significantly.

Let me know what you think. Thanks very much. Joe Calderazzo, Southwestern Indiana Officials' Association

[Zeke5]

Nice post JoeC. I'm curious to see all the responses to
this in the off-season, and I'm sure there are a lot of
other suggestions to come.

I'd have to say that I STRONGLY agree with you on all
of your assertions, but I'd like to play devil's advocate:

#1.) The NFL has a concept of continuing action in which
certain actions (like late hits on the runner) are
are considered fouls of the previous play penalized from
the succeeding spot. The nature of these fouls are always
personal fouls which are all automatic first downs for
A if committed by B (In the NFL). Neat, but it also places
an additional onus on the officials to determine what actions are a continuing action of the play.

Questions:
Can a continuing action foul only be committed by the
defense? What if right after B55 piles on, A10 flattens
B26 30 yards away from the play? Isn't this a continuing
action? Would the penalties offset and possession goes to
B? When and where does an action fail to be designated as
a continuing action? Obviously, a lot of grey areas would
be introduced if the Federation would adopt this change.

How about this philosophy: What part of the action of B55's
late hit prevented A from reaching the line to gain?

#2) This situation suffers from almost the same points
of contention for #1. There would be an added burden
placed on the officials to determine which acts were
associated or near simultaneous.

#3) Why not make all personal fouls on B automatic
first downs for A? It sure would simplify things for us.
I'd like to see the Competition Committee toss this one
around.

As for #1 & #2, I'm sure it is (and has been) in the
interest of the Federation to mitigate (or eliminate) the
amount of subjective interpretation necessary to enforce
penalties. I'd have to admit that Rule 10 is one of the
shortest and most succinct rules in the book with minimal
exceptions (All-but-one, non-player fouls and
unsportsmanlike). Why? Because it serves to produce
uniform, clear cut enforcement of penalties in 50 states
at the ground level of football officiating. This is not to
say that there aren't any officials at our level that are
capable of making these determinations, it's just that
there are enough questions about our interpretations
that caused us to throw a flag, why introduce even more
questions about how we enforced it since that is one
thing we can always back up with the book?

Just my 2 cents ...

[TomA]

Personally, I'd like NF to make the end zones live on kicks and to add a post-scrimmage kick enforcement spot.

A punt is a surrender of the ball and to let K have a first down on a loose-ball foul by R 40 yards downfield just doesn't seem right nor equitable.

As to the EZ's, 2 years ago in a playoff game, the Blue team ground out a 9 minute drive to take a 17-12 lead with :50 left. Their kicker had put every KO out the back of the EZ in each of his last 5 games including mine. They figure they can hold White for :50 from the 20. Naturally, the kicker just misses the kick and White catches it at the 6" line, runs it back for a TD and White wins. If that ball had gone 6" more it would have been the auto TB and a totally different outcome. That was one of the most exciting plays I've seen in my 27 years of officiating. There is no logical reason for the EZ's to be dead.

Make it the same as NCAA.

I'd also like NF to go back to the original timing rule but I know THAT won't happen.

[joec]

Tom, thanks for the opinions. I am presently giving some thought as to what Zeke mentioned and mulling that over at this time. I fully concur with making the end zones "live" regarding kicks. There is a great deal of confusion on the part of the coaches with this rule. Many coaches feel as though the ball is still alive when it penetrates the plane of the end zone on a kick, be it free or scrimmage. Personally, I have a problem awarding a touchback on a play where R muffs a kick which rolls into the end zone from the field of play. But, force is NOT a factor when a kick enters R end zone. As to PSKE (post scrimmage kick enforcement), I feel this change would align NCAA and Fed. rules. Generally, I'd like to see the Fed., NCAA, and NFL rules all be aligned. It seems that Fed. and NCAA statutes come a bit closer each year. Hopefully, they'll become even moreso in the not so distant future. The timing rule adopted by the Federation several years ago was suppose to add no more than "10-15 minutes" to each game. I haven't seen this at all. I believe it adds 30-45 minutes or more to a varsity contest. I, too, do not look for it to change in the foreseeable future. Good posting, Tom. I am presently working on a response to Zeke's. Joe Calderazzo, Southwestern Indiana Officials' Association

[Theisey]

If you have a copy of the NFHS Football Handbook, there is a section that describes how high school rules are changed and the criteria that must be followed to do so. It was interesting reading.
One thing I know for sure, officials have little direct input unless you happen to be on the annual questionaire list.

I have to comment on some statements posted earlier.
::.. would like to see the Fed., NCAA, and NFL rules all be aligned. It seems that Fed. and NCAA statutes come a bit closer each year.

C>> This will never happen in our officiating careers. This year alone, there are over 220 categories of NCAA and NFHS difference. If you count rule specific differences, the count is in the 280+ range.


:: The timing rule adopted by the Federation several years ago was suppose to add no more than "10-15 minutes" to each game. I haven't seen this at all. I believe it adds 30-45 minutes or more to a varsity contest.

C>> Do you have stats on this?? There is no way I can beleive 30 to 45 minutes is the norm. There are far more clock stoppages for First Downs, Measurements, Injury TOs, OOBs, Incomplete Passes, Penalty adminstration, TDs and Free kicks than there is for change of possession clock stoppages.

[sportswriter]

I find the original poster's ideas on rule changes an ineresting experience for me, personally.

As mentioned elsewhere, I'm a Canadian rules guy. Now, I'm not trying to stir up any debate here, but for the purposes of enlightenment:

a) dead ball fouls: UR penalties by the defense always carry the weight of an automatic first down, even if they occur two seconds after the end of a play that would otherwise have resulted in a turnover on downs.

It could 3rd and 28 (remember, we run three downs only) and the QB sacked for a 12-yard loss... if the defense wanders in and spears a blocker a second after the play, it's an automatic first down after the 15-yard penalty.

b) in regards to "offsetting" penalties, ie, where B45 suggests that A14 perform a physical impossibiliy, and then three seconds later, A23 suggests that B66 was the result of a physical indecency with another species.... easy. 10 yards both ways, counter each other out, downs continue as if nothing happened.