A player was disqualified during a recent game for a hand to the helmet. The LJ who threw the flag stated that he assessed it to be flagrant due to the fact that the players arm was extended and elbow locked. The player claims that it was incidental as he was swiping at the offensive blocker's arm who was holding onto his jersy, and that the heel of his hand hit the facemask unintentionally. What rule qualifies the LJ assessment to "automatically" make this a flagrant action?

Automatically? The LJ made a judgment -- are you asking what gives the officials the right to DQ a player?

It is a judgement call.

No, the judgement of the official is not in question, nor am I asking what right does he have DQ a player. What I am asking is that it appeared that the official was qualifying the extension of the arm and locking the elbow was based upon a ruling that would constitute a flagrant foul. What is in question is the interpretation of a rule that appears to be non-existant. What I am asking is there such a rule that gives this definition?

I still don't quite understand, there is no set rules for what a flagrant foul is, it is whatever is deemed by the officials, aka a judgement call.

Somehow, somewhere I seem to remember that only the referee can disqualify a player. That being the case if your LJ says A76 did whatever then he reports to the R who makes the final decision to disqualify the player.

On my crew that is the policy and it comes from a questionable experience in a JV game where an official disqualified a player yet was not clear about the circumstances surrounding the reason for disqualification.

Yes, I recall reading that, I blieve its in the rulebook somewhere.

Again, I guess I am looking at "an extended arm and locked" elbow as the reasoning behind the difference between a slap to the helmet (9-5) and adding a flagrancy violation on top. This official determined that because it met this criteria that it constituted flagrancy and DQ. Where is this definition is all that I am asking? If it does not exist, then does it not stand to reason that this is a misapplication of a rule that does not exist?

There is no such definition. It sounds like the official has his own personal guideline, as we all do, for what constitutes "flagrant," and the description you give is part of his guideline. It is not a misapplication of a rule - this is entirely the official's judgement as to what is "flagrant."

Thanks for your replies. I guess that answers my question; each official has a different set of guidelines that they use as reference points in determinng flagrancy. That helps me to understand why one official would get upset at a player saying the word "damn" and another ignoring it. This is based upon an offical's own personal set of guidelines; makes perfect sense to me. So what is stopping any offical from infringing upon another official's set of personal guidelines? Seems to me that there has to be a baseline measurement so that there is consistency that players and coaches can rely upon. Whereas I trust one offical's judgement, another's can be quite the contrary.

If you don't trust an officials judgement, don't let them officiate your games. Every official uses their observations, experience, knowledge and wisdom on every call. From the posts here and over at NFHS it sounds like the LJ was justifying his flagrant determination by stating the defender had locked out his elbow therefor throwing a strike at his opponent and not just slapping at the helmet. I know that when I describe a flagrant personal foul to my R, he wants to know what made it flagrant because he has to agree it is flagrant to DQ around here. We both then go explain what happened to the coach of the player that is ejected. You cannot just say, "Coach, # 74 open hand to the helmet and it was flagrant." You have to be able to explain what made it flagrant. In this case, I am suposing that the LJ was justifying his flagrant judgement by stating it was not just an open hand to the helmet, but the defender extended the arm and locked out the elbow when making the contact.

First, based on what you said, I don't think the LJ said what happened was "automatically" flagrant.

In addition, none of us saw the play. It was, indeed, a judgement call on his part, and without seeing the play, none of us can confirm or refute the validity of this call.

Also, if the official said it was flagrant because of "the rule that says if the elbow is locked, the block is worthy of a DQ" then he would be wrong on the rule, but he is not misapplying a rule that does not exsit; he is "correctly" applying the fake rule (if you can correctly apply a rule that does not exist!?).

Finally, the issue with consistency. In the NFL it is relatively "easy" to have consistency in the calls. If the league decides that if one swear word slips out of a player's mouth it is only a warning, then it is fairly easy to make sure that different officials will not flag it. In contrast, I don't find using "damn" to be an offense worthy of a foul, but an official in North Dakota (I'm in Pennsylvania) might believe it comes at a cost of 15 yards. At this level, there is going to be some amount of consistency within an association, but between different areas, there are going to be different ideas on judgement calls.

Folks, this is just a youth coach looking for officials to land firmly on his side. I've had an email conversation with him today and in the end he reminded me of the coach of the kid I ejected on Saturday for getting in my face and telling me to "mind my own damned business." The coach was more interested in proving me wrong than in taking care of his kid and telling him to play and act the right way.

Also, I told him the story of my talking to the kids on the field and asking them en masse to watch their language -- that's when the 14 year old kid got in my face and told me to MYODB.

That's when this youth coach told me I ejected the kid on a "whim."

On a whim? I guess the player was entitled to a free shot before being asked to leave the game. Sorry, his reaction deserved more than "just" an USC flag.

I just don't "get" coaches. If I were coaching, I would certainly hold kids a bit more accountable -- it's unfortunate to think that the kids that got tossed from his game and my game will end up thinking they got screwed by some official with a chip on his shoulder.

--Rich

[Edited by Rich Fronheiser on Oct 19th, 2004 at 04:12 AM]

Just like the kid I tossed a few weeks ago for kicking an opposing player. The tight end tried to cut block the player, legally. The defensive player took exception and preceeded to kick the TE in the upper back. The coach, after the game, wanted to know more exactly as to what happened. I told him. His response was "Not trying to defend him but they were holding him all game, grabbing his legs...." We cut him off and told him he is defending him and that there is zero excuse for what he did.

The assistant on the team (or whatever he is) who is also the kid's dad hollered at me, "We have it on film what he did." I replied back to him, "Good then it will match my report I'm filing with the league." He turned around and walked away. Nothing more he could say.

Ahhh...those coaches.

Reminds me of two quick stories.

First, doing a kids game a couple of years ago, the coach comes out during a time out and complains to me and the rest of the crew about talking to his players. What we were telling the players was to walk away after the play without taunting and to be careful with the late hits. The coach insisted that we not talk to his players. Okay, next time we'll flag them first, then warn them.

Just this past weekend, I flag and DQ a B player for kicking an opponent who was lying on the ground. The coach and player complain, "He was tackling him." I reply, "Coach, it couldn't have been much of a tackle if he's on the ground and you're player is standing over him and kicking him."