1. Do we tell them, or not? Here is the case. Under NF rules, 6-5-4 states "The captain may choose to free kick or snap anywhere between the inbounds line on the yard line through the spot of the FC is made or thru the spot of interference, when a FC is awarded. These choices remain if a DB foul occurs prior to the down, or a foul or any IW occurs during the down and the down is repeated." Let’s say a FC, or awarded FC occurs at the B-35 with 9 seconds left. On the next play we have DPI, or another foul, so the free kick after a FC is still an option for team A after the penalty enforcement and we still have 2 seconds on the clock. Team A is behind by 2 points.

Team A and their coaches are none the wiser of this “opportunity” that by rule exists for them. Do tell them they have this opportunity to free kick from the 20 yard line? Are we required to tell them?

My opinion is, we do not have to tell them. Why? This is not a penalty situation where we need to give them all there options. When R completes a fair catch, or an awarded fair catch, they have that option, but we do not have to tell them they can snap the ball or have a free kick anywhere between the hashes.

<b>That being said, if they know they can do so, and take the free kick option and a penalty occurs, we should tell them that they still have the free kick option cuz that is part of the penalty situation. </b>

That’s my 2 cents, what’s yours?

2. Tell coach penalty options, or not? If you have a very complicated penalty enforcement, one in which the captain could easily be confused, and would be looking to the coach for help anyway, would it be ok to take the captain over by the sidelines so the coach can hear the options? I have seen it done in the NFL and NCAA before, or at least it appears that’s what they are doing. I think it is ok, and if the other coach has a problem with it, tell him you would give him the same courtesy if needed. This would be a 1 or maybe 2 times a year situation at best.

Teams/Coaches are required to know the rules. We are not there to remind them. Do you remind the coach before a play that it's legal for him to try a forward pass? Do you remind him on 3rd and 25 from his own inchline that it's legal for him to punt? Of course not - it's part of the rules, not part of penalty enforcement. This sitch is exactly the same. Coaches need to know what they are allowed to do, without prompting from us.

Would you agree that it is different if they know the rule to take the FK option, that we tell them after a penalty that the option is still there, or do you say they need to know that as well? I think we tell them in this case as it is part of the penalty enforcement, just as we tell them if a penalty results in a LOD if they are hollering to decline it.

No, I wouldn't. To take the point to the extreme...

It's legal for them to attempt a forward pass on a play. We should assume that they know that their options on a play that follows a penalty are the same. You would not remind them after a penalty that they have all the same options that they had before the penalty ... so why the exception here. Just because it doesn't come up often?

I think that any time you step outside your bounds to "help" a coach, you run a risk of unfairness. What happens when the OTHER coach finds out you've in essence suggested something to the first coach that helps the first coach score? Even worse, what happens if exactly this scenario happened to his team in previous weeks, but that official didn't remind them of an obscure rule?

It's not our job to help out a coach or a team (I'll admit an exception to this at lower levels, of course) - and once we do so, we begin directly affecting the game instead of officiating it --- a line we should not cross.

To me, reminding a coach in this sitch that he can FK is as bad as saying, as the clock winds down, "Coach, you have 1 timeout left", before he asks.

Same situation as your #1, but the score is A-17, B-28. Do you still make it a point to tell A that they have the option of the free kick?

What if A was down by 2, but 8 minutes remained in the third quarter?

Ok, but what would you do in this senario. 3rd-4 for A and they have intentional grounding 10 yards behind the LOS. Before you can explain to the captain that it is a spot foul, and a LOD, the coach is hollaring at his captain to "decline" the penalty cuz we want 4th down. Are you not going to tell the captain, "let me explain your options" and make sure he understands it will still be 4th down and they will be back 10 more yards? I am a referee, and most I know agree that if they do not "understand" the situation, make sure they do so they have a fair chance to make a decision. That is good game management by the referee.

Your forward pass statement is not on the same "level" at all as this. In response to your second statement, just because the previous crew did or did not do something is not going to influence my decision. If that was the case I would have allowed a team to have a number 32 on his line, therefor not having 5 players on the line with numbers 50-79 cuz "the officials said we could do it the last 3 weeks.

Coaches go to the same rules meetings we do, they get the same rule book we do. If they choose not to know the rules then it's not our position to enligthen them.

If you carefully read what I said, I indicated that I would NOT tell them they had the option originally, but if knew the rule and did it, then a penalty occurs, I would make them aware the option STILL exists after the penalty. I would NOT tell them originally, so no I would not in your above question.
You are missing the point that I would NOT tell them originally, but WOULD if they did it, then we had a penalty.

Hmmm. Being in my first year in the R position these are things I'm interested in knowing that the "right" thing to do is. I asked this very same question in the referees meeting this season so I would know how to handle this situation.

In looking at your responses I have to ask the following. Are we really explaining the penalty options correctly if we don't provide the captain ALL the information?

Here are two explanations (let's assume K doesn't touch the ball so no FT applies):

I was always under the impression that #2 was the more appropriate explanation.

"Captain, your team was interfered with by the kicking team so here are your choices. You can take them back 15 yards from the previous spot and replay 4th down...or, you can take an awarded fair catch and put the ball in play right there."

Or 2,


"Captain, your team was interfered with by the kicking team so here are your choices. You can take them back 15 yards from the previous spot and replay 4th down...or, you can take an awarded fair catch and put the ball in play right there. If you take the ball right here you will be given the opportunity to put the ball in play by snap or free kick."

I agree what you guys are saying about coaches need to know the rules for appropriate strategy and I also agree we shouldn't "help" them. But, just as we given them facts and data to make a decision (in #1) I'm asking are we really giving ALL the facts and data to make a decision and is it really wrong to provide them? As long as we do that consistently and provide the same courtesy to both teams then I'd ask are we really out of line with providing explanation #2?

...and one more thing....

These are kids and they can't take a time out to consult with their coach. And, if they don't have the facts to make a decision because we didn't provide them are we really doing a service to the kids? I think we all agree about coaches should know the rules, but the kids sure as heck don't. If the captain gives his choice to replay 4th down and had no way of knowing he could snap or free kick (because we didn't tell him) I'll ask....were we fair to the captain? Remember, this is high school.

So when are you going to change your name? :)

Thinking of giving Div III a shot as an LJ since I'm sure they wouldn't take me as an R. Might as well keep the name.

Canadian Philosophy
 

MJT,

Excellent question.

I've been wrestling about this for about a year now.

Although we play with different rules, the philosophy you mention does exist in our game.

In the Cdn game, the team scored upon (TD only) may elect to receive or kick. We never give the option, because what team, after scored upon, wants to kick to the other team?

Play: A scores a TD (+ convert) to tie the game, with 2 seconds on the clock. After the convert is dead, A1 is flagged for unnecessary roughness. By rule, the only point of application is the ensuing kick-off. If B opts to receive A's kick, then time will likely run out after B's kick-off return. B's only way to win is to return kick the ball through the EZ (a single point in Canada). That's likely not going to happen given the depth that A will kick the ball, even with the 15 yard penalty.

Let's say that B has a fantastic kicker. So, B should choose to kick-off to A. They will still move up 15 yards for the kick-off. Now, B kicker kicks the ball deep and it:

- touches the ground IB and then goes OB through the EZ
- is caught deep in the EZ by A and A is tackled in the EZ

In these scenerios, B will score a single. And they're more likely than the first paragraph.

But how many B coaches know that they can do this?

Not many, I surmise.

I think that officials, at the beginning of the year, should communicate a set a statements to the coaches about things they might not know, such as:

- a team can decline ANY penalty, except the DQ part of a Rough Play foul

- a team can accept a penalty, but decline the yardage portion of the penalty

- a team can kick-off or receive the kick-off following having a TD scored on them

- the safety options (no coaches remember all of them)

- maybe some others

wwcfoa43? ref18? cdnRef? Casey?

Mike, I believe that coaches should be required to take a Level 1 clinic at the minimum. I coached baseball for many years before I became an umpire. Boy, it changed my point of view of the game.

To bring it back to football, I was white hatting a minor game earlier this year. Last play of the half, QB says he is going to take a knee. He does, but the DE comes in and plows him. I throw the flag for UR.

Immediately, the coach of the OT calls to his captain that he wants to apply the yardage on the kick off in the third quarter. I announce the penalty and the DT coach goes ballistic.

Needless to say, the OT coach had done his homework and knew that there were only two penalties where you could apply the penalty at the start of the next quarter.

If coaches spent time learning the rule book, okay it takes years, they could better coach their team. I know that knowing the rule book made me a better baseball coach.

You couldn't be more right!!!

Here are some suggested statements I have for coaches, all deal with mis-interpreted rules.

1. I don't care what they do in the US, but a coach can't call a timeout from the bench.

2. If the kick-off goes 10 yards, isn't touched and bounces back into the neutral zone, the kicking team can recover without penalty.

3. There is no such thing as a personal foul in Canadian football.

4. In order for pass interference to be called, the pass must be CATCHABLE!!!

5. Blocking from the rear is legal in the close line play area.

There are other rules that have gone misinterpreted, but I can't remember them now.

That was what stood out most in my mind from working as a line judge this season. (the only guy who actually gets to hear what the coach has to say, how unlucky;))

The only other thing that bugs me about football is our tolerance. In baseball as soon as the coach looked at us cross eyed, he was gone. Even to suggest that the rule was mis interpreted, ejection.

In football, we take a lot of crap before we even through the flag. Although, I am getting less tolerant. I had one game this year where the coach did not like my decision.

Here's the play, Team A 1 and 10 from their own 9. Flag is up for the half. Running play, 2 and 10, through a pass, incomplete. I look over, the flag is still up.

The QB comes out and says he is going to take a knee. Huh? Okay, your coach must know what he is doing. QB takes a knee, I blow the whistle. I look over, the flag is still up.

I rule yards not gained, 1 and 10 for Team B at the Team A 9. Coach goes ballistic. I check with the timekeeper and sure enough, at the time of the whistle there was still 7 seconds left.

A lot of chatter from the bench, I had had enough, throw the flag for OC, half the distance, first down and of course they score.

My point is this, the coach should have known that after the incomplete pass, time would not start until the snap of the ball. Since the flag was still up, possibly there was time left.

I am getting less tolerant with coaches that do not know the rules or do not know the time left, etc. Question a call is one thing, make negative comments, OC.

If you're tossing a coach for saying you mis-interpreted a rule you don't belong on the field. ANY field. That's one of the coaches rights in all sports.
In baseball it's called a protest. You know a protest. It's when the manager walks out onto the field and tells you that you don't know the rules, and you have to go to the scorebook and write down that the manaher says I don't know the rules, and then they have a committee that decides if you do or don't know the rules.
When I teach umpires I tell them to accept ANY protest, for whatever reason. If you're right it doesn't mean anything. If you're wrong it should be changed.
When I give rules clinics to caches I tell them, that if they feel they are right and the umps are wrong, to make the protest. If they find later that they were wrong they apologize and tell the ump to forget it. If the ump was wrong the situation needs to be changed and the ump needs to know what mistakes he is making.

That is the problem with baseball umpires. If the coach looks at you wrong, you toss him. If he thought you didn't know the rule, toss him. I think baseball umpires, in MLB anyway, seem to think they are bigger then the game many times. They will often confront the coach, screaming back at him ans sometimes being more offensive then the coach, then make as big a show as he can when he "tosses" him. I don't think I have "ever" seen an NFL or NCAA official argue like that with a coach, and I am glad they do not. The coaches don't yell anymore in baseball, but the officials handle it much better. Why is that? I don't know, but I am glad to be with the FB officials.

Umps...oh boy... back to our topic>

I am on a fine line here between MJT and mcrowder...
I guess it would be okay after the penalty to tell the captain that they could free kick...But me personally.

I would have to say I wouldn't. I am telling them that they can replay the down. If they knew that they could free kick the first time then they should know it for replaying the down.

Like I said there is a fine line between preventive officiating and coaching...

To Jim S. Let me clarify what I said. I was liberal in my comment about looking cross eyed and throwing him out. When I umpired, and even today in football, I let any coach question a call. I will grant a conference to explain what I did.

It is when they get personal that I get annoyed. There is nothing wrong with questioning a call, the interpretation, the application. It is after explaining it to them and they start to tell you that you don't know the game, bad call, etc. etc. that I will throw the flag.

In baseball, I always allowed coaches to question a call. I would explain the rule. I even accepted comments about my strike zone. Again, it was only after the personal comments that I tossed them.

All I was saying is that we are a lot more tolerant in football that we are in baseball. Perhaps it is because we are further away from the coaches and hear less, I don't know.

As a coach in baseball, I saw a lot of umpires abuse their position and try to use their position of authority.

Just so that I'm sure, can someone please tell me about this free kick?

Sitch: B receives the punt and signals a fair catch. They then inform the Referee that they'd like a free kick.

Does this mean, and therefore the definition of a free kick is that, B gets a field goal attempt without A being allowed to rush?

Basically, this is a cross between a field goal attempt and basketball's free throw.

So then after a defensive (or offensive???) foul when A opts to scrimmage instead, they still retain the right to free kick.

You got it. Basically, if R elects to free kick it's nothing more than a kickoff except you place the free kick line for R (now K) right where the interference took place. The teams line up 10 yards apart, timing rules are the same, the ONLY difference is that the kick can score a field goal. If that happens by the way NO time should run off the clock. And no, the new R team (the original punting team) can NOT rush because it would be a dead-ball encroachment foul just as on a normal kickoff.

Now, if the team that was interfered with asks to put the ball in play by snap and there's a foul by the defense (eg: defensive pass interference), the option to put the ball in play by free kick or snap is availab.e

Consider the following:

K's ball 4th and 10 from their own 1 yard line. K kicks to K's own 40 where he interferes with R's opportunity to catch the ball. R chooses an awarded fair catch and puts the ball in play 1st and 10 from the B 40. If B fouls on first down (eg: DPI) the penalty will be an automatic first down and it will be A's ball on B's 25. A can THEN request the ball be put in play by free kick...and yes, it can score a field goal.

I don't have my rules book handy. There are multiple rules to cover this. Under rule 4 "putting the ball in play" section 1, and in section 4.3 as well (Out of bounds and inbounds spots).

Hope that helps. If I mis-stated anything someone feel free to correct me.

OK, see what happens when you don't get the phrasology right?
Agreed that when it becomes personal that's the end. I always tell new umps. "That's a crappy call!" (not too loud or long)is an opinion, and everyone is entitled to their opinion. (they are also enitled to keep it to themselves) "YOU made a crappy call" is a personal attack, and we deal with it appropriately.
Of course sometimes their 'opinion' requires that my opinion be "you're done for the day!"

I would not tell the coaches they can free kick in either situation. That is up to them to know. Now if a coach is not certain and they ask me if they can then I would info them they can. This way I am assisting them in the rules of the game and not in coaching the game. I could also care less at the level I am calling. That should be the same from 1st grade to the NFL.

Jim, I agree with you.....

I'm with Cowbyfan1, to not inform the coach of this unique rule unless directly asked. He's supposed to know it.

I'll explain everything regarding the penalty options as defined in the PENALTY: section of the fair catch rules.
No where in that section does it say anything about a free kick.

That stuff is defined as a subsection of the fair catch rules. If Mr. Head coach asks, I'll tell him just like I would for any other rule(s) question he may have.

Communication, courtesy, and equitable application of the rules will get you lot further in this game than knowledge of the rulebook and an attitude of not being there for the kids or coaches. In theory, I agree coaches should know the rules. In reality, even the officials blow enforcements on a regular basis. I'm not going to tell a coach which option to choose, but I'll make sure he knows what his options are. I'll do it for both coaches and I promise you'll get a lot more respect and opportunity to work again then if you don't talk to a coach and let him know what is happening. Enforcing penalties is not an opportunity to show how much smarter you are than the coach, it is the opportunity to allow both teams to play on an honest and equal level, and that includes providing the teams with all necessary information. After 19 years, I learned a long time ago to leave the rulebook in the car and play by "what is the right thing to do" theory.