STC - You make the call!!!

[KWH]

Score tied 7-7, 0:01 remaining in the 3rd quarter, clock is stopped, 3rd and goal on the B-5 yard line.
Quarterback A1 throws forward pass that is intercepted 5 yards deep in the endzone by B1.
B1 returns the ball 105 yards and crosses A's goal line.
During B1's return, substitute B12 runs onto the field (at the 50 yard line) while wearing an "Amber eye sheild" and runs directly to the Umpire and shouts in the Umpires face, "You dumb f**k, you can't take this one away from us can you!"
The Umpire "guestimates" that B1 was on approximatly the A-25 yard line when B12 entered the field.
While the officials are discussing the penalties and enforcment A1 approaches the officials huddle and polietly informs the officials that, he knows B12, his real name is Gainesta38, and he is the same player that the officials disqaulified in the first half for fighting, however he has apparently changed his jersey number from 38 to 12. (The allegation made by A1 regarding B12/B38 is proven to be true.)
What penalties have occured and how are they enforced under 2005 NFHS rules?

[Edited by KWH on Mar 2nd, 2005 at 12:39 PM]

[Bob M.]

Originally posted by KWH
Score tied 7-7, 0:01 remaining in the 3rd quarter, clock is stopped, 3rd and goal on the B-5 yard line.
Quarterback A1 throws forward pass that is intercepted 5 yards deep in the endzone by B1.
B1 returns the ball 105 yards and crosses A's goal line.
During B1's return, substitute B12 runs onto the field (at the 50 yard line) while wearing an "Amber eye sheild" and runs directly to the Umpire and shouts in the Umpires face, "You dumb f**k, you can't take this one away from us can you!"
The Umpire "guestimates" that B1 was on approximatly the A-25 yard line when B12 entered the field.
While the officials are discussing the penalties and enforcment A1 approaches the officials huddle and polietly informs the officials that, he knows B12, his real name is Gainesta38, and he is the same player that the officials disqaulified in the first half for fighting, however he has apparently changed his jersey number from 38 to 12. (The allegation made by A1 regarding B12/B38 is proven to be true.)
What penalties have occured and how are they enforced under 2005 NFHS rules?

[Edited by KWH on Mar 2nd, 2005 at 12:39 PM]

REPLY: I'm anxious to see others' responses to this. All I can say is I'd love to see the umpire's smile when he tells B12, "Oh yes I can!"

[cdnRef]

The coach allowed the player to come back onto the sidelines with a new jersey. This action combined with the total lack of self-control of the player makes a travesty of the game. Nothing else matters at this point.


B has elected to forfeit the game.

[kdf5]

Originally posted by cdnRef

The coach allowed the player to come back onto the sidelines with a new jersey. This action combined with the total lack of self-control of the player makes a travesty of the game. Nothing else matters at this point.


B has elected to forfeit the game.

Whoooaaaa!!! Forfeit? You must have a death wish. There are some penalties to be assessed here but a forfeit???

[IAUMP]

Originally posted by KWH
Score tied 7-7, 0:01 remaining in the 3rd quarter, clock is stopped, 3rd and goal on the B-5 yard line.
Quarterback A1 throws forward pass that is intercepted 5 yards deep in the endzone by B1.
B1 returns the ball 105 yards and crosses A's goal line.
During B1's return, substitute B12 runs onto the field (at the 50 yard line) while wearing an "Amber eye sheild" and runs directly to the Umpire and shouts in the Umpires face, "You dumb f**k, you can't take this one away from us can you!"
The Umpire "guestimates" that B1 was on approximatly the A-25 yard line when B12 entered the field.
While the officials are discussing the penalties and enforcment A1 approaches the officials huddle and polietly informs the officials that, he knows B12, his real name is Gainesta38, and he is the same player that the officials disqaulified in the first half for fighting, however he has apparently changed his jersey number from 38 to 12. (The allegation made by A1 regarding B12/B38 is proven to be true.)
What penalties have occured and how are they enforced under 2005 NFHS rules?

[Edited by KWH on Mar 2nd, 2005 at 12:39 PM]

I would say we have illegal participation at the 50 (15 yards), unsportsmanlike conduct on B12/B38 (15 yards), 2 Unsportsmanlike conduct penalties on coach (30 yards). Result is Bs ball 1 and 10 at their 10 yard line, Head coach and B12/B38 are ejected. I would let the new head coach for B know that if I see B12/38 anywhere near the field I will eject him (new coach) and forfeit the game.

[Bob M.]

...unsportsmanlike conduct on B12/B38 (15 yards)

REPLY: Are you sure this foul is USC? You might want to check that again. In my opinion, getting this foul right is the key to not screwing up the entire play.

[IAUMP]

Bob,

Why would it not be an USC on the player? I know that if any player or coach would address me in this manner (previously ejected or not), they are going to be flagged. Just because the player had been ejected earlier, does not mean you can't have an USC on him, or any other bench personnel for that matter.

BTW, the 2 USC on the coach are: 1 for the illegal tinted face shield, and 2 for allowing an ejected player back into the game.

[Bob M.]

REPLY: First off, I didn't realize that it was B12 who mouthed off to the U. I guess we're talking about two different fouls by B12/38: One, and you're absolutely correct about it, his comments deserve the USC, but my thoughts were focused on the fact that he entered the field during a down and communicated with an official. That makes him a "player" by definition and therefore he's violated the rule against a disqualified player re-entering the game. Right? That's specifically covered in another NF rule--not USC. It's the latter foul that I think is the key to not dealing with this play inequitably for A. The fact that you caught it as illegal participation is what I was looking at as a means of keeping the score from standing.

[cdnRef]

Whoooaaaa!!! Forfeit? You must have a death wish

Nope. The coach allowed this behaviour to occur and made a travesty of the game by choosing to allow previously disqualified players to change their numbers and re-enter the competition. A game official was physically assaulted on the field with, essentially, the permission of the coach. This calls into question the legitimacy of the entire game.

If you tolerate this type of behaviour where do you draw the line in the future? The team clearly has no respect for the game; therefore, game over. If the game weren't over, that would be my last and it would end for me right there.

[kdf5]

Originally posted by cdnRef

Nope. The coach allowed this behaviour to occur and made a travesty of the game by choosing to allow previously disqualified players to change their numbers and re-enter the competition. A game official was physically assaulted on the field with, essentially, the permission of the coach. This calls into question the legitimacy of the entire game.

If you tolerate this type of behaviour where do you draw the line in the future? The team clearly has no respect for the game; therefore, game over. If the game weren't over, that would be my last and it would end for me right there.

You'd better have large huevos and lots of video tape to support a forfeit. I bet you'd be a majority of one here.

[cdnRef]

Maybe that's just one more difference between Canada and the US. There'd be war...that much is guaranteed...but from the language that has been coming from the league I have my doubts that the coach would have much defence in the matter.

We're throwing flags for saying 'crap' too loud...

Facts:

a) we don't supply officials to all games that get 'scheduled'. The teams might think they've got a game but when we've only got, say, 40 officials and 12 games on the same day it simply isn't going to happen. The league simply can't afford to have officials getting assaulted.

b) we've been instructed clearly to show zero tolerance for any language on the field

c) we've been instructed to toss coaches for unsportsmanlike conduct if applicable

The league has acknowledged that they need to step up and protect their officials if they want their kids to have a game. Given the severity with which we've been instructed to penalize certain things, I can't imagine how we'd have any other choice but to end the game.

Further to that, if I were injured and forced to miss work or incur extra medical expenses because of that stupidity there would be a lawsuit to contend with as well.

[cdnRef]

ok...now I learn to read...I thought I had learned this lesson once before.

after reading and re-reading this I couldn't figure out why I seemed to be the only one advocating ending the game...

"and runs directly to the Umpire" is not the same as "and runs directly into the Umpire"...as in, 'mows over the umpire...'

I'll go back to 'not posting' for a while.

[MJT]

Originally posted by cdnRef
Maybe that's just one more difference between Canada and the US. There'd be war...that much is guaranteed...but from the language that has been coming from the league I have my doubts that the coach would have much defence in the matter.

We're throwing flags for saying 'crap' too loud...

Facts:

a) we don't supply officials to all games that get 'scheduled'. The teams might think they've got a game but when we've only got, say, 40 officials and 12 games on the same day it simply isn't going to happen. The league simply can't afford to have officials getting assaulted.

b) we've been instructed clearly to show zero tolerance for any language on the field

c) we've been instructed to toss coaches for unsportsmanlike conduct if applicable

The league has acknowledged that they need to step up and protect their officials if they want their kids to have a game. Given the severity with which we've been instructed to penalize certain things, I can't imagine how we'd have any other choice but to end the game.

Further to that, if I were injured and forced to miss work or incur extra medical expenses because of that stupidity there would be a lawsuit to contend with as well.

With what you have been instructed, ejection by you would be warrented, but for anyone who was not so "specifically instructed", an ejection would be too severe. I think that is what kdf5 is getting at, and I think most on this board would agree.

I agree with IAUMP, IP at the 50, USC on B12/38 (same player), and 2 USC on the coach.

I got a kick out of the fact that you said the kid with the "amber eye shield" was Gainesta38!!! Hilarious!!!

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by cdnRef

The coach allowed the player to come back onto the sidelines with a new jersey. This action combined with the total lack of self-control of the player makes a travesty of the game. Nothing else matters at this point.


B has elected to forfeit the game.

Ooohhh... nice... a Canadian ref!

Do you have a rules reference for that one?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by KWH
Score tied 7-7, 0:01 remaining in the 3rd quarter, clock is stopped, 3rd and goal on the B-5 yard line.
Quarterback A1 throws forward pass that is intercepted 5 yards deep in the endzone by B1.
B1 returns the ball 105 yards and crosses A's goal line.
During B1's return, substitute B12 runs onto the field (at the 50 yard line) while wearing an "Amber eye sheild" and runs directly to the Umpire and shouts in the Umpires face, "You dumb f**k, you can't take this one away from us can you!"
The Umpire "guestimates" that B1 was on approximatly the A-25 yard line when B12 entered the field.
While the officials are discussing the penalties and enforcment A1 approaches the officials huddle and polietly informs the officials that, he knows B12, his real name is Gainesta38, and he is the same player that the officials disqaulified in the first half for fighting, however he has apparently changed his jersey number from 38 to 12. (The allegation made by A1 regarding B12/B38 is proven to be true.)
What penalties have occured and how are they enforced under 2005 NFHS rules?

I've got illegal participation by B12. I've got a non-disqualification objectionable conduct foul by B12.

Therefore, B-1D/10 @ A-45.