live ball deadball

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

I referee NCAA rules, and confess to not be a FED expert (although I do try to learn all I can - almost exclusively from here). But doesn't FED have a rule that says all Personal Fouls are enforced as DBF? Or is that just USC?

Also, would you differentiate between a players that was "obviously out of the play" and no longer participating, and one who is running toward the play?

REPLY: PF and USC in Fed is handled pretty much the same as in NCAA. There are both live ball and dead ball personal fouls. And they're treated accordingly. All USCs--regardless of whether they're committed during a down or not--are treated as dead ball fouls with succeeding spot enforcement.

[mcrowder]

Gotcha.

I still don't think, in the OP, that the action described was illegal. But I'm going off his use of the word "Blocking". To me, if this block was not either in the back, exceedingly malicious, or below the waist, I'm having trouble seeing what one might call a personal foul. And if it was in the back or below the waist, we have different penalties than PF for this (not to mention that the OP's statement that the player was out of the play would no longer be a relevant part of the equation).

Too often I've seen a player who is supposedly "out of the play" suddenly become "in the play" again due to unforeseen circumstances, and since this DOES happen, we can't be too strict on blocking players supposedly "out of the play".

[BktBallRef]

mcrowder, perhaps you need to read the play again.

"2nd and 3, A33 sprints down the left side of the field from the 50 towards his goal line and just as he getting tackled at the 10, A21 blocks B76 at the 30 and knocks him on his butt who was clearly out of the play. "

The runner is about to be tackled and a A21 makes a block on a kid that's 20 yards away and knocks him on his a$$. I see no reason for this block/play/hit/contact whatsoever. I'd flag it as well.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

mcrowder, perhaps you need to read the play again.

"2nd and 3, A33 sprints down the left side of the field from the 50 towards his goal line and just as he getting tackled at the 10, A21 blocks B76 at the 30 and knocks him on his butt who was clearly out of the play. "

The runner is about to be tackled and a A21 makes a block on a kid that's 20 yards away and knocks him on his a$$. I see no reason for this block/play/hit/contact whatsoever. I'd flag it as well.

I did read the play. And your explanation. And I see no reason for the foul unless there was something else to it other than a block. The ball is live. You don't know (and neither does the kid making the block, nor the kid getting blocked), at the time of the block, that the ball carrier is going to hold on to the ball when he gets tackled. Heck, you don't even know for sure that he's GOING to get tackled - he could easily break out, reverse field, whatever, and this player who was blocked COULD become involved.

Would you flag an end on the right side of a play blocking the CB and "knocking him on his a$$" if the play was sweeping left, and the ball happened to be 20 yards away from this block? Of course not ... so why call it in the OP?

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

I did read the play. And your explanation. And I see no reason for the foul unless there was something else to it other than a block. The ball is live. You don't know (and neither does the kid making the block, nor the kid getting blocked), at the time of the block, that the ball carrier is going to hold on to the ball when he gets tackled. Heck, you don't even know for sure that he's GOING to get tackled - he could easily break out, reverse field, whatever, and this player who was blocked COULD become involved.

Would you flag an end on the right side of a play blocking the CB and "knocking him on his a$$" if the play was sweeping left, and the ball happened to be 20 yards away from this block? Of course not ... so why call it in the OP?

This is truly judgement. If the official believes the player being legally blocked is truly out of the play, it is a foul.

You often see this on a long run when one of the defensive linemen is lumbering toward the play and some "enterprising" player sees his opportunity to "clean his clock" by turning around giving that smashing block. It is illegal!

However, my suggestion is to use preventative officiating by verbaly letting the players know you are there with something like "Keep it clean, don't hit anybody" when you are trailing the play.

It is a stupid penalty but it can also be dangerous if the player being blocked has a reasonable expectation of not being hit by his location well out of the play.

[RoyGardner]

The way this play is described IMO would best be treated as a DB-PF. Since the "block" occurs at about the same time as the tackle, and 20 yards behind the tackle, I would offer that the intent of the rules would be best served by calling it DB in that the block did not result in an "unfair advantage" for the actual ball carrier.

Also, as described (at least under NCAA rules) this is definitely a foul. This type of play has been cited by the NCAA rules committee for the last several years, and is again included as bullet 9 under the Protection of Defenseless Players section within the Point of Emphasis.

When in the judgement of the covering official the player is "out of the play" and therefore has no reasonable expectation of getting hit, we should have a flag when he does get hit. I would also agree with the preventive officiating idea if I was the trailing official and offer the standard "let's not do anything stupid" if we see anything "developing" well behind the play.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Gotcha.

I still don't think, in the OP, that the action described was illegal. But I'm going off his use of the word "Blocking". To me, if this block was not either in the back, exceedingly malicious, or below the waist, I'm having trouble seeing what one might call a personal foul. And if it was in the back or below the waist, we have different penalties than PF for this (not to mention that the OP's statement that the player was out of the play would no longer be a relevant part of the equation).

Too often I've seen a player who is supposedly "out of the play" suddenly become "in the play" again due to unforeseen circumstances, and since this DOES happen, we can't be too strict on blocking players supposedly "out of the play".

You're correct. You're not an NFHS expert. If you were, you'd be familiar with the POE's over the last few years. You'd be familiar with what HS officials are told at state and local clinics. This play is illegal and the Fed and the States want it called.

Stick with NCAA.

[BoomerSooner]

Just to comment on the "play to the whistle" point that was brought up. I made the mistake saying most officials. This was a generalization that I've made from my experiences outside my own crew. I've worked with crews that have acutally said "play until the whistle", but in my normal crew's captain's meeting we tell them to "watch for the play being dead i.e. player obviously down by contact or OOB and incomplete passes, but if you are unsure to be aware of ongoing play until the whistle." Regardless of what we say though, alot of coaches coach play to the whistle which I agree can be stupid and dangerous.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

You're correct. You're not an NFHS expert. If you were, you'd be familiar with the POE's over the last few years. You'd be familiar with what HS officials are told at state and local clinics. This play is illegal and the Fed and the States want it called.

Stick with NCAA.

Will do, BASKETBALL ref. I'll stop trying to clarify my understanding of your rules. Wouldn't want to know more or understand anything better, now, would I?

Now, on a more civil note ... can you post for me the POE's you're talking about - I have read the ones that get posted here, and don't recall this one ... but maybe it just hasn't been posted before. Assuming said POE exists, I'm wondering what the reasoning is behind making assumptions that certain players on the field who are a certain undefined distance from the play would never end up having an effect on the play, and thus are unblockable.