Coin Toss Options
 

Tonight, we had a very interesting, while absurd, situation happen on the coin toss (and subsequent second half options).

Ref: "Home, you've won the toss. You have the option of kick, receive, defend a goal, or defer to the second half."

Home Captain: "We'll defer and defend that goal" (indicating the west goal).

Ref: "You only get one choice right now; kick, receive, defend a goal, or defer to the second half."

Home Captain: "Ok, we'll defend that goal" (once again indicating the west goal).

Ref: "Visiting captain, you have the option to kick or receive."

Visitor Captain: "We'll receive."

Ref: "Home captain, you'll be kicking from the west end and it will be white choice in the second half."

Both teams shake hands and go off to their sidelines. No qualms or questions at all. Then, when we're giving the options for the second half, Home Captain insists that they get to receive the ball even though Visitor Captain has already stated their desire to receive the ball. For some reason, the Home coach also insists that it should be their ball to begin the second half.

I know we did this correctly, but I just had to share the fact that there are still some people out there that don't understand that you don't always get to receive the second half if the other team received in the first half.

Allowing a team, at ANY level, to screw up the coin toss is unnecessary and is usually a case of a WH saying "look how smart I am."

I ask if the team wants to defer to the second half, receive, ....and then I pause long enough for the captain to answer in one of the two choices that are picked in 99.9999999% of the games out there.

At the freshman/JV level I will say "defer, receive, and the other two choices will make your coach angry."

I would argue that all the choices should be given. I've had coaches want to wind in 2nd and 4th quarters and the only way to achieve that goal is to choose which end to defend in both halves. Of course I've also had a team choose to defend one end and the other choose to kick. This is something that must be coached and is reason to pick captains with some amount of intelligence or at least ones with ability to follow intructions.

No you didn't. At somepoint before declaring the choice final, the R shuld have specifically said, "if you make that choice then it is highly likely you will NOT be receiving the kickoff in the 2d half either. Do you still want to do this?"

It was VERY clear, according to what you have said, that what the captain WANTED to do was defer his option to the second half. So instead of running that route, having a good clean game, and having no coaches pissed about the situation, your R decided to be technical in order to show off how smart he was.

Once again, it was clear in this situation that the player wanted to defer. Don't be a smarty pants.

A way to avoid this, and the way it's done here is:

Toss the coin. To the winner say: *** you've won the toss. Do you want to make your choice now or defer the second half?

If he says "defer" then the loser will usually say " we want the ball" before you can ask him.

Don't make officiating harder than it already is.

At the varsity level I give the four choices and let them decide. I constantly tell coaches to teach their kids that unless there are very poor weather conditions, that they should either receive or defer. I don't think we need to coddle the kids at that level. At lower levels I explain the consequences of their choice. You can easily spot the well-coached teams because their captains are prepared for the coin toss options.

They are not taking the SAT test out there..there is nothing wrong with giving them whatever help is needed to prevent an error. It take no extra effort and should cause you no extra difficulty to make it clear to the KID (and that is what they are, KIDS) what is choice will yield. Maybe it has been a long time since you were in their shoes but at that point in the game, many kids are so cranked up they have a hard time thinking straight. How does it hurt anything to help them out???

IMO the R should have taken the original choice and clarified it. It would have eliminated any confusion. The R repeating the list of four options after it's clear there is some confusion borders on arrogant. I really don't care that according to the rules he is "technically correct".

After two of these instances in key game 3 years ago, our R's now ask the team winning the coin flip "Do you want to exercise your option now, or defer to the 2nd half?" There's only one "choice" here and that's now/defer. If they say defer, then option is offered to the other team and that is started off by R clearly saying they have deferred their option to the 2nd half, you have the option for the first half ......

Once the winning team indicates defer, we ignore the rest and of the response and pass the option to the other team. The coach clearly told the player something like "If we win toss, we want to defer, and defend the North goal." If we take that response to mean the team is using it's option to defend a goal, shame on us. It's our job to get it right, and I have no interest in showing the coach how "technically well we know the rules".

Additionally, the R's response "You only get one choice right now; kick, receive, defend a goal, or defer to the second half." is very misleading.

When a team defers it will in most cases get a 2nd choice. When team 2 uses the option to receive, team 1 then has a 2nd option to decide end of field to defend. Let's not be "smart", let's be fair.

When I'm Referee, I ask the coaches what they want if they win the toss and see to it the captain makes the right choice. If I'm on the wing bringing the captain in, I ask him if he knows what his coach wants and make him tell me before we even see the Referee.

Choices
 

I haven't been WH for very long, but my approach is to ask the coach during our initial meeting with him prior to coin toss, coach, if you win the toss what is your captain going to tell me? and which end do you want to defend? Then if the captains don't say what coach told me prior, then we say are you sure? This last Friday night prelim game, when Red won toss elected to defer, White took ball, asked Red, which end will you defend, captains, looked at each other and said,:confused: " I don't know Jeff what do you think, which way do you want to go" I stepped in and suggested that I thought their coach wanted to defend the scoreboard, they said okay, "we'll defend the scoreboard."

It seems to work for us anyway.

I also say you need to make sure he understands the mistake he is making even at the varsity level. I would say, "if you choose to defend a goal, you are going to kick and they are going to receive BOTH halves and I don't think you want that. Again, your choice is to receive, defer your choice to the 2nd half, kick, or defend a goal." If he still says defend a goal, I'm going over with him to the sideline after the announcement and explain exactly what happened out there.

Ok I have to ask, what do you do if the Home team wins the toss and elects to defer, then the Visitors elect to Kick because that's what the coach told him to do if he won the toss? Do you correct him or not?

I only give the options in this order RECEIVE, DEFER, KICK, (I DON’T GIVE THE OPTION OF DEFENDING A GOAL UNLESS THE CONDITION MAY WARRANT THAT OPTION). When I team defers I look at the other team and say "you want the ball, right?" Then I turn away and ask the deferring team which way they want to kick no even giving the other team a chance to screw it up. Deferring to the second half is not meant to screw a time out of the ball both halves. It is just an option if you want the ball in the second half, treat it as such. Just because they are captains doesn't mean they are smart kids, they may just be the best player or they may rotate captains for the toss from game to game. When we talk to the coach before the game I always ask him if he has a preference which captain will talk at the toss.

We need to use common sense and preventing officiating in this case.

I had a game once where the captain said they wanted to kick. I made him well aware that if he kicks then he'll most likely kick to start the second half as well. He assured me that is what his coach said. It turns out he was right. This team liked playing defense. The coach was a defensive minded coach and wanted them to set the tone for the game. Since then I will now talk with the captains on the sideline, as will the umpire, about coin toss options. If the captains are confused they can consult with their coach prior to going out for the toss.

Is he still the coach...seems kind of stupid to let the other team get the ball both halves. Is his name Dave Wannstadt (former Bears coach)?

Let's put it this way, we've had things like this happen before where a kid was told a very specific thing by his coach and he got confused. His options were explained clearly and then he made a different choice. His coach then blew up saying we had convinced his captain otherwise.

Our policy is to not influence the players' decisions. We are not there to decide what happens in the game.

A touch judgemental here, without knowing that team's strength. Perhaps their defense is their primary scorer? Perhaps they know that their defense is strong enough to pin and hold the opponent deep in their own end?

glyphrunner, it is called humor, try it sometime!

It is obvious from this statement from the original post: Home Captain: "We'll defer and defend that goal" (indicating the west goal). That the captain was a bit confused.

They did exactly as they planned. Stopped the offense and got the ball right back in good field position. Apparently they figured they'd get better field position on defense than they would with a kickoff return. The coach must be doing something right cause they went on to win the state championship in Texas that year and they are number 1 in the polls this year as well.

When I wear the WH I ask the coaches when I talk to the prior to the game if the captain knows what to do if they win and if the other team defers. That way you can point the kid in the right direction if he screws it up. Bottom line here is we all talk about preventative officiation and I think the toss falls right into that thinking. Why start the game or the second half with a pissed off coach? Knowing what the kids is supposed to do and "helping" him get there makes things much easier.

Poor game management. When he said, "We defer and..." you should just tell him that he only gets to defer right now and he has to wait a moment on the goal to choose. You should not have reopened the other options - he already told you EXACTLY what he wants.

ANY time you are faced with a kid about to give the other team the ball both halves, you need to make sure that's REALLY what he wants.

REPLY: I don't look at it as a captain having four choices. It's actually a two-tiered set of options:
FIRST DECISION

• Choice in the first half, or
• Defer and take choice in the second half.

SECOND DECISION

• Kick
• Receive
• Defend a Goal

So I approach it that way: "Captain, you've won the toss. Would you prefer to make your choice this half or defer and wait till the second half?" Only after that decision is made, will I even begin to mention the three options that need to be considered.

Same way as Ref In So CA recommended.

We had it in a game Friday night. The home team won the toss and chose to defer. At the beginning of the second half, the captain said they would kick. After the WH asked him if he really wanted to kick the ball away and give it to the other team he figured that what he really wanted to do was to receive. Who knows what the kid was thinking.

I know...he really wanted to receive! Why else would they defer, we sometimes are really reading way too much into these scenarios!

We had a game a couple of years ago and the captian said "We want to kick the ball." So I asked him again and he said "we want to kick the ball." So I asked the other captians if they were sure of his choice and another captian said "we want to defer to the second half." I said great choice, and the first captian broke in and said " Gdit, we want to kick the ball." :mad: So they got to kick off both halfs that night. :p I felt we tried to help but we couldn't make the choice for the team.

Under Switzer, the Sooners used to do this all the time. The FOP for their first series, after a 3 and out and a punt, was almost always around the 40, whereas after the other team kicks it's usually much further back. Sound strategy if your defense is as dominating as theirs was at that time.

If we get 100 high and 100 college coaches in a room and ask them if they want to kick-off both halves what would be the number of coaches that would say, "hay that is a great idea?" NONE, my bad, that one Texas HS coach would.

Canadian Ruling
 

This is the Canadian method. It's been in our book for a long time. It prevents many hiccups.

As I posted earlier, I agree 100%. The option process should be handled as 2 parts:

1. Use option now or defer?

2. Then depending on 1. offer the 2nd option.

In any case, based on original scenario, I would have taken the response to mean: We will defer our option to the 2nd half, when opponent elects to take ball this half, we want to defend X goal."

... I had a very interesting jr. high school game last night. I laid out the 4 choices, the away team captain upon winning the toss said, "We want to kick." I asked, "Is that what choice you want to make?"
"Yes."
"Are you sure you don't mean 'defer'?"
"No, we want to kick."
"You may want to ask your coach for help with this. If you kick now, that means you will most likely kick now AND starting the second half."
He looked at his coach, and the coach said, "We want to kick."
"Ok then."

At the beginning of the second half, score 0-0, the home team stated they wanted the ball. When I asked the away team which way he wanted to kick, the coach said he wanted the ball. After a conversation that went on for what seemed like 15 minutes (I'm sure it was really a minute), the coach still was not getting the idea. He kept saying, "I thought if we kick in the 1st half that we get the ball in the 2nd half."

Hopefully it was a lesson learned for him.

That is why this coach is coaching at the JR HS level! A rule book costs less than $10!

Agreed! An investment of great worth it!

You are there as part of the educational process. And by letting him do something that you know is stupid without taking a minimal amount of effort on your part to be sure he really wants to be stupid, seems almost like dereliction of duty to me. And if you had done as some suggest (i.e. confer with the coach before the toss) you would know what he intended anyway.

It is the coaches' job to coach their players and our job to be impartial.

I started officiating before we became the self-esteem police. In a Varsity game I don't ask the coach what he wants. That's the Captains' job as he has instructed them. If a 17 yr old kid can't make the right decision, it's not my fault.

Then it's time to adjust to 21st century officiating, isn't it?

It's interesting that when we have trouble with a rule we complain about conflicting rules, too many rules, and obtuse language, yet there seems to be some of us that want a 17 year old player to sort out the mumbo jumbo of the coin toss wording in the rule book.

The actual process requires two distinct choices:

1. Use option (choose now for 1st half or defer to the 2nd half)

then after that decision is made the 2nd option:

2. Decide receive, kick, or defend a goal with opponent probably still getting to choose end to defend

I see absolutely no reason to let this get screwed up simply because we know how this works and we're not going to make sure that everyone else does. IMO this is one case where getting it right (according to the rules) is not enough. Don't let a team make a mistake here, and before accepting what looks like a "confused choice" make sure that team understands that they may end up not getting ball in either half.

No, you're not there to influence their decisions. You're there to insure that the game is fair for both teams. Make all the excuses you want, you didn't do that.

The young man said that he wanted to defer. He's not stupid so he knows the other team will elect to receive. So it went ahead and told you that they would defend the west goal. But no, your white hat had to show everyone how smart he is.

That's just plain over officious officiating. Glad I'm not on that crew. :(

BktBallRef is correct. This is just trying to prove how smart you are. If a captain tells me that he is electing to kick to start the game I try to explain that they probably won't get the ball to start the second half either.

If you allow a team to mistakenly elect to kick you're just setting yourself up for a sh*tstorm to start the second half.

I had a 7th grade game and you'd know that while standing on the sideline the coach is going over the options with his captain. He tells him if they win the toss that they want to kick. I explained to them that if they kicked then they'd most likely be kicking the 2nd half as well since the other team would get the 2nd half choices. I told them if they truly wanted to kick then the best option would be to defer. So, they won the toss and elected to defer. Sometimes even the coaches need a little help.

Just last night, winning captain elects to kick. I repeat his options and he says he wants to kick. I asked "are you sure?" and he says he wants to kick.

After the coin toss - I went to the coach to make sure he understood what happened and he said his captain did what he (the coach) wanted - he wanted to kick!

I never did ask why he didn't just defer.

I always give options in this order, "defer, receive, kick or defend a goal." I don't disagree with those who don't give all the options, but I figure captians and coaches have to take some responsibility for knowing what the heck to do!

Hey Walt - think of anything "witty" yet?

3-2-3 is pretty clear; I can't see how we as officials continue to make this so difficult. Bob M. is correct; it is actually a two-tiered set of choices.

"The winner of the toss shall have first choice of options for the first half or to defer and have first choice for the second half."

There are actually two options to start each half, and they are the same before Q1 and before Q3. It is the right to wait to the second half to choose one of these two options when “defer” is used by the winner of the coin toss.

"The options for each half shall be:
a. To choose whether his team will kick or receive.
b. To choose the goal his team will defend.
The captain not having the first choice of options for a half shall exercise the remaining option."

I always ask winner of toss if they want to defer choice to second half, or make a choice now. Then I ask the appropriate captain if they want “to receive or kick, (slight pause to take a breath) or you can choose which goal to defend.” Very seldom - - maybe never? - - has the same team kicked off to start each half in any of our crew’s varsity games. However, there could be a situation (inclement weather) that gives the coin-toss-winning-deferring team an advantage by kicking off twice. That is the advantage of deferring, you have the choice closer to the situation you are about to put yourself into.

Had the exact same thing happen in a junior high game today, and since I wasn't the one doing the coin toss and the guy who was is a very experienced official, I had to let it go. But one team ended up kicking off to start both halves when I'm sure that wasn't their intention, but the 7th or 8th grader, whatever he was, was confused and I thought just asking him twice wasn't enough.

Now, thanks to this thread, I'm going to do the two-tiered deal on coin tosses that I'm in charge of.

If we have this many problems on the coin toss, I would hate to see the rest of the game.

Like so much of every game, you can do it half-a___ and get by as long as nothing unusual happens. BUt as soon as something a little strange occurs, if you are being half-a___ it is going to lead to major problems. That is why we can't afford to be half-a___ even when things are just cruising along.