Announcers wanted U to signal TD

[ljudge]

Good post about ABC guys talking about the Side Judge in the OSU v. Mich game. They clearly gave credit where credit is due.

I watched two games yesterday, the other was Rutgers. I was doing a little bit of surfing of the channels during Rutgers so I'll say I'm 99% sure it was the Rutgers game.

I think the voice was Mike Patrick's. He criticized the U for not signaling TD. He said something like (I'm paraphrasing) "I can't understand why in the history of football the umpire can't signal touchdown. It was right in front of him and he just moves out of the way. It's a procedural thing that I don't understand."

Well the funny thing about this was it turned out to NOT be a touchdown and the wings nailed it. The players knee was down and it showed on replay which made him look like a complete dunce!

[MJT]

Ya, the talking heads can definitely have some classics at times. Like you said, the best part was he did not score on the play.

[wwcfoa43]

Though the replay showed that the talking heads were incorrect about whether it was a TD, I agree with them that the umpire should be able to rule on TDs.

In Canadian four, five and seven man mechanics, with the ball inside the two yard line, the umpire positions himself close to the line of scrimmage and then steps forward on the line surge to be able to rule whether the ball crosses the line or not. In six man, we place two officials in this position. (Mind you, our fields are 65 yards wide, placing the outside wing man farther away.)

I believe that putting the umpire in a position to rule on a TD is a significant advantage in mechanics.

Since I have just disagreed with the mechanics of 90% of the officials in North America, I certainly do not expect much support from south of the border!

[Texas Aggie]

When you have 2 wing officials (even if both are 6 yards farther away than they are in the US), why would you need an umpire making a decision on something that he's likely to be incorrect about? Even if he's not incorrect about it, how is it an advantage?

[wwcfoa43]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

When you have 2 wing officials (even if both are 6 yards farther away than they are in the US), why would you need an umpire making a decision on something that he's likely to be incorrect about? Even if he's not incorrect about it, how is it an advantage?

Simple: the umpire is closer and therefore more likely to be in a better position than the far wing man to see the play. All he has to do is step forward to position himself on the goal line.

[sj]

How will he do that if there are bodies everywhere covering the goal line?


As for the announcers comment..."It's a procedural thing that I don't understand."

.....Maybe it should dawn on him to go find out. He's got hours of prep time before a game. All he has to do is go ask the U. Too simple I guess.

[The Roamin' Umpire]

Originally Posted by wwcfoa43

Simple: the umpire is closer and therefore more likely to be in a better position than the far wing man to see the play. All he has to do is step forward to position himself on the goal line.

I hope this doesn't sound too patronizing. In my opinion, this is one of the top fallacies of officiating: Closer means in a better position to see the play.

This play is an excellent illustration. The umpire, that close to the action, is likely to get jostled as he tries to make this call; also, he probably doesn't have a good view of the runner's legs & knees. I'll take the view from the wing.

[bluezebra]

Originally Posted by wwcfoa43

Though the replay showed that the talking heads were incorrect about whether it was a TD, I agree with them that the umpire should be able to rule on TDs.

In Canadian four, five and seven man mechanics, with the ball inside the two yard line, the umpire positions himself close to the line of scrimmage and then steps forward on the line surge to be able to rule whether the ball crosses the line or not. In six man, we place two officials in this position. (Mind you, our fields are 65 yards wide, placing the outside wing man farther away.)

I believe that putting the umpire in a position to rule on a TD is a significant advantage in mechanics.

Since I have just disagreed with the mechanics of 90% of the officials in North America, I certainly do not expect much support from south of the border!

The umpire's job is to watch for holding, and other infractions, in the line play. He doesn't have time to watch for scoring. If he did, a lot of "garbage" would go unoticed, and uncalled.

Bob