High Stepping in the Orange Bowl

[Forksref]

Trying to prevent a kid from breaking his neck is not a stupid intent for a rule.

As for enforcement, wide open diving would merit a flag. Diving to avoid a defender is not worthy of a flag. Officials are paid to be able to discern the difference. Looks like they get it right most of the time.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Forksref

Trying to prevent a kid from breaking his neck is not a stupid intent for a rule.

I do not know that anyone has made that claim. But since this is being brought up, the intent of the rule has nothing to do with safety. If that was the case then all diving under any circumstances would be illegal.

Originally Posted by Forksref

As for enforcement, wide open diving would merit a flag. Diving to avoid a defender is not worthy of a flag. Officials are paid to be able to discern the difference. Looks like they get it right most of the time.

If this was a safety issue (only) then I would see diving over a player as more dangerous. At the very least when players are diving to showboat, they are not doing so with 200 pound players hitting them in the process while running at full speed.

Peace

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by Forksref

Trying to prevent a kid from breaking his neck is not a stupid intent for a rule.

As for enforcement, wide open diving would merit a flag. Diving to avoid a defender is not worthy of a flag. Officials are paid to be able to discern the difference. Looks like they get it right most of the time.

I totally agree. The problem is consistency. The SEC let the dive go....but in a Michigan/OSU game a receiver catching a pass at the five and between two defenders gets a flag for diving into the end zone.

It is perfectly understandable to penalize a player doing a front flip into the end zone the same with wide open diving. But diving to avoid defenders?

Excessive celebration connotes actions AFTER the score, not making the score. This is not to say that taunting or finger pointing on the way to paydirt should be ignored. But diving and high stepping? The rulesmakers need to get a grip.

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

I totally agree. The problem is consistency. The SEC let the dive go....but in a Michigan/OSU game a receiver catching a pass at the five and between two defenders gets a flag for diving into the end zone.

It is perfectly understandable to penalize a player doing a front flip into the end zone the same with wide open diving. But diving to avoid defenders?

Excessive celebration connotes actions AFTER the score, not making the score. This is not to say that taunting or finger pointing on the way to paydirt should be ignored. But diving and high stepping? The rulesmakers need to get a grip.

Diving to avoid a defender is not a foul. If you dive and are unnopposed then that is illegal. In all the bowl games thus far and all the flags that have been thrown or not thrown I would agree with all but one non-call. I'm not sure of the actual numbers but a good guess would be about 10 Unsportsmanlike calls. So, if an official missed 1 of those that's pretty good as far as consistency go. Missing 1 out of 10 is pretty darn good.

[ljudge]

Originally Posted by JasonTX

Missing 1 out of 10 is pretty darn good.

And a grade of 90 gets you an "A" in most universities. Get all 90's and you graduate Summa Cum Laude.

Darn good officials in this game!

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by ljudge

And a grade of 90 gets you an "A" in most universities. Get all 90's and you graduate Summa Cum Laude.

90's may get you cum laude or magna cum laude, but it takes more than that, in most institutions that take their honors seriously, to graduate summa cum laude.

[ljudge]

Originally Posted by GarthB

90's may get you cum laude or magna cum laude, but it takes more than that, in most institutions that take their honors seriously, to graduate summa cum laude.

An A gives you a 4.0....doesn't matter whether it was 93, 95, 97, or 100. A 4.0 is a 4.0. And, Summa is (I believe) anything greater than 3.85.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by ljudge

An A gives you a 4.0....doesn't matter whether it was 93, 95, 97, or 100. A 4.0 is a 4.0. And, Summa is (I believe) anything greater than 3.85.

1. Here is what I responded to: ...a grade of 90 gets you an "A" in most universities. Get all 90's and you graduate Summa Cum Laude.

2. A 90 does not get an A in many Universities. At the two my sons attended, an A- took 93%.

3. I don't believe there is a universally accepted breakdown of cum laude, magna cum laude and summa cum laude. I know of instances where different individuals, both earning 4.0's, received different levels of honor, or "praise" recognition; one received magna and the other received summa.

4. I meant only an academic observation and really didn't intent to start an argument. I agree with your basic premise...it was good officiating.