How Do You Penalize Chipping by the Offense?

[Ed Hickland]

Know we went through this sometime in the past and I seem to remember one association or state (commonwealth as in Kentucky, Mass. uses NCAA) that had a good solution.

A player running for a touchdown when A78 decides this is a good time to give opponent B78 a nice unsuspected de-cleater fifty yards away from the ball while it is still alive. Personal foul. How do you penalize if the result of the play is a touchdown? What if it results in a tackle at the one yard line still in A's possession?

Could someone refresh my memory? Thanks.

[jaybird]

How Do You Penalize Chipping by the Offense?

What is chipping?

[Welpe]

Ed, speaking NFHS, if the foul occurs before the touchdown is scored, treat it as a liveball foul and enforce it under the all but one principle. The penalty will be enforced from the spot of the foul since it was behind the basic spot. If the foul occured after the score, it is enforced as a dead ball penalty from the succeeding spot (the try). If there's any doubt, I'd consider making it a live ball foul.

In either case, if the foul is flagarant, disqualify A78. I would strongly consider disqualification for a blind hit 50 yards behind the play that decleats the B player.

This is a penalty I flagged a lot last season. I was surprised how often it happened but that is why it is so important for those of us behind the play to be vigilantly cleaning up this kind of behavior.

[ajmc]

Flagging this type behavior as a live ball foul, eliminating the score, will likely bring the standard list of predictable howls from the sideline affected, but the lesson learned by the offender, and his team, will last 1000 times longer.

The Referee, or the Umpire or BJ (4 or 5 man) in the case of an interception or advanced defensive fumble recovery, should remain behind the flow just to guard against this type situation.

[Sonofanump]

I read the title and pictured Steve Buscemi in Fargo putting his friend in the wood chipper.

Oh, back to the question, I agree with live ball foul from spot of foul.

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by Sonofanump

I read the title and pictured Steve Buscemi in Fargo putting his friend in the wood chipper.

Oh, back to the question, I agree with live ball foul from spot of foul.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qWFhDvURLg

A good wood chipper is a must in the north country.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Flagging this type behavior as a live ball foul, eliminating the score, will likely bring the standard list of predictable howls from the sideline affected, but the lesson learned by the offender, and his team, will last 1000 times longer.

The Referee, or the Umpire or BJ (4 or 5 man) in the case of an interception or advanced defensive fumble recovery, should remain behind the flow just to guard against this type situation.

Both excellent points. When I give pointers to our new WHs, I looked for these plays to make sure that they're not marching downfield too quickly. I learned in basketball, and apply to football, "you have to know how a guy got on the ground."

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Flagging this type behavior as a live ball foul, eliminating the score, will likely bring the standard list of predictable howls from the sideline affected, but the lesson learned by the offender, and his team, will last 1000 times longer.

The Referee, or the Umpire or BJ (4 or 5 man) in the case of an interception or advanced defensive fumble recovery, should remain behind the flow just to guard against this type situation.

As an older R, I find myself more and more remaining behind the flow. The excuse of anticipating a fumble return is a good one. Guard the goal line, the most important line on the field.

Seriously, though, whenever I have flagged this, I have heard 10 times more howls directed at the player than at any of the officials. The word "stupid" is usually the most common term heard.

I have given a "talking to" foul on simple pushes in the back that are far from the runner and don't bother the defender, but I never ignore it. I have even told some players who are close to a hit but change their mind, "smart choice in not hitting that guy."

The lead official, usually the BJ or a wing will have the runner and the rest of us need to be vigilant. An eye on the clock is important in this situation too. We record the time of the score in case the CO starts the clock on an untouched free kick that goes OOB.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Flagging this type behavior as a live ball foul, eliminating the score, will likely bring the standard list of predictable howls from the sideline affected, but the lesson learned by the offender, and his team, will last 1000 times longer.

But at the expense of: requiring the official to see which occurred first, the foul or the TD 50 yards away; and of an act having the same nature (and no effect on the play) being penalized according to where (as well as when) it occurred; and of encouraging players to wait to take a cheap shot until after the whistle, when the opponent is even less likely to expect it.

The basic spot enforcement system was devised to produce a relatively easy to administer way to prevent the gaining of an unfair advantage, not to penalize ill behavior like this. The fact that it is unnecessary roughness means that it didn't have an effect on the play, so if there's any way you could see it as occurring after the ball became dead, that's how I would. DQ if necessary, but depriving team A of an otherwise legitimate gain, no.

Robert

[ajmc]

aIf it wasn't for this, "human nature" thing, you might have a point. Officials are not out there to regulate behavior, that's the job of the parent, coach and school. Our job is to insure that everyone abides by whatever rules govern the contest.

Obviously, we can only respond to what we see, and sometimes that might be 50 yards away. The responsibility for bad behavior rests entirely with the player, or coach, who decides when and how to exhibit it. Every player and every coach is RESPONSIBLE to know the rules, which means understanding the consequences of choosing to violate them. That decision is theirs, not ours. We're responsible for observing the behavior and knowing if, and what penalty, may be associated with it. We don't have any control over deciding when a player, or coach, chooses to do something stupid - that's on them, entirely.

The player who chooses to take a cheap shot, that has nothing to do with the outcome of a play, MUST understand that he is writing a check, that his teammates may have to pay a very expensive penalty for. The coach, of that player, MUST understand that the players action provides him with a teaching opportunity, that he had thusfar failed to recognize.

The penalized team did not lose an "otherwise legitimate gain", one of their teammates chose to discount and reject it. If you choose to minimize the penalty by allowing a live ball foul to be arbitrarily reduced to a dead ball enforcement, you are guilty of enabling that player to behave badly, which may only encourage him, or others, to repeat that behavior over and over again. Who benefits from that?

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

The fact that it is unnecessary roughness means that it didn't have an effect on the play, so if there's any way you could see it as occurring after the ball became dead, that's how I would. DQ if necessary, but depriving team A of an otherwise legitimate gain, no.

Robert

I am not going to try to make it something that it is not. I am going to see it as it actually happened, not when it is beneficial for a particular team. If I think it deserves a flag, I am not going to try to lessen the effect by changing the time at which it occurred. If I don't think it deserves a flag, I don't throw it. When it occurred is not important to me if I think it was serious enough for a flag. The PLAYER is the one who deprived his team of a legitimate gain, not me.

Also, not all fouls/flags/judgments are meant to relate to whether they had an effect on the play. Safety has nothing to do with the play. Remember, there are 3 classifications of fouls:
1 – No Brainers – e.g., False start, encroachment…
2 – Safety - e.g., Helmet contact, personal fouls…
3 – Discretionary - e.g., Away from the point of attack
a "talking to"...

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

But at the expense of: requiring the official to see which occurred first, the foul or the TD 50 yards away; and of an act having the same nature (and no effect on the play) being penalized according to where (as well as when) it occurred; and of encouraging players to wait to take a cheap shot until after the whistle, when the opponent is even less likely to expect it.

The basic spot enforcement system was devised to produce a relatively easy to administer way to prevent the gaining of an unfair advantage, not to penalize ill behavior like this. The fact that it is unnecessary roughness means that it didn't have an effect on the play, so if there's any way you could see it as occurring after the ball became dead, that's how I would. DQ if necessary, but depriving team A of an otherwise legitimate gain, no.

Robert

If the all but one was a system produced to make it a relatively easy way to administer penalties then why are you advocating seeing one thing and calling another? We're not depriving anyone of anything. His teammate did that. If we started lessening the penalties because A gets deprived of an otherwise legitimate gain is a sure way to encourage more cheap shots, not less.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

Know we went through this sometime in the past and I seem to remember one association or state (commonwealth as in Kentucky, Mass. uses NCAA) that had a good solution.

A player running for a touchdown when A78 decides this is a good time to give opponent B78 a nice unsuspected de-cleater fifty yards away from the ball while it is still alive. Personal foul. How do you penalize if the result of the play is a touchdown? What if it results in a tackle at the one yard line still in A's possession?

Could someone refresh my memory? Thanks.

CANADIAN RULING:

A hit like this 50 yards away is definitely Unnecessary Roughness: 15 yards.

If A78 has already scored the touchdown, B can apply the 15 yards:

• on the convert
• on the ensuing kick-off
  • + if the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd quarter ended with the TD, B can choose to apply the 15 yards on the KO to begin the next quarter (including the bridge from 2nd to 3rd)
  • + if the 4th quarter ended with the TD, B can choose to apply the 15 yards on the induced KO, or in OT, if the TD results in a tie game. If the convert breaks the tie, I will let B re-submit their answer to revert to the induced kick-off

If A78 is still in the field of play (no TD yet), but HAD reached the line to gain:

• 15 yards from where the ball was when the hit happened (called Point Ball Held), no TD, and 1D/10 after the 15 is applied

If A78 is still in the field of play (no TD yet), and HADN'T yet reached the line to gain:

• 15 yards from PLS, down repeated, or
• 15 yards from Point Ball Dead, AND roll the down