substitution vs participation

[Jimmie24]

Seems to me that a lot of wrestilng with a pig in mud is going on here. I would think that after all of these posts, the question was answered. Hard to tell someone that they are wrong with out a window to see out of.

[Patton]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

I think we covered that. Prudent questions would be if a clear cut illegal substitution occurs and is noticed by officials do they have any justification in ignoring it, then proceeding to call a similar foul with a higher penalty? If so, is this ethical?

The answer to the second question is without a doubt NO. Since it’s not ethical I tend to think the answer to the first question is no as well.

You asked for the rule and we've given it. Since you don't like that answer, you now want us to fall into your conspiracy theory that the official knew he had you for a IS, but blatently waited until after the snap so he could really put it to you...and your players. Sorry coach, I don't buy it.

[PSU213]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

I think we covered that. Prudent questions would be if a clear cut illegal substitution occurs and is noticed by officials do they have any justification in ignoring it, then proceeding to call a similar foul with a higher penalty? If so, is this ethical?

The answer to the second question is without a doubt NO. Since it’s not ethical I tend to think the answer to the first question is no as well.

The problem I (and I'm guessing others have on here) is that we are not convinced the official knew about and ignored the IS. Now if he truly passed over the IS for IP, then it was incorrect. I would have a hard time saying it is unethical, because this implies that he was intentionally trying to hurt your team, which does not sound like the case.

[hawkishowl20]

No mocking or hostility is coming from me. If I am miss-interrupting or misrepresenting anyone’s emotions in my responses tell me I’ll take your word on it.

[Mike L]

Coach, unless you are some sort of mind reader, you really have no idea what the official was thinking prior to the play. You may suspect, even strongly suspect, but there is no way for you to know. You may be right, it should have been flagged as a substitution, but it wasn't so it becomes a participation. But my question is, if all this time went by between the time out, the offense finally returning, sidelines yelling at players and officials, why the heck couldn't you manage to get one player, any player, off to avoid any penalty? The whole story is beginning to sound just like that, a story.
Respectfully, it is quite obvious you came here expecting some sort of validation for your point of view and it should also be obvious you just are not going to get it. So I guess I'm wondering why you continue the debate.

[hawkishowl20]

Originally Posted by Patton

You asked for the rule and we've given it. Since you don't like that answer, you now want us to fall into your conspiracy theory that the official knew he had you for a IS, but blatently waited until after the snap so he could really put it to you...and your players. Sorry coach, I don't buy it.

Yes because I've tried to make myself look like a saint and the officail the devil. It isn't a question of buying it. It is a question of what happened. I take from your answer that you agree with my answer's to the 2 questions. No and No.

[hawkishowl20]

Originally Posted by Mike L

Coach, unless you are some sort of mind reader, you really have no idea what the official was thinking prior to the play. You may suspect, even strongly suspect, but there is no way for you to know. You may be right, it should have been flagged as a substitution, but it wasn't so it becomes a participation. But my question is, if all this time went by between the time out, the offense finally returning, sidelines yelling at players and officials, why the heck couldn't you manage to get one player, any player, off to avoid any penalty? The whole story is beginning to sound just like that, a story.
Respectfully, it is quite obvious you came here expecting some sort of validation for your point of view and it should also be obvious you just are not going to get it. So I guess I'm wondering why you continue the debate.

Without making any insults, what are you talking about? Making points in a debate doesn’t mean you are looking for validation no matter how much you want that to be the case. Trying to bully someone isn’t an argument. If it were clear cut I wouldn’t question it. I’m looking for someone on the other side of this to make a good argument. So, in a way I want to be wrong but no one has made an argument. The lack of logic here is ridiculous.

[hawkishowl20]

I have no problem with people taking the other side of this. If a logical argument exists I want to hear it. Obviously, the two rules are similar. They both have the sentence “when 12 or more players are on the field” in them.

From the officials and coaches I’ve talked to, common practice is to differentiate based on if it’s called before or after the snap. That is practical but incorrect considering the rules differentiate based on the extra player entering the field before or after the snap.


The players actions determine what penalty it is not the officials. This attitude is backward, lazy, and selfish.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

The players actions determine what penalty it is not the officials. This attitude is backward, lazy, and selfish.

I must be misunderstanding your point of view. You are 20 posts in on this site and I am really not clear what you are trying to accomplish. Do you want people to agree with you? Do you want to validate that the official was wrong? Do you want the actual rule and the common interpretations? All you seem to do is argue with people that disagree with your position. If you have not noticed, that goes on a lot here. There is nothing wrong with your position if that is what you believe. You cannot expect everyone else to take that position with you because you want them to. It does not work that way in the real world, it does not work here either.

Peace

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

I didn't want a time out and I didn't mind the penalty. The missaplication or ignoring of rules generaly diminishes "fun" and "fair play." Those things I teach my team.

Sorry coach I have to call bull**** on this one.

[Ref inSoCA]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

Who's right? Who's wrong?

I’m looking for opinions on this ‘situation’ I ran into Saturday. Maybe someone has come across this before or knows the rules.

My league uses WIAA rules which are basically NFHS rules. So, during a timeout my defensive coordinator substituted a cornerback for a cornerback. He said something like “you’re in” and “you’re out.” The kid that was in is new and not very sharp so he didn’t understand this and stayed on the field. Being new he also didn’t pick up on someone being in his position promptly. The timeout ends, the other team breaks the huddle, goes up to the line, we realize we have to many men, the official sees we have 12 men, decides to not stop play, the play is run (veer dive), the official throws a flag on the snap…

The official signals illegal participation and walks of the penalty 15 yards from the line of scrimmage.

That's BS. That's why there are 2 officials counting A/B so if there are 12 on the field before the snap, you kill it and it's a 5 yd Ill Sub foul.

Screaming at a coach shows lack of training and, I dare say, maturity.

[hawkishowl20]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I must be misunderstanding your point of view. You are 20 posts in on this site and I am really not clear what you are trying to accomplish. Do you want people to agree with you? Do you want to validate that the official was wrong? Do you want the actual rule and the common interpretations? All you seem to do is argue with people that disagree with your position. If you have not noticed, that goes on a lot here. There is nothing wrong with your position if that is what you believe. You cannot expect everyone else to take that position with you because you want them to. It does not work that way in the real world, it does not work here either.

Peace

Can we address the issue at hand? stop sidetracking on the meaning of life or whatever your talking about. Your right I shouldn’t respond to a lot of the people here but I did I hoped they would eventually share knowledge or logical analysis. I don’t know who is smart and who isn’t. I can sift through a lot of information so why are you concerned about the number of posts? make a good point about the rules / situation please.

[hawkishowl20]

Jrutledge said
“…it must be made clear that the rules allow for a live ball substitution infraction. There are people that will read this and only think there is one option or the other.”

If that is true, which I think/know it is, that completely undermines the only argument I’ve heard disagreeing with me. The “if I catch it it’s 5 yard mistake if I don’t it’s akin to a personal foul unsportsmanlike penalty” argument is baseless. The intent of both rules would never make this situation happen. No rule making body would structure it this way. What makes it happen is officials using a rule of thumb that is false because they don’t know the rules or messed up and need to figure out what to do somehow.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by waltjp

I count players before each play. If I have something different than 11 I count again. If I verify that there's more than 11 on the field then I'll flag it as an illegal sub and kill the play. If the ball is snapped while I'm still counting then the only choice is illegal participation.

I've read this far into the thread and nobody has yet quoted (and I can't, no recent rule book) the Fed rule for illegal substitution (dead ball). That was the only point of contention, not whether it became a case of illegal participation once the ball was put in play (which everyone agrees).

Some officials are saying they try to flag illegal substitution based on their count of players, plus lack of indication that any of them are trying to leave the field. What language in the rule book supports that? I remember there being some discussion here about illegal substitution as an automatic call in Fed based on certain procedures' failing to be followed, but the discussion seemed to be only about cases where it's team A.

Robert

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

Can we address the issue at hand? stop sidetracking on the meaning of life or whatever your talking about. Your right I shouldn’t respond to a lot of the people here but I did I hoped they would eventually share knowledge or logical analysis. I don’t know who is smart and who isn’t. I can sift through a lot of information so why are you concerned about the number of posts? make a good point about the rules / situation please.

Your question has been answered. Just because you do not like the answer, does not mean that everyone else is wrong and you are right. At this point is seems like should take the information given into to you and either accept it or reject the information all together. It really does not matter to me, but stop trying to take on everyone because you do not agree with them. That is only going to show you for what people think you are. And if that is not what you want people to think, then I suggest you quit while you are ahead. But just because you think you know more than everyone here, does not make it so.

Peace