substitution vs participation

[hawkishowl20]

Originally Posted by youngump

So I don't work the oblongated ball, but I do follow a bunch of your discussions from where I belong on the forum... mind if I ask a question that's bothering me in this discussion?

So, B1 illegally enters the field. That broke a rule. The official notices this either a) just as the ball is snapped or b) just before the ball is snapped or c) well before the ball is snapped. In this discussion c is a 5 yard dead ball foul. a or b are 15 yard live ball fouls.

Now what bothers me is that I can't think of an analagous situation in any sport where the time the official notes the infraction determines it's severity without the player doing anything else.

There are a couple of close ones that are about preventative officiating but they all seem to involve when we notice relative to what the illegal player did.

Why isn't this (and the casebook seems clear to me that you are all right that it isn't) a case where when after the snap you get to 12 you blow it dead because you realize a foul occurred before the snap. (If you're not sure where it occurred that's another thing... I mean the case where you're sure there were no late substitutions and are sure they committed a dead ball foul.)

It's bothersome that the officials error makes the penalty much worse.

Youngump asks a great question and the answer is simple you can stop play after it starts and call the dead ball foul. It is not only suggested in the substitution rule it also is the safest thing to do. That’s why participation carries a higher penalty: if you run on after play begins it may be difficult to catch and is dangerous. That’s why substitution is a 5 yard penalty because it occurs outside of play and causes no danger.


*3.7 COMMENT, Page 26: a. If a replaced player or substitute attempts to leave the field, but does not get off prior to the snap, the foul is considered as having occurred simultaneously with the snap and the illegal substitution penalty is enforced from the previous spot. (3-7-4, 10-4-2a)

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

*3.7 COMMENT, Page 26: a. If a replaced player or substitute attempts to leave the field, but does not get off prior to the snap, the foul is considered as having occurred simultaneously with the snap and the illegal substitution penalty is enforced from the previous spot. (3-7-4, 10-4-2a)

In your description of your play, the player makes no attempt to leave the field = 3.7 Comment a. does not apply.

[Jimmie24]

What I find amazing is that a certain coach has been shown the rule, over and over. He has seen the case play yet still can not get over himself. IF he were as he said an official and part of the fraternity wouldn't he understand this stuff easier? Or maybe, being a part of the fraternity, he expects to be able to get away with stuff? Rules are rules. This one is pretty plainly stated. If he talked to the official on the sideline as densly as he speaks here, seriously how long would he stay?

[Blue37]

Originally Posted by Jimmie24

IF he were as he said an official and part of the fraternity wouldn't he understand this stuff easier?

There are a couple of pee wee leagues in my area that use the commissioner's son or brother-in-law or mechanic or whoever is available. Those guys have no current rule books and just call what they see on TV. Maybe he is one of them. That would explain a few things!

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Blue37

There are a couple of pee wee leagues in my area that use the commissioner's son or brother-in-law or mechanic or whoever is available. Those guys have no current rule books and just call what they see on TV. Maybe he is one of them. That would explain a few things!

And they use these guys because of hothead idiots like the original poster. No licensed official wants to put up with this crap (or won't do it for what they are paying).

It is amazing how uninformed this guy is. Dangerous to run a play with 12? Allowing a player to line up in the neutral zone is dangerous to the quarterback?

Jeez, I'm getting dizzy with all the stupid coach-speak being bandied about here. It's very rare that we officials keep players from getting hit or hurt. My whistle and flag doesn't stop players, common sense and not being a thug stops players. You hear coaches say "play to the whistle" and then try to blame the officials if there's a late hit because the "whistle" was late. My goodness.

Working a freshman game, a trainer actually asked a wing to have a quicker whistle on plays so players wouldn't get hurt. I told the wing that he should tell the trainer to call me so I can tell him how to wrap an ankle.

[Robert Goodman]

Youth football scrapes the bottom of the barrel for officials for several reasons, all related to money. One is that the scholastic programs outbid them money-wise for personnel. Another is that conditions are poor, with small crews, poorly marked fields, and uncertain times. By the latter I mean the start of games may be delayed because of a need to wait for the field to become available, but on the other hand forfeits are not uncommon. You may wind up with a game ending in near darkness, have to deal with people who wander thru the field because they don't realize a game is under way, be asked to enforce many local variant rules, all sorts of conditions that wouldn't come up often in scholastic ball.

Of course the coaches operate under those & other handicaps as well, not related to money. Talk about 12 on the field? Last year the Jr. Pee-Wee team I coached on had trouble keeping 11 on the field -- players kept taking themselves out or failing to go in! There were occasions you could've called USC on coaches on the same side cursing each other out.

Robert

[hawkishowl20]

This is the whole point. I know how to count. Maybe I give others to much credit, but it isn’t hard and it doesn’t take long. This specific situation had loads of “extra time” to count. The official also proved by many actions he knew the count before the snap. Grabbing the flag and holding it until the snap then throwing it the instant the snap occurred is a good indication of that knowledge. He made a mistake. I didn’t yell at him. I brought up the correct rule. Instead of apologizing or giving the only possible (but actually impossible due to his actions) justification of not having the count in time, he went ballistic. He couldn’t bring himself to accept that he was wrong and took it out on me. I wanted to be sure of the rules because this was so out of the ordinary and didn’t want to be guilty of “dragging this guy through the mud.” This guy was probably hired by our opposition not my league which could as suggested be the explanation for his inexperience and low quality. I don’t know how this particular opponent staffs it’s games. I think the people that have posted using the fact that I have actively questioned one call in 15 years of football as evidence that I am some sort of hothead is an indictment of their professionalism (if they have any). I have found the conclusion to the questions.

I didn’t do anything out of line by simply stating rules (correctly)

The official made a mistake maliciously or in incompetence about enforcing a rule. Than compounded the error hundreds of times by lashing out at me.

I should have perhaps known he was acting childish immediately, but I was honestly not sure hence my request for a conference at all. I don’t remember my exact words used to calm him down so they aren’t really in my OP although I stated I had to calm him down.

The rules are somewhat flawed in that they allow unethical abuse and create honest confusion among some, but otherwise fine. I did think this specific situation needed to be addressed by the rules but now realize it was simply the officials error.

If I was officiating this wouldn’t have happened because the count never is a problem. So, it would have to take some extra-ordinary circumstances like the extra player entering the field within 3 seconds of the snap. That actually is illegal participation so I would call that. If I was vomiting or something prior to the snap and missed the count I would call participation. I would explain to the defensive teams coach that I made a mistake do to my vomiting and had to apply a rule that isn’t really intended for that situation.

In terms of amending the rules. The ethical question still remains because this does get botched up from time to time. If the official knows he made a mistake he probably should be able to blow it dead during a live ball for safety or have a different infraction to enforce. The team couldn’t have committed the participation if the ref did his job, but he didn’t so it’s a 10 yard live ball substitution or something.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Youth football scrapes the bottom of the barrel for officials for several reasons, all related to money. One is that the scholastic programs outbid them money-wise for personnel. Another is that conditions are poor, with small crews, poorly marked fields, and uncertain times. By the latter I mean the start of games may be delayed because of a need to wait for the field to become available, but on the other hand forfeits are not uncommon. You may wind up with a game ending in near darkness, have to deal with people who wander thru the field because they don't realize a game is under way, be asked to enforce many local variant rules, all sorts of conditions that wouldn't come up often in scholastic ball.


Robert

Fortunately for me, there is a huge youth league here that contacts with the association I belong to. The league is well managed, well funded and for the most part, is kept in control. We have the occasional issue, especially with teams from certain cities that are poorly managed but we have a great relationship with the league. In turn, the league provides a great place for newer officials to build and refine their officiating skills. Due to the quality of the league, there are many veteran officials that don't mind working there so we are able to facilitate a good learning experience and knowledge transfer. To top it off, the quality of play is actually pretty good with many of the teams from the oldest age group being better than quite a few high school freshman teams.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

Youngump asks a great question and the answer is simple you can stop play after it starts and call the dead ball foul.

*3.7 COMMENT, Page 26: a. If a replaced player or substitute attempts to leave the field, but does not get off prior to the snap, the foul is considered as having occurred simultaneously with the snap and the illegal substitution penalty is enforced from the previous spot. (3-7-4, 10-4-2a)

Since when can we stop play after it starts? Please do not quote from outdated books. Get yourself a 2008 rulebook and casebook and start reading for comprehension.

[Jimmie24]

Wouldn't we go into the fundamentals. No live-ball foul causes the ball to become dead.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by daggo66

Since when can we stop play after it starts? Please do not quote from outdated books. Get yourself a 2008 rulebook and casebook and start reading for comprehension.

Again, not my game, but it happens all of the time whether the rule book supports it or not. Whistle, mic comes on, dead ball, delay of game. Whistle, mic, Dead ball, fault start.

I think the analogy I'm making is this: Suppose in a basketball game they made backcourt a technical foul instead of a violation. A player catches the ball out of bounds in the backcourt and then steps in. Because this is so hard to follow in realtime (I know; but bear with me), he doesn't realize that the player is out of bounds until after he whistles the backcourt violation. But he's sure he didn't get there legally.

Or put another way in this scenario the only way the player can commit violation two is by getting away with violation one. I guess that's not so weird since he got away with something. But that's what's been bothering me.
________
Glass Pipe Pictures

[Jimmie24]

Originally Posted by youngump

Again, not my game, but it happens all of the time whether the rule book supports it or not. Whistle, mic comes on, dead ball, delay of game. Whistle, mic, Dead ball, fault start.

I think the analogy I'm making is this: Suppose in a basketball game they made backcourt a technical foul instead of a violation. A player catches the ball out of bounds in the backcourt and then steps in. Because this is so hard to follow in realtime (I know; but bear with me), he doesn't realize that the player is out of bounds until after he whistles the backcourt violation. But he's sure he didn't get there legally.

Or put another way in this scenario the only way the player can commit violation two is by getting away with violation one. I guess that's not so weird since he got away with something. But that's what's been bothering me.

You answered it already, those are dead ball fouls. A dead ball foul we do not allow the ball to become live.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Jimmie24

You answered it already, those are dead ball fouls. A dead ball foul we do not allow the ball to become live.

(I thought I did too with my third paragraph. But not with that one.)

So is illegal substitution. In all three cases the player violated a rule that should cause the ball to stay dead and the ball is made live. In the first two you go ahead and fix it but in the substitution case you instead call a live ball foul and penalize more.
That seems as weird to me as if the penalty for delay of game were 5 yards and the penalty for running a play after the play clock expired was 15.
________
StarryEyed

[hawkishowl20]

Originally Posted by youngump

(I thought I did too with my third paragraph. But not with that one.)

So is illegal substitution. In all three cases the player violated a rule that should cause the ball to stay dead and the ball is made live. In the first two you go ahead and fix it but in the substitution case you instead call a live ball foul and penalize more.
That seems as weird to me as if the penalty for delay of game were 5 yards and the penalty for running a play after the play clock expired was 15.

"If delay of game were 5 yards and the penalty for running a play after the play clock expired was 15." It is exactly like that only it is more important for officials to stop play in the substitution case for safety reasons. It is actually impossible to call participation when a substitution occurred without being guilty of neglect… blow it dead.

[hawkishowl20]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

"If delay of game were 5 yards and the penalty for running a play after the play clock expired was 15." It is exactly like that only it is more important for officials to stop play in the substitution case for safety reasons. It is actually impossible to call participation when a substitution occurred without being guilty of neglect… blow it dead.

It is like ignoring a defensive end lined up in the offensive backfield and than calling a personnel foul when he puts the quarterback in a stretcher. Neglecting one penalty in order to allow dangerous situations and than ignoring everything that led to that point. Like awaking from a slumber of neglect.