Question for the white hats.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Welpe

There are many rules that we could consider unfair but they should still be enforced. Its harsh but then so is OPI.

One thing is for sure, enforcing as a live ball foul really nips that activity in the bud quickly. A competent coach will get tired of having touchdowns called back because of completely unecessary and stupid hits.

A friend of mine and I were discussing your OPI penalty. It is very harsh! We almost couldn't believe it!

[ajmc]

Sloth, I think your dilemna may be caused by your trying to bite off more than you can chew. Your job title does't include deciding what is fair punishment, or not, neither does the job title of "coach", so their input on the question is totally immaterial.

We shouldn't presume that the rule makers didn't fully contemplate this type situation when designing these rules, so we should deal with what we're given. Generally, football rules are intended to be simply black, or white. As situations of gray develop, where necessary and appropriate, exceptions are included to cover significant deviations.

If you're looking for a fudge factor, the question of whether or not the runner was still actually in the field of play when the foul was committed is an option, but the answer is clear, the rules don't differentiate between a cheap shot on a breakaway versus a cheap shot anywhere else. Possibly the idea is to really enforce the notion that cheap shots, wherever they take place, are simply not acceptable.

Will coaches whine and feint shock and disbelief? Sometimes, but what difference should that make. A smart coach will use the example as a teaching moment that will likely prevent such action from ever taking place again. You ALWAYS have to consider the "other side of the coin".

What will be the reaction to your credibility by the offended team? Will they judge you as being biased? Will they take you decision as an excuse to levy their own form of retaliation? Will the player who was fouled be motivated to seek retaliation? Whichever decision you make, there will be consequences some of which are known and controllable, others over which you have no idea of, or control over. When following the rule, consequences seem much more predictable.

One can call it anything they want, describing it as a, "'live ball foul treated as a dead ball foul", is no more accurate than calling it, "coping out because you were afraid of making someone unhappy". It's a decision each of us have to make in all sorts of circumstances, most not as graphic as the question suggests.

[Rich]

I lean towards enforcing it as a LIVE ball foul if there is any doubt. Of course, I don't see calling back a TD as a big deal. Don't foul and we won't be having that discussion.

We had a IBB on a kick-return TD last night. Kids on the sidelines ran onto the field, excited, and the L almost ran into them going down the field. 25 yards in penalties (10+15) later.....

[kdf5]

I think if your association or "local practice" is to leave your sack in the locker room, then hang it up. If it's live ball then call it that. If not, then go to the succeeding spot but don't be afraid of getting booed. I agree wholeheartedly with ajmc. Don't forget that it's the National Federation of High Schools that write these rules. The very schools you are officiating. It's their rule, not yours.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

A friend of mine and I were discussing your OPI penalty. It is very harsh! We almost couldn't believe it!

Until about 1970 in NCAA, the penalty was loss of ball. And why not? If opponents have equal right to the pass, why shouldn't possession go to the player who was fouled? I'll take a rough guess that it was also loss of ball in Canadian football until approximately then.

Robert