Would You Wind It?

[OverAndBack]

Had a game recently where A was up 21-0 with under a minute to go.

A is near midfield, they just give the ball to a running back, and he breaks outside and goes down the sideline before B tackles him out of bounds short of the goal line, about the 4. Now there's :05 left, first and goal.

Quarterback (jayvee) goes right up in the white hat's face and asks for time out. They have two left, so time out is granted.

Luckily, cooler heads prevailed and A just took a knee on 1st and goal from the 4.

But could you/would you have started the clock on the ready coming back from the timeout, just in the interests of fair play?

[Jim D]

No, but if I were a wing on the play I'd think maybe he actually was downed inbounds if that were at all possible. If not (A ran out on his own untouched) then let the game play out. Fair play is going by the rules, which say the clock starts on the snap. Maybe A will send in a player who hasn't played all game. He gets his 5 seconds of action the same as everyone else.

[Bad Mood Risin]

No. It starts when it starts. With 5 seconds to go the ECO should make the next play the last, regardless of whether it's a TD or not, so the game will end. At this point, how it 21-0 more fair that 27-0? It makes no difference, but winding it will be obvious to all what you're doing, and it isn't worth it.

[refbuz]

Originally Posted by Bad Mood Risin

No. It starts when it starts. With 5 seconds to go the ECO should make the next play the last, regardless of whether it's a TD or not, so the game will end. At this point, how it 21-0 more fair that 27-0? It makes no difference, but winding it will be obvious to all what you're doing, and it isn't worth it.

Yeah, I agree. It is not worth the flack you would get if you were being observed.

That being said, if the clock is being kept on the field, the game would be over without even granting the TO.

[jontheref]

You all have hit on all the points. The wings need to have progress stopped inbounds. Its a judgement call for progress. And in my judgement in this game with this much time left, he was stopped in bounds. The other thing is they aint getting in the endzone again...because some lineman twitched for a false start or they didnt have enough guys on the line. But no I wont wind the clock after a timeout.

[PSU213]

Originally Posted by jontheref

You all have hit on all the points. The wings need to have progress stopped inbounds. Its a judgement call for progress. And in my judgement in this game with this much time left, he was stopped in bounds. The other thing is they aint getting in the endzone again...because some lineman twitched for a false start or they didnt have enough guys on the line. But no I wont wind the clock after a timeout.

I totally agree with ruling him in bounds, letting my watch run to zero, etc... That being said, I find it to be totally wrong to call a player for a foul he did not commit. I'm guessing some will argue that both situations are essentially the same (i.e. 'stretching' the rules in a blowout to prevent another score). However, in the latter situation, you would have to be 'making up' a foul against an innocent player. I do not think that is fair to that individual (including the potential grief he will get from coaches and fellow players). Sure, move slowly to run out the clock, but don't penalize a player who has done nothing wrong.

[OverAndBack]

I can see not winding it. That's cool. But I don't think that's as egregious as a phantom foul.

I've actually had partners tell me before to make up fouls to keep an obviously dominant team from scoring more, and I won't do it. That's just where my personal line is.

[MJT]

I wouldn't wind it. Sometimes the kids don't think about the situation, they are just thinking about scoring a TD whenever possible. It is nice to know the team decided to down it. The coach didn't call the TO, the kid did, but I'm sure the coach made sure they just downed it on the next play.

[refbuz]

Originally Posted by OverAndBack

I can see not winding it. That's cool. But I don't think that's as egregious as a phantom foul.

I've actually had partners tell me before to make up fouls to keep an obviously dominant team from scoring more, and I won't do it. That's just where my personal line is.

I'm not throwing phantom fouls, but I might be looking harder if the starters are still in there in a blowout. If the 2nd or 3rd team is in there, I am more apt to let them play. If they score so be it, they've worked just as hard during the week.

It's not my fault that your 1st team can't stop their 2nd team.

[w_sohl]

almost exact. Visitor up 14 with the ball. No time out called, after a first down so clock stopped for chains. I see coach calling in a play and the center runs to the line and tries to move my WH, standing over the ball, out of the way telling him they were going to go. He looked at him and said no your not and let the clock run out.

Only bad can happen from this, this is the very type of play where a cheap shot is going to take place. I think what my WH did was very good preventative officiating. They already won and scoring has nothing to do with post season.

[OverAndBack]

Originally Posted by w_sohl

almost exact. Visitor up 14 with the ball. No time out called, after a first down so clock stopped for chains. I see coach calling in a play and the center runs to the line and tries to move my WH, standing over the ball, out of the way telling him they were going to go. He looked at him and said no your not and let the clock run out.

Seems to me to be the same as winding it.

I guess it's up to your association/state/assignor/crew chief's wishes.