Missing tailbone pad puts team in the playoffs

[OverAndBack]

Originally Posted by HossHumard

As much as I admit I am not well versed with American rules, IMHO this is well outside the "spirit of the game" and I would use my discretion as an official to ensure this match was decided by play and strategy, not a coach who feigns concern for an opposing player's safety by waiting until an opportune moment to mention it to an official.

It's definitely an asshat move.

This reminds me a bit of the ice hockey rule concerning the curvature of a player's stick. There is a limit as to how curved a stick can be (thanks Bobby Hull!) so it was not uncommon for coaches to note an opposing player's stick that was likely exceeding the legal limit and then "call the penalty" when they needed a manpower advantage.

There's a Mr. McSorley on line two for you.

I know what I would say in any hearing that I might be called too afterwards too. "So, coach, you saw a potentially dangerous safety issue for a player on the field and you did not immediately report it? What if the players tailbone had been damaged permanently? Were you prepared to live with that knowing you could have prevented it?"

Which would make for a great Aaron Sorkin-esque moment in the proceedings, for sure. Not sure it would help your case, though.

These are sticky situations and this isn't an easy game to officiate. People who think it is should try it sometimes.

I'm just glad I didn't have to make this call. Because I'd be very inclined to just send the kid off and tell him he couldn't participate and let the coach ***** all he wanted. I think that's the right thing to do.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I agree with 2 key points stated so far:
1. This is a crap tactic by the coach who's asking for the penalty.
2. If the opposing team wants to avoid being "victimized" by such tactics, all they have to do is follow the rules.

That said, I can't see a way to avoid assessing the penalty here. The closest thing would be to say that I didn't see the player participate without the pad on the previous play.

But if I knew he did participate -- if he's the QB, for instance -- it's just not plausible to say that somehow he lost the pad after the play.

So in the end I'd probably do what the R did in this game: assess the penalty and let the chips fall where they may. I agree with Luke's philosophy of enforcing the rules, at least up to the standards set by my state and my association.

There is a baseball play that comes to mind, I believe it was George Brett who was using a bat with more pine tar than allowed and Billy Martin was the Yankees manager. Martin saw Brett use the bat several times until one day he hit a crucial home run. Martin asked for the bat to be inspected taking away the home run from Brett.

But more important for football is a missing tailbone protector can subject the player to the possibility of permanent paralysis. I would rather be criticized for "over officiating" than being light on player protection.

[refbuz]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

There is a baseball play that comes to mind, I believe it was George Brett who was using a bat with more pine tar than allowed and Billy Martin was the Yankees manager. Martin saw Brett use the bat several times until one day he hit a crucial home run. Martin asked for the bat to be inspected taking away the home run from Brett.

You know that the Royals protested and had that call overturned, right? The Home Run counted and they won the game.

Pine Tar Game

This wasn't pointed out for the player's safety, it was merely pointed out to gain an advantage by the opposing coach.

[OverAndBack]

Originally Posted by refbuz

You know that the Royals protested and had that call overturned, right? The Home Run counted and they won the game.

Brett's bat did violate the rule. But the AL President ruled that the bat didn't violate the "spirit of the rule."

The Royals did win, but they did have to play from the point of protest weeks later to complete the game. It was a big ol' mess.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by HossHumard

I'm with Sloth too. This is a BS move by a coach and I would simply send the kid off without penalty.

As much as I admit I am not well versed with American rules, IMHO this is well outside the "spirit of the game" and I would use my discretion as an official to ensure this match was decided by play and strategy, not a coach who feigns concern for an opposing player's safety by waiting until an opportune moment to mention it to an official.

This reminds me a bit of the ice hockey rule concerning the curvature of a player's stick. There is a limit as to how curved a stick can be (thanks Bobby Hull!) so it was not uncommon for coaches to note an opposing player's stick that was likely exceeding the legal limit and then "call the penalty" when they needed a manpower advantage. What happened then of course was stick challenges all over the place, delaying numerous games, until the NHL decided to penalize incorrect challenges to this rule with a two minute penalty to the team that complained to the officials.

I know what I would say in any hearing that I might be called too afterwards too. "So, coach, you saw a potentially dangerous safety issue for a player on the field and you did not immediately report it? What if the players tailbone had been damaged permanently? Were you prepared to live with that knowing you could have prevented it?"

My understanding is that in Canada is that a coach bringing to our attention an equipment violation is a flag. Doing otherwise is contrary to the national rules interpretor. Now, if that info hasn't filtered down to all levels.......

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by OverAndBack

Waking up every three hours, crying and looking for a breast to suck on?

Only after a bad set of youth games...