Florida/'Bama
 

Okay, I was listening to the SEC game on the radio this afternoon, and they talked about the "Sideline Interference " call that pushed FL away (temporarily) from the endzone on a scoring drive.

What is that?

In this case it was 4 coaches on the field.

Yep, and some were as far as 5 yards (my estimate) onto the field. Pretty easy call. The TV color guy didn't like it, but he knew it was the rule.

Actually it was not handled correxctly by rule. The coaches were on the field in a dead ball interval. Now that is not permitted but it is generally disregarded as long as they are off by the snap. If yu are going to flag them for being on in the dead ball interval then it is a 15 yarder for unsportysmanlike conduct They went with sideline interference which is only a foul if it happens when ball is live.

Sounds like an odd combination of strict enforcement of the wrong foul for the sake of a lesser penalty.

On the contrary, it seemed like a perfect application and a judicious use of common sense to get a needed point across at a critical situation. After a momentary, obligatory, "What did we do wrong" posturing, the Florida coaching staff quickly accepted their improper, obvious display of over excitement, and accepted their fate.

Perhaps, technically the application of rule was slightly adjusted, but the punishment selected more appropriately fit the infraction, and the situation along the lines of plea bargaining.

However, the entire game was well played on both sides and the crew of officials appeared non exisrent, which we all know is the ultimate objective.

Game well played, job well done.

Radio guy didn't like it either, so I figured it was a good call. Thanks for the info, I was wondering what happened.

Good thing FL scored, or ESPN guys would be having heart attacks over the over-zealous officials trying to make a name for themselves.

NCAA eliminated sideline warnings. Gary Danielson knew the rule instantly but still harped about it. Basically he wanted no call at all.

While I don't know the rule or its enforcement, I did watch the game.

Danielson did a good job I thought. Knew the rule, said it was the right call, and said he thought it was a bad rule. Didn't kick the refs over it. Just kicked the rule.

All season I haven't heard him say one stupid thing... most of the time he agrees with the judgment calls and always clarifies confusing calls with the correct rule (like illegal formation, illegal shift, multiple enforcements, etc.)

He could replace that hack Dan Fouts any day.

I saw it, too. I was surprised by the application of the rule at that point but I agreed with the enforcement that they did. Good job of applying common sense.

So officials just get to decide what the penalty for a specific foul should be as they go now, are you think that is a good idea?

Actually, the real goal is to officiate the game properly.

Excuse me "grasshopper" but the REAl real goal is to manage and control the game properly, insuring the rules are applied appropriately so that neither team gains an unfair or unearned advantage as inconspicuously as possible without becoming a nusince or a factor in it's outcome.

Knowing the rules is extremely important, but not nearly as much as understanding how and when to apply them. Sometimes being precise isn't always all it's cracked up to be and common sense is a necessary tool.

I dunno. The best answer yet to "why did you do that?" is: "That's the rule, coach (supervisor, etc.)"

I looked at it and said, "Okay, yeah, that makes sense." I didn't know there was no warning anymore. Kudos to Danielson for knowing. (And I went to Florida.)

They did miss about four face mask calls, though.

Which can be summed up in 5 words as "officiate the game properly".

Why are you all about this hiding stuff? Sometimes the official must stand out.

Everything the officials do the entire game effects the outcome. It is naive to believe that result could have been exactly the same with different officials.

If I was the opposing coach I would have requested a conference with the referee regarding what foul was just called. How does the referee justify your "common sense" ruling?