What I Like About the A-11

[Robert Goodman]

For those of you who are advocating that the numbering exception be made a judgement call (based on likelihood of a kicking play), would you at least require the referee to inform both teams when, in his opinion, they were in a kicking situation?

Robert

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

For those of you who are advocating that the numbering exception be made a judgement call (based on likelihood of a kicking play), would you at least require the referee to inform both teams when, in his opinion, they were in a kicking situation?

Robert

Robert, you're just having some fun now, right???

[TXMike]

In the legal system we have a term called "the reasonable man standard". It is used in different situations, i.e. self-defense cases. The jury is asked to apply the "reasonable man" standard when deciding if someone's actions were acceptable. This means the law does not have to spell out ever specific instance when a person can use deadly force in self-defense but rather the jury is permitted to decide if someone acted reasonably in whatever method they chose to use for their self-defense.

I would suggest that a similar "reasonable man" standard could be used here and therefore would not require an official to inform teams but rather would let him rely on the teams being as "reasonable" as him when determining if it was obvious a scrimmage kick might be attempted.

[ajmc]

Fabulous idea, of course then we'd have too expand the "reasonable man standard" to cover coachs (both head and assistant), spectators, announcers, sports writers and nit pickers. Probably life, in general, would be a lot, or at least nicer.

[Robert Goodman]

The legal system has judgements like that all over the place, because life is a situation we're forced into. But games are invented. We have the chance to make game rules that reduce uncertainty, and I'm amazed that several posters here actually want to increase uncertainty in football. The reason I asked the above question is that although making scrimmage kick fomation a judgement call based entirely on an official's opinion of the game situation would be a terrible thing, at least the uncertainty could be mitigated if the teams were told in advance what the ref had in mind. What objection could there possibly be to requiring an announcement?

Nobody has answered my question of why the logic of "play situation" shouldn't be applied to the passing rules by Fed too. What if it looks like a pass play was called, but team A failed to pass (and thereby draw a foul by B) because their receiver(s) was/were not open because he/they was/were contacted in a way that would've been illegal on a pass play? Actually NFL does have a rule that depends on whether it looks during play as if a pass is still likely, so it's not unprecendented. Do you see why Fed spared their officials of this judgement? Even the NFL had the sense to base it on a judgement during play rather than of the play situation before the down.

Come to think of it, why not ban the forward pass except in officially-judged "passing situations"? If such judgements are so easy and equitable, wouldn't it simplify the officials' jobs to not be surprised by pass plays?

Robert

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Nobody has answered my question of why the logic of "play situation" shouldn't be applied to the passing rules by Fed too. What if it looks like a pass play was called, but team A failed to pass (and thereby draw a foul by B) because their receiver(s) was/were not open because he/they was/were contacted in a way that would've been illegal on a pass play?

That is hard to understand. Can you give a better example including what foul would have been called?

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Actually NFL does have a rule that depends on whether it looks during play as if a pass is still likely, so it's not unprecendented.

Can you quote this rule?

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Come to think of it, why not ban the forward pass except in officially-judged "passing situations"?

I'm fine with that. In every game I have ever seen it has been common for teams to pass on 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th down no matter where they are located on the field as well as during tries. So every scrimmage down the entire game would be a passing situation.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

The reason I asked the above question is that although making scrimmage kick fomation a judgement call based entirely on an official's opinion of the game situation would be a terrible thing

If it is such a terrible thing then how come it works perfectly in NCAA games?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by LDUB

That is hard to understand. Can you give a better example including what foul would have been called?

There was a discussion of that here a while back -- that Fed had an illegal contact rule against potential receivers. I hadn't been aware of it until I read it here.

Can you quote this rule?

Not right now, but the wording was approximately that the restriction on B continute "until the runner demonstrated no further intention to pass".

[quote]I'm fine with that. In every game I have ever seen it has been common for teams to pass on 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th down no matter where they are located on the field as well as during tries. So every scrimmage down the entire game would be a passing situation.{/quote]
And I've seen kicking on all downs, so we're even.

If it is such a terrible thing then how come it works perfectly in NCAA games?

It's just a matter of the number of teams playing under the different codes. It took many years before the A-11 was concocted; it's just a matter of time in NCAA, now that the gentleman's agreement that was apparently understood at the time the numbering exception has passed from everyone's memory.

Robert

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

For those of you who are advocating that the numbering exception be made a judgement call (based on likelihood of a kicking play), would you at least require the referee to inform both teams when, in his opinion, they were in a kicking situation?

Robert

You must be joking.

It isn't based on the likelihood of a kicking play. It is based on the likelihood that a kick may be attempted. It really isn't complicated...if it is a kicking situation and A is in a SKF then the numbering exception is used. I find it hard to believe that you are too dumb to recognize a kicking situation when it comes up.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by LDUB

It isn't based on the likelihood of a kicking play. It is based on the likelihood that a kick may be attempted.

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by LDUB

It isn't based on the likelihood of a kicking play. It is based on the likelihood that a kick may be attempted.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

It doesn't matter if the officials think that A will run a fake and not kick the ball, all that matters is that it is obvious that a kick may be attempted. All that matters is if it is a kicking situation or not, not the actual probability of A kicking.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by LDUB

All that matters is if it is a kicking situation or not, not the actual probability of A kicking.

You're serious about this? That "kicking situation" refers to something other than that probability? That the likelihood of a kick's being attempted means something different from the likelihood of a kicking play? If your use of the language is that idiosyncratic, how does anybody understand you?

Robert

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

You're serious about this? That "kicking situation" refers to something other than that probability? That the likelihood of a kick's being attempted means something different from the likelihood of a kicking play? If your use of the language is that idiosyncratic, how does anybody understand you?

Robert

Yes, that is correct. The A-11 offense is legal on 4th down in NCAA rules. The officials may feel that A is not going to kick, but it is still obvious that a kick may be attempted.