titans/ravens game
 

after the titans scored their first touchdown, they lined up for the extra point, and one of the guys on the end of the defense line came rushing across much too soon (he actually ran past the kicker and the ball was snapped and kicked behind him, and the try was good surprisingly), so they called "offsides, unabated to the kicker, 5 yard penalty will be accessed on the kickoff. retry the pat." what i'm confused about is wouldn't it be half the distance to the goal (move from 2 yard line to 1 yard line) and retry? since when can a penalty be assessed 2 plays ahead of time? and by that i mean since the pat was waved off due to unabated, the play never happened, therefor they assessed a penalty 2 plays ahead of time in actuality.

On an "unabated" foul in the NFL, they kill the play, making it a dead ball foul, thus the try did not happen, even though the kick got off and was good.

Many teams don't want to move the ball up one yard and the five yard penalty is a greater punishment on the kickoff. I assume that it is a special enforcement provision in the NFL. In Fed ball the choice would have been to decline and replay the try or accept half the distance. Some coaches will choose to decline in order not to change the kickers spot, perception, etc.

Of course any encroachment (offsides) is a dead ball foul in HS ball, there is no "unabated" condition. NCAA is a little different, I believe.

I figured this thread would be about the lack of a delay of game call against the Ravens on the drive that led to the winning FG. Now THAT was odd.

Mike Pereira covered that issue last week
 

on Official Review as it came up in a game. Stated the BJ must look at the time then look to see if the ball is snapped so the clock is actually 25 sec + a "beat" so to speak.

The number of offsides calls was greater before this choice was instituted, especially before 2 pt. scoring was adopted. The only other possibility for repeated half-the-distance situation fouling by B was to award a score, and officials would always allow a couple of offsides before thinking about that, so it could delay the game a bit. Some of you may know I consider the whole try a delay of the game, but at least they improved this detail.

Robert

Unbelievable that the refs missed that call. :mad:

That's actually not as big an issue as most fans make it out to be. As Pereira explained last week, the mechanic is for the BJ to recognize the clock has reached 0 (which takes him off his key temporarily) and then look to make sure the ball has not been snapped. He doesn't have the luxury of watching both the clock and the snap at the same time. This leads to a "Zero - bang" as I believe Pereira called it. That means there is usually a slight delay in the clock reaching 0 and the delay of game penalty.

I've only seen the replay once and it did appear to be a little bit longer delay than normal but it wasn't significantly longer. Should it have been a delay of game? Probably. Will the officials get downgraded because of it. Very possible. Unbelieveable that the refs missed that call? No.

The defense still had every chance to play defense there. Yawn to the whole thing. Even had my team been involved, I wouldn't hold that up as a reason why a team lost. 3rd and 7 isn't much different that 3rd and 2 if you're going to pass anyway.

this is exactly what i was thinking. if it was enforced how i thought it was, why not just get a jump on the snap every time, you only have 1 yard to lose. i now see why they have an option.

what about awarding a score? are you saying that would be another option? because you can't "award" a score in any level of football, that would be retarded. what would the rule be, you get a penalty with the ball inside the 6 inch line and it's automatic? pfft.

Be careful with statements like this. I can't answer for the NFL or NCAA but I know this isn't true in FED.

NFL:

The Referee may award a touchdown when a palpably unfair act...
The Referee could award three points for a palpably unfair act...

The defense shall not commit sucessive or continued fouls to prevent a score.
Penalty: For continuous fouls to prevent a score: If the violation is repeated after a warning, the score involved is awarded to the offensive team.

NCAA:

The referee may take any action he considers equitable, including...awarding a score...

NFHS:

The referee enforces any penalty he considers equitable, including the award of a score....Repeated fouls (Art. 2) - the game may be forfeited.

Wanna bet?

forgot about the palpably. ya, i was thinking about like if a receiver went up for a catch in the end zone, and the defender just grabbed him by the face mask and ripped him down, not allowing him to catch it or something. basically, i was thinking of scores being awarded on regular plays, which don't happen. also, when asking questions or making statements, i don't consider high school to be in the conversation when discussing rules, as you can tell (you did mention the palpably in the nfl though). 99% of the time, people aren't talking about high school in regards to anything sports related, let alone rules. i can't remember the last time one of my friends was like "hey did you see that high school game on public access?". not even when i was going to high school did i hear about high school football.

btw, many people ask questions in the form of statements. i'm one of them. for instance, "what? they can't do that!" could possibly mean "they can't do that from what i know, but if somebody knows different, tell me." this is in the same boat as using absolute statements when you really don't mean them literally, such as "i never make mistakes while driving". i'm clarifying this because some people are really immature and love to insult others on the web, so they use every little thing they can against a person.

We've gone over this before. The vast vast majority of members on this forum work nothing higher than high school games. If you ask a question on here you are going to get NFHS (high school) responses. If you post on here then you must change your view of the rules. I would say more than 90% of the posts on here deal with NF rules, about 9% deal with NCAA rules, and the other 1% are split between Canadian rules and NFL.

And another 0.2% miscellaneous like AFA. It's not a non-random sample here, just that a lot more games are played by Fed rules than those others.

i'm aware of this, but where else would i go that isn't filled with teens, and where they have nfl and nba sections on the same forum? and i'm sure most of you watch major sports, i mean how could you not, so at the very least i'm discussing sports with adults.

Isn't this was Google is for? I am sure most here would not know or care. Most here are interested in talking plays from an officiating perspective. Talking to fans is very frustrating and pointless in many cases.

Peace

well people will have to agree to disagree with me then, because to me, an OFFICIATING forum is the place to discuss rules and plays from any league. on the main page, it doesn't say 'high school basketball', it just says 'basketball'. same for all the other sports. if it said the former, i wouldn't have joined. and yes, i did use google, to find this place. the reason why it's mostly high school is simply because you're not going to find nba/nfl/nhl/mlb refs discussing things on forums. i don't know why, you just won't, at least not nearly as much as other "regular" people like you guys.

btw, to the guy above me, i like your signature. took me a second to get it, but now i got it.

This is not about you agreeing or not. You can discuss those things, but you are not going to get answers from people that work the pro levels. In some cases many here do not watch those levels or care what happens with them. It does not have to say "high school" to know that the people you are dealing with is not directly involved in those levels.

Peace

true. i just ask you guys don't be so closed minded and negative about pro sports and/or my discussions of them. this is a national forum, and pro sports are national, so when one of us discusses a play, there's a much greater chance several of us actually saw the play, especially for the nfl. btw, i feel so stupid about your signature; i've heard it like 30 times and just didn't realize it. although i don't know you at all, i never would have guessed you listened to jay z or the like.

Your first lesson in stereo-typing. Well actually your 2nd since you have now learned that not all officials have kids in high school. ;)

You didn't know? All officials are stodgy and old (over 30). :p

You're not on my 'watch' list!

you could say that, but i don't consider it to be a stereotype if it's true, or mostly true. for instance, saying that black people commit more crimes than asian people (% wise, not total) isn't a stereotype, and depending on the context, probably isn't racist either. however, simply saying most black people commit crimes is a stereotype, because it's untrue. (relaaaax, it's an example!)

not only did i not say that all officials have kids in high school, i didn't even say it as a statement, but rather a question. i'm just saying that there are many more officials in their 40's than in their 20's (am i wrong?), and that there's a good chance they got into officiating high school games because their kid goes to that school/district, and that they have a day job. i just assume that a high school ref is a side thing.

to everybody: please, just chill out and stop analyzing every little thing i say, to the point where we get into these big discussions, it makes you look like you you're the flamer/troll who is out to analyze/twist my words just so you can insult me. i'm here to talk about officiating, and if you don't like it, then maybe you shouldn't be on an officiating forum. and if my slightly off topic (in your opinion) posts (or whatever else problem you have with my posts) are not to your liking, then just don't read my posts. btw, this is to everybody who has a problem with me, not specifically you badnews. it's highly messed up i have to give a lesson on something as simple as being polite and not starting fights to people much older than me (yes, i'm assuming all but a few people on here are older than 24, is that so bad to assume that?). damn, i make it sound like i'm some horrible person saying whatever the hell i want on here and pissing everybody off, when in reality a few people just take me the wrong way. i'm going to leave this bullcha alone now, and come back when i have an officiating question.

get that call right now! adios.

Every area is different, but you could be wrong. For one there are a lot of people in their 30s officiating. And if you do the math most would not have kids in high school. And many in their 40s do not have kids that are high school students. People are having kids much later in life and to make that claim would be not always true. Also how old an official has a kid is irrelevant to this discussion. I am not even sure why you made the statement in the first place.

Do not change the rules now when it does not fit. You have been doing the very same thing to the officials you claim screwed up. If you do not want to be scrutinized in the same way, stop doing that yourself. Also, we did not come to a fan site and tell you what we knew over you. You are a fan coming to an officiating site and wanted us to back up your crap no matter how absurd it is. We talk about these situations all the time, but we are coming from an educated point of view or looking at this through experience, knowledge of rules and mechanics, unlike you coming here trying to tell people that have seen more football in one season than you have in your entire life.

Remember you came here to us; we did not come to you. And it is irrelevant if we do not like you, no one told you to come here. And if your objective is to simply run down officials that is not going to be tolerated. And if it keeps up it will not be individuals like me that will take you off this site. If you have legitimate questions and are willing to listen and understand them, you are more than welcome by most here to have a conversation about those issues. It sounds like you are having a problem dealing with the fact people have called you out and told you where to go. We are used to a few clowns every year coming here to discuss officiating and they go away soon after. You will be no different I am sure.

Peace

Being a smart a$$, is really not limited to any specific age. It's a skill we're all born with that most are able to overcome, before they reach the age of 24. Hopefully as you age, and mature, a bit more you'll come to realize that how much you choose to say is best dependent on how much you actually know about whatever it is you are thinking of saying.

Two types of people you might consider it not practical to argue with; fools, because they just don't know when they are wrong, or don't care that they are wrong and those who obviously know more about the subject being debated than yourself.

I thought you were only into the NFL not high school sports. If there is an NFL official who is 40 years old then how old do you think he was when he started officiating at the high school level? It takes time to move up.

Of all the sports officials I have ever talked with about why they got into officiating, not one has ever that that was their reason to begin officaiting.

Remember, you could also heed this advice. Just don't read the posts you don't like.

No no...that only applies to us. Remember, it is our job to be an out reach to all fans. ;)

What is wrong with you Pack. First you make a statement that shows you have no knowledge of the rules. Then when you are proven wrong at all levels of the sport, you move on to disparaging high school sports.

Tell me how you were "asking a question in the form of a statement" in this case?