Ravens/Steelers game

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by pmarz1

daggo, you seem to be breaking your own rules now. You wrote:"The rule you cited pertains to unnecessary roughness on a defenseless player." Correct me if I'm wrong but doesnt this rule apply to all players, not just defenseless ones? It goes on to state the officials may place special attention to defenseless players, etc....true?

If I may speak for daggo66 (I think he will allow me to do that). I think what he was trying to say is the entirety of what you quoted was the section of the rules that pertain to a defenseless player. Your quote had a header titled "Impermissible Use of Helmet and Facemask". The specific item you listed was sub-section (g). I've never seen the NFL rule book but I assume that means there are also sub-sections (a) through (f) and possibly additional sub-sections starting with (h) that you did not include. I also know that the NFL does have rules regarding "defenseless players" that we don't specifically have at the HS level. Based on what you quoted, I believe this sub-section is there to deal with the defenseless player situation which is what daggo66 was trying to point out.

It usually takes an official a couple years to combine the wording of the rules with the philosophy and application of the rules in game action. I don't exect you as a fan to be able to do this at all since you don't have that experience or training. But I would at least think you could listen to the comments on this board and think to yourself, "Oh, there's probably a lot more to this than I realize and the NFL officials probably do know a lot more than I give them credit. Maybe I should change my approach to be more open to the comments the officials on this site provide because there is some experience behind that comment."

I'm not trying to dissuade you from asking questions, looking for clarification, or stating your opinion on a judgement. I'm just hoping to provide you with an opportunity to see the officials on this site (and the NFL) generally know what they are talking about. I hope you take that in a positive light.

[mbyron]

According to a statement that the Ravens issued at around 2:30 p.m. Monday, McGahee has been released from the hospital, is resting at home, and is expected to recover fully from his injuries (unspecified).

http://masnsports.com/2009/01/update-on-mcgahee.html

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

If I may speak for daggo66 (I think he will allow me to do that). I think what he was trying to say is the entirety of what you quoted was the section of the rules that pertain to a defenseless player. Your quote had a header titled "Impermissible Use of Helmet and Facemask". The specific item you listed was sub-section (g). I've never seen the NFL rule book but I assume that means there are also sub-sections (a) through (f) and possibly additional sub-sections starting with (h) that you did not include. I also know that the NFL does have rules regarding "defenseless players" that we don't specifically have at the HS level. Based on what you quoted, I believe this sub-section is there to deal with the defenseless player situation which is what daggo66 was trying to point out.

It usually takes an official a couple years to combine the wording of the rules with the philosophy and application of the rules in game action. I don't exect you as a fan to be able to do this at all since you don't have that experience or training. But I would at least think you could listen to the comments on this board and think to yourself, "Oh, there's probably a lot more to this than I realize and the NFL officials probably do know a lot more than I give them credit. Maybe I should change my approach to be more open to the comments the officials on this site provide because there is some experience behind that comment."

I'm not trying to dissuade you from asking questions, looking for clarification, or stating your opinion on a judgement. I'm just hoping to provide you with an opportunity to see the officials on this site (and the NFL) generally know what they are talking about. I hope you take that in a positive light.

Thank you, my patience was wearing thin.

[pmarz1]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

If I may speak for daggo66 (I think he will allow me to do that). I think what he was trying to say is the entirety of what you quoted was the section of the rules that pertain to a defenseless player. Your quote had a header titled "Impermissible Use of Helmet and Facemask". The specific item you listed was sub-section (g). I've never seen the NFL rule book but I assume that means there are also sub-sections (a) through (f) and possibly additional sub-sections starting with (h) that you did not include. I also know that the NFL does have rules regarding "defenseless players" that we don't specifically have at the HS level. Based on what you quoted, I believe this sub-section is there to deal with the defenseless player situation which is what daggo66 was trying to point out.

It usually takes an official a couple years to combine the wording of the rules with the philosophy and application of the rules in game action. I don't exect you as a fan to be able to do this at all since you don't have that experience or training. But I would at least think you could listen to the comments on this board and think to yourself, "Oh, there's probably a lot more to this than I realize and the NFL officials probably do know a lot more than I give them credit. Maybe I should change my approach to be more open to the comments the officials on this site provide because there is some experience behind that comment."

I'm not trying to dissuade you from asking questions, looking for clarification, or stating your opinion on a judgement. I'm just hoping to provide you with an opportunity to see the officials on this site (and the NFL) generally know what they are talking about. I hope you take that in a positive light.

First of all, I think in my earlier post to daggo, I referenced the link with the entire rulebook. You are correct about the other subsections, etc. but that particular section dealing with unnecessary roughness(Section 8) subsection g. had the subtitle of "Impermissible Use of Helmet and Facemask". This subsection seems to deal with all players as it initially states, then goes on to state how officials may pay particular attention to defenseless players. Regarding the remainder of your post, if you read my initial post, I was called into question as to the existance of such a rule. Many who post here got very defensive with their comments,some feeling I was a Ravens fan/sore loser. I have no connection with them or the Steelers. If you all are truely impartial, then answer the questions that way. You are one of the few that responded as one would hope an official would. I understand we as fans have the opportunity to see so much more after the fact, things that when witnessed in real time may be hard to detect. Unfortunately, the league doesnt allow the officials to consult a replay to determine whether or not a penalty is in order, and in this case, a change of possession, which most likely had no effect on the outcome.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by pmarz1

Many who post here got very defensive with their comments,some feeling I was a Ravens fan/sore loser. I have no connection with them or the Steelers. If you all are truely impartial, then answer the questions that way. You are one of the few that responded as one would hope an official would. I understand we as fans have the opportunity to see so much more after the fact, things that when witnessed in real time may be hard to detect. Unfortunately, the league doesnt allow the officials to consult a replay to determine whether or not a penalty is in order, and in this case, a change of possession, which most likely had no effect on the outcome.

Wait a minute.

You claimed that the officials were wrong and when challenged on the things that you posted, you got upset when people did not agree with you.

And in the game of football there is much more than the written rule, there is also the practice and application of the rules. And what many people are trying to tell you, that it was not cut and dry as to how the contact took place and if you have to watch a slow motion replay to determine what actually happen, it is not an easy thing to call. Just as easily as the officials could have made a call for PF, they could have missed to it (for example the roughing the kicker call earlier in the game). And the pay we were discussing was much faster and would not have been an issue if both players did not get hurt. If both go up, then it would not have been an issue. Then again, I do not know how much experience you have as an official, but these are very hard plays to cover even at the high school level.

Peace

[zm1283]

1. I'm one person on here. I have no idea who pmarz1 is.

2. I'm not a Ravens or Steelers fan. My favorite team is the Cowboys. I'm just tired of how bad football officiating has gotten, especially in the NFL. (College is just as bad, but that's another story) You can stop trying to discredit me because you think I'm a fan of one of these teams.

Is it not possible to lead with your head but make contact with your shoulder pad a split second before your helmet? I played football and was always taught to tackle with my head up. Clark made no attempt whatsoever to get his head up. His head was down the entire time.

Hmmmm, watch this video.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxkrgIpxa34
(Looks almost exactly like the McGahee hit. Clark's shoulder hit Welker first, but he was penalized for this hit. I thought if the shoulder hit first it isn't a penalty?)

Clark is going to get a reputation as a head hunter if he's not careful.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zm1283

2. I'm not a Ravens or Steelers fan. My favorite team is the Cowboys. I'm just tired of how bad football officiating has gotten, especially in the NFL. (College is just as bad, but that's another story) You can stop trying to discredit me because you think I'm a fan of one of these teams.

That is even worse. I think people were giving you credit for being just a fan. But then again, you did not say you officiated either.

Originally Posted by zm1283

Is it not possible to lead with your head but make contact with your shoulder pad a split second before your helmet? I played football and was always taught to tackle with my head up. Clark made no attempt whatsoever to get his head up. His head was down the entire time.

What is your officiating background? What levels do you work? How many camps have you attended?

With all due respect, I do not care if you were a member of either organization or just watching TV. If you think you know more about the rules than people that actually work multiple games and have worked multiple years, then show us why we should take your word for things. After all, I would not expect someone that is not a doctor to talk intelligently about something specific to a condition or specialization unless you had training in that field. So what are your credentials?

Peace

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by zm1283

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxkrgIpxa34
(Looks almost exactly like the McGahee hit. Clark's shoulder hit Welker first, but he was penalized for this hit. I thought if the shoulder hit first it isn't a penalty?)

You have to look not only at what the player hits with, but also at what the player hits. This was shoulder-to-chin and deliberately so.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by pmarz1

Many who post here got very defensive with their comments,some feeling I was a Ravens fan/sore loser. I have no connection with them or the Steelers. If you all are truely impartial, then answer the questions that way. You are one of the few that responded as one would hope an official would. .

Perhaps the tone of responses was adversely influenced by the way the initial few questions were asked and some inflamatory rhetoric added to a totally subjective assessment of the NFL game officials abilities and performance.

As some have tried to point out, the amount of time, training, review and almost constant scrutiny NFL game officials devote to the pursuit of excellence is staggering, and considering the speed and talents of the players they monitor, their production and accuracy is outstanding.

However, despite the significant effort, dedication and pursuit of excellence they are not, and never will attain perfection. You should understand that in addition to the written rules code, that are somewhat different for multiple levels of football, there are reams and binders of official interpretations and approved rulings, clinics and years of intense discussion and debate that further clarify the intent, purpose and details of each rule to assist field officials in better understanding the basic intent and purpose of each rule.

Every official who has reached the level of the NFL has already completed extremely successful careers at each of the High School and, likely, multiple levels of the collegiate game. All that experience, training, study, review and constant critiquing, still does not guarantee automatic perfection, but it does bring this small band of professionals as close to that goal as has been achieved.

However, honest questions do deserve honest answers that are devoid of excessive defensiveness, athough defensive excesses sometimes slip through due to the right provocation. Perfection in the art of responding to questions, is also an elusive objective albeit worthy of pursuit.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by pmarz1

First of all, I think in my earlier post to daggo, I referenced the link with the entire rulebook. You are correct about the other subsections, etc. but that particular section dealing with unnecessary roughness(Section 8) subsection g. had the subtitle of "Impermissible Use of Helmet and Facemask". This subsection seems to deal with all players as it initially states, then goes on to state how officials may pay particular attention to defenseless players. Regarding the remainder of your post, if you read my initial post, I was called into question as to the existance of such a rule. Many who post here got very defensive with their comments,some feeling I was a Ravens fan/sore loser. I have no connection with them or the Steelers. If you all are truely impartial, then answer the questions that way. You are one of the few that responded as one would hope an official would. I understand we as fans have the opportunity to see so much more after the fact, things that when witnessed in real time may be hard to detect. Unfortunately, the league doesnt allow the officials to consult a replay to determine whether or not a penalty is in order, and in this case, a change of possession, which most likely had no effect on the outcome.

From what I recall, the NFL does not publish the rule book (at least not yet). The first link you provided was someone's attempt to summarize the rules. It appears pretty thorough but it's definitely not the rules as they are published. The other link does look like an actual rule book from the NFL but as you stated it is 2006. I have no idea if this rule has changed since then.

You were called out because your initial note indicated two penalties preceeded by the numbers 13 and 14. These appeared to come from somewhere so the official asked you where they came from. I now see they came from the summary site and not from the actual rule book. They are high level discriptions used a guide to help someone identify key penalties and their yardage enforcement.

What everyone is trying to tell you as nicely as possible is you don't have the knowledge to apply the rules you found in an actual game. What you are doing seems to be happening more lately than I remember and I think you are receiving the brunt of that frustration.

I think it has been pretty clearly established:

• Just making contact with your helmet doesn't warrant a personal foul for unnecessary roughness.
• Having your helmet be the first thing to contact the runner doesn't necessarily make it a personal foul.
• The rule you quoted (and let's just assume it's still valid today) says "using any part of a player’s helmet or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily". There are probably specific definitions somewhere (I couldn't find them) for the words butt, spear and ram that play into this. They define these terms at the HS level.
• The last 2 words are "violelently" and "unnecessarily". These allow the official to apply judgement if they feel the contact was minor.
• This rule also implies the player was "using" the helmet which implies it was a tool in making tackle. Some have argued on here that they felt he did use his helmet this way and others have argued he didn't. I believe both arguments are valid but that's where the judgement comes into play.

The NFL guys have seen video after video after video of plays like this and have a pretty good feel for what they should and should not call a PF. Sometimes it just has to come down to what they see in real time and applying that judgement. If 10 NFL officials see this play on video and 7 think it was a foul and 3 do not, that does not mean it was a bad call. Could this play cause the competition committee to make it more strict that any contact with the helmet is a foul...you never know.

One of your quotes was "Please don't try and defend the officiating in this league. It's borderline criminal." If you had any idea how crazy that statement was, you would realize why many people on this site started to treat you as a "fanboy". You do not have the ability to correctly evaluate the quality of the officials just like I don't have the ability to correctly evaluate the performance of MLB umpires.

If you have the opportunity, I suggest you attend part of a local HS officials clinic or an association meeting to get a glimpse of the types of things officials discuss. You will be amazed. Then when you consider the types of discussions and training the guys at the NFL level have been given, you'll realize these guys are right almost all the time. There is nothing criminal about that.

Good luck now. Here ends the lesson.

[chymechowder]

I'm a sixth-year Massachusetts highschool football official. And I'm new to the forum, which I really enjoy reading. I will say, however, that at times the majority's tone can come across as a bit defensive and dismissive. this is understandable to a point, especially when non-officials discuss the rules or lambast questionable rulings. but here's a hypothetical I'd like to ask:

Say the Clark hit WAS flagged as unnecessary roughness. Also, suppose it happened on the ravens' previous possession, and after the 15 yards the ravens went on to kick a game-winning field goal.

Now lets say someone came on the forum and bemoaned the "awful" call.

Would people deride him as a "steelers fanboy" who doesn't know the rules? Would people look at the same clip and say that McGahee's head clearly snaps back as a result of helmet to helmet contact?

I guess my point is, sometimes we officials can be a little quick to automatically dismiss someone's point, simply b/c the questioner is not an official.

As for the play itself, when seeing the replay, I thought clark led with the helmet. But I also realize that the play--like so many other plays in real-time--happened so fast that it wouldn't have been a "blown call" either way, whether it was flagged or not.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

I'm a sixth-year Massachusetts highschool football official. And I'm new to the forum, which I really enjoy reading. I will say, however, that at times the majority's tone can come across as a bit defensive and dismissive. this is understandable to a point, especially when non-officials discuss the rules or lambast questionable rulings. but here's a hypothetical I'd like to ask:

Say the Clark hit WAS flagged as unnecessary roughness. Also, suppose it happened on the ravens' previous possession, and after the 15 yards the ravens went on to kick a game-winning field goal.

Now lets say someone came on the forum and bemoaned the "awful" call.

Would people deride him as a "steelers fanboy" who doesn't know the rules? Would people look at the same clip and say that McGahee's head clearly snaps back as a result of helmet to helmet contact?

I guess my point is, sometimes we officials can be a little quick to automatically dismiss someone's point, simply b/c the questioner is not an official.

As for the play itself, when seeing the replay, I thought clark led with the helmet. But I also realize that the play--like so many other plays in real-time--happened so fast that it wouldn't have been a "blown call" either way, whether it was flagged or not.

I think there are two points you are missing here.

There are not a lot of people saying that the call was right. Many of us have been involved in plays like this and we had a hard time determining if there was helmet contact or not. The responses are about as much about the difficulty of the call as it is whether the call was right.

And finally the next leap that a call like this makes NFL officials less competent or less talented is silly. For one the person trying to quote the rule did not even quote the rule properly. And he did not understand what he was posting. You cannot make a claim that something only applies to a defensive player and then miss the word (you quoted) that says "any player" as apart of the rule. If you do not know that, how can you know what should be called or not? Basically this was probably one of the most difficult things to rule on at fast speed as any play during the season. It is possible the officials got the call wrong, but to make the leap they are terrible when you do not know their success rate on calls or how they are evaluated are big points that were commented on.

I know this was not one of the points, but I think it needs to be said. Often during this time of year we have people that come from no where to "discuss" a play or two in a game that seems controversial. Then when they ask the question and people give them an answer, they get mad is if we do not know what we are talking about. Even though they have never officiated or know the basics that they are complaining about. It must be noted that even the media has suggested this play was totally legal (not a good source by the way), but when pressed on the OPer's knowledge, they have little to add when it comes to their experience. The same thing happens during Final Four time on the Basketball Board or during the playoffs or World Series on the Baseball Board. Then we will never see them again after they complained about this situation. Give it a month and we will never see these people again.

Peace

[PSU213]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

I'm a sixth-year Massachusetts highschool football official. And I'm new to the forum, which I really enjoy reading. I will say, however, that at times the majority's tone can come across as a bit defensive and dismissive. this is understandable to a point, especially when non-officials discuss the rules or lambast questionable rulings. but here's a hypothetical I'd like to ask:

Say the Clark hit WAS flagged as unnecessary roughness. Also, suppose it happened on the ravens' previous possession, and after the 15 yards the ravens went on to kick a game-winning field goal.

Now lets say someone came on the forum and bemoaned the "awful" call.

Would people deride him as a "steelers fanboy" who doesn't know the rules? Would people look at the same clip and say that McGahee's head clearly snaps back as a result of helmet to helmet contact?

I guess my point is, sometimes we officials can be a little quick to automatically dismiss someone's point, simply b/c the questioner is not an official.

As for the play itself, when seeing the replay, I thought clark led with the helmet. But I also realize that the play--like so many other plays in real-time--happened so fast that it wouldn't have been a "blown call" either way, whether it was flagged or not.

I don't necessarily disagree with the main point of your post--that we are less likely to accept the view of someone who is not an official. However, I think you are missing a key point there. The OP went on to say (paraphrasing here): this was a terrible call, how could the officials miss such a obvious call, and (within a few posts) this person went on to say that NFL officials are clearly the worst in sports. I think this person would have been treated a lot differently if he was not so quick to dismiss this as a terrible call made by the worst officials in sports. In addition, when his view was questioned, he became way too defensive, continued to name-call, and ignored everything constructive being said to him.

So, in short, yes, non-officials may be taken less 'seriously' on this forum. However, I have never seen an instance where a non-official is dismissed when he/she has asked a serious, un-biased question. It seems (to me anyway, for what that is worth) that they are only derided when they come here with sour grapes.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by PSU213

I don't necessarily disagree with the main point of your post--that we are less likely to accept the view of someone who is not an official. However, I think you are missing a key point there. The OP went on to say (paraphrasing here): this was a terrible call, how could the officials miss such a obvious call, and (within a few posts) this person went on to say that NFL officials are clearly the worst in sports. I think this person would have been treated a lot differently if he was not so quick to dismiss this as a terrible call made by the worst officials in sports. In addition, when his view was questioned, he became way too defensive, continued to name-call, and ignored everything constructive being said to him.

So, in short, yes, non-officials may be taken less 'seriously' on this forum. However, I have never seen an instance where a non-official is dismissed when he/she has asked a serious, un-biased question. It seems (to me anyway, for what that is worth) that they are only derided when they come here with sour grapes.

I'll add, there are often times when a non-official comes on to ask a question about a play or ruling. The majority of the time they accept the answer and move on. The posts that become controversial are the one where the non-official starts making accusations about the pro or college level officials and disregard the information they were given.

You've heard it before, we're all officials and we'll always stick up for each other. Any regular reader of this forum knows that isn't true and we've had many debates about good or bad calls.

Want an example of a bad call in yesterday's Steeler/Ravens game??? Try roughing the kicker called against Baltimore.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

I'm a sixth-year Massachusetts highschool football official. And I'm new to the forum, which I really enjoy reading. I will say, however, that at times the majority's tone can come across as a bit defensive and dismissive. this is understandable to a point, especially when non-officials discuss the rules or lambast questionable rulings. but here's a hypothetical I'd like to ask:

Say the Clark hit WAS flagged as unnecessary roughness. Also, suppose it happened on the ravens' previous possession, and after the 15 yards the ravens went on to kick a game-winning field goal.

Now lets say someone came on the forum and bemoaned the "awful" call.

Would people deride him as a "steelers fanboy" who doesn't know the rules? Would people look at the same clip and say that McGahee's head clearly snaps back as a result of helmet to helmet contact?

I guess my point is, sometimes we officials can be a little quick to automatically dismiss someone's point, simply b/c the questioner is not an official.

As for the play itself, when seeing the replay, I thought clark led with the helmet. But I also realize that the play--like so many other plays in real-time--happened so fast that it wouldn't have been a "blown call" either way, whether it was flagged or not.

Thank you. I'm just tired of football officials sticking up for their own no matter how badly a call is blown. I can promise you that if they would have flagged this play, everyone would be saying what a great call it was.

I'm not sure where the accusations of me "name calling" came from. I don't think I called anyone on here any names.

Another example was in the Florida/Miami game this year. I can't find the video of it online, but a Florida DB went up to intercept a pass by the sideline. He did come down with one foot inbounds, but he never even controlled the ball while going to the ground. The ball ended up laying on the ground next to him. They reviewed it and somehow ruled that he caught the ball and it was an interception. I wish I could find the video, because it really was inexplicable.