Oddly enough this came close for me with a much better outcome! I was working the Referee position in a midget game about 10 years ago and on the opening kickoff a player muffed the ball and it went into the EZ. They thought the player gained possession, then fumbled into his own EZ, to which the other team had recovered for an apparent TD. Of course I quickly ruled TB. I heard nasty yelling from the sideline of how "we got on camera and you screwed up."

Needless to say the first half was a not-so-friendly atmosphere for me. But in the 2nd half not as much noise. Of course being a young referee (and I know everyone makes mistakes) when I said good-bye to the coach I had to ask...."Coach, I know you saw that first kickoff on tape and perhaps you saw something different than I did. What did the film show? I'd like to learn from it."

Quick response...."Yeah, we looked at it at halftime and you were right."

Funny that parent and/or coach didn't approach me letting me know that I was correct. I can't imagine if it would have turned out with me being wrong.

He looked at it at halftime!?

USC!!!

Great thing to consider, Ed. But, you can't give a USC after the game was over. But, if my memory serves me correct I thought use of a video at halftime or other times during the game was USC if it was used for coaching purposes. And, I believe you have to see them actually looking at the video if it was in fact looked at during the game. Not 100% sure so since you brought it up....

Any idea?

A liberal interpretation of the rule is you don't look at the video until after the game. The question in this situation is how can you look at the video at halftime to see if a play was successful or not and not be coaching? And, if the coach tells you he looked at the video is not that sufficient evidence?

Not looking for a flag but the rules are the rules.

Clarification. In our area the game is not over until you leave the field. Example. A few years ago my head linesman made a terrific no-call that decided the game. The losing assistant coach approached him and verbally berated him to the point that security had to step in. We flagged the coach and he sat home the following week.

"When in Rome....", so "local practice" can often trump general rules, but
NF:1.7 defines "The game officials shall assume authority for the contest, including penalizing unspotsmanlike acts, 30 minutes prior to the scheduled game time or as soon thereafter as they are able to be present."

NF:1.8 declares, "The officials jurisdiction extends through the referee's declaration of the end of the fourth period or overtime." In essence, when the referee declares the game is over, it's over and so is our official authority.

However, although there are no "football rules" governing a coaches behavior after a contest has ended, they are restricted by civil law, and whatever expectations are imposed upon them by a school, a league or any organization responsible for the event. A flag is not necessary, nor appropriate, as any improper conduct or behavior by players, coaches or attendants simply should be reported to game management for disposition.

Should game management fail to act satisfactorily, that becomes an issue for your assigning body to deal with.

Having worked in other jurisdictions I like the method our assigning body dictates the handling of the after the game stuff. A flag is required and that lets the coach or whomever know they have violated the rules and a report will be filed. Discipline is meted by the assigning body which is over the athletic director or game management.

As I suggested, "when in Rome, do what the Romans do and want done", but in the type situation you described, "the coach or whomever know they have violated the rules", the instant they open their mouth, and the throwing of a flag is not only totally unnecessary but may very well exacerbate the situation, and is an excellent way to lose a flag or have it treated disrespectfully.

The preferred way to deal with such outbursts is to simply leave the area without responding, or adding to the exchange, and report the incident to the proper authority as strongly as you deem necessary.

I don't know whether a flag is appropriate under the playing rules, but we'd file a misconduct report on a situation like a coach berating an official after a game.

copy to the school, league and state

Question.

If you give a coach two USCs during the game he is disqualified by rule. Is he suspended for the next game?

What if the coach has one USC during the game, then after the game he berates an official, would that count as a second USC or does he get a free pass?

We play under NCAA rules with our state exceptions and right now, that is actually an open question based on some UIL wording. I don't think there's an NCAA provision for a coach's ejection absent physical contact with an official or for fighting.

Not necessarily.

Ideally, he'd get his butt written up, but we won't flag that.

Guys, a UIL report is the LAST thing a Texas coach wants. A few years ago, that may not have been the case, but at least since this decade started, that process has not been fun for anyone.

True, a flag may inflame. The fact is in our area that is the procedure and it becomes a cover your backside because if the coach writes you up and no flag has been displayed you are the one in trouble. Example, as you exit the field and the coach calls you a "$#%#$" you have no standing in filing a report. The first question asked is did you flag it.

That's Rome!

I'm afraid your problem goes a lot deeper than unruly coaches. The basic idea of using a flag is to identify that something improper has happened , immediately before, during play or immediately thereafter, so everyone knows that further game action will be interrupted until the foul has been addressed.

When leaving the field, after the game has ended, the absolute worst and dumbest thing we can do is stop, prolong or focus attention on any type of inappropriate behavior, and it's resulting commotion, in front of a crowd. Whoever it is who might insist that a flag be thrown, before taking action against inappropriate behavior by coaches, or players, after a game has ended, is a complete idiot.

The inappropriate conduct is being, or has been, committed, it makes no sense, no difference and there is no benefit or purpose in calling added attention to it at the spot, when the contest is over. There is no need to pause, as no penalty will be assessed at, or from, that point.

Roman society lasted a long time, but eventually the leaders got themselves so far off track, they had to get thrown out of office. It took a while for the Romans to get that pi$$ed off, but eventually they did.