Defered Option

[bisonlj]

We ask the coaches in the pre-game conference as well. If one says receive and the other says defer, I know who is going to have the ball first. If I'm in a jovial mood, I will tell the captains that I am escorting to the R that they will definitely be kicking or receiving the opening kick off (depending on which team I have). They look at me like I'm crazy and laugh when they realize I was right. It's my own inside joke. The things we do to entertain ourselves.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Mike L

Actually, yes I am. I am going to suggest they receive the ball, usually by simply stating to the losing team "you want the ball, right?". If they try to go with kick I'll ask them if they really want to kick both halves. Amazingly, I've never had any coach ever question it from either side. You can go strictly by the book here and possibly buy yourself a shtstorm, or you can practice a little game management. Your choice.

Interesting. Two seasons ago we had a visiting team win the toss and elect to kick. The WH essentially did what you say and talked them out of it. It cost us a possession. Why should one team lose a possession because the other coaching staff didn't do their job?

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Interesting. Two seasons ago we had a visiting team win the toss and elect to kick. The WH essentially did what you say and talked them out of it. It cost us a possession. Why should one team lose a possession because the other coaching staff didn't do their job?

We never "talk" them out of it. If they truly want to kick, we will allow it. What we do is make sure that they fully understand what their choice entails. When a captain says they want to kick, I will say, "you realize it is your choice this half. They will have the choice in the second half and could end up receiving both halves. Are you sure you don't want to defer instead?" If they still insist on kicking that is their right. It didn't really cost you a possession.

[Mike L]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Interesting. Two seasons ago we had a visiting team win the toss and elect to kick. The WH essentially did what you say and talked them out of it. It cost us a possession. Why should one team lose a possession because the other coaching staff didn't do their job?

And I'm sure you don't mind when the officials try to keep your captains from making a poor penalty choice or even maybe come directly to you on a difficult one. It is amazing how ones perspective changes depending on just who is getting the help, huh?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Mike L

And I'm sure you don't mind when the officials try to keep your captains from making a poor penalty choice or even maybe come directly to you on a difficult one. It is amazing how ones perspective changes depending on just who is getting the help, huh?

My perspective doesn't change much on it at all...we teach our captains what to do and say. If they aren't sure, they are taught to turn to our sideline and yell at us - and we yell back what we want them to do. Again, if the other coaches don't do it this way, that's not our fault...if our captains make a poor choice, then we will deal with them at our next practice.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

My perspective doesn't change much on it at all...we teach our captains what to do and say. If they aren't sure, they are taught to turn to our sideline and yell at us - and we yell back what we want them to do. Again, if the other coaches don't do it this way, that's not our fault...if our captains make a poor choice, then we will deal with them at our next practice.

Sounds like another example of why, "One size NEVER fits all". Some coaches want to be involved in Captain's decisions, others want their Captains to learn to make decisions, and there are all sorts of increments inbetween.

The Referee's job is to explain options as clearly and completely as possible and deciding whether the explanation has satisfied those requirements is the responsibility of the Referee, alone. If a Captain makes a decision that causes the Referee to question whether his explanation was as clear as he intended, he can, and in fact should, choose to amplify that explanation to whatever depth he believes the situation calls for to satisfy the requirements of clear and complete.

If you want to get technical, the procedure outlined in NF: 10.1.1 doesn't mention coaches or officials being involved in the decision process. It instructs, clearly, that the captain(s) be notified and that, "The Captain's choice of options may not be revoked.".

It's the Referee's responsibility to insure that the Captain is given the necessary and correct information from which to make a decision, and the coach's responsibility to insure that the Captain is prepared to make the right decision.

NF: 2.32.5.c designates the "Captain" as the designated team representative during (c) Penalty decisions following a foul."

Sometimes a Referee's job requires multiple explanations before a Captain fully understans his options, or a coach may feel providing additional instructions, from the sideline is necessary, to assist the Captain's decision making.

The common objective should simply be that the Captain has all the information necessary to make his best choice. How that plays out may differ from game to game or even penalty to penalty.

[Mike L]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

My perspective doesn't change much on it at all...we teach our captains what to do and say. If they aren't sure, they are taught to turn to our sideline and yell at us - and we yell back what we want them to do. Again, if the other coaches don't do it this way, that's not our fault...if our captains make a poor choice, then we will deal with them at our next practice.

It seems the coaches around here are happy to avoid the whole I explain it to their captain who barely remembers he's the captain, who hopefully can then repeat the explanation correctly, so that the coach can hear it and make a decision, to have said confused 18 year old figure it out again & repeat it to me.
We just go with cutting out the unnecessary middle man and getting the game moving along.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Mike L

It seems the coaches around here are happy to avoid the whole I explain it to their captain who barely remembers he's the captain, who hopefully can then repeat the explanation correctly, so that the coach can hear it and make a decision, to have said confused 18 year old figure it out again & repeat it to me.
We just go with cutting out the unnecessary middle man and getting the game moving along.

Ha!

Good explanation...and I get it. I'm really not trying to argue the point or anything...I like this explanation and ajmc's. It's an attempt to stop a stupid mistake - I get that. Thanks for explaining it.

[Texas Aggie]

is that most good White Hats will not let a captain select the option to "Kick" without making sure he is really sure that is what he wants to do

Change this to read: "(m)ost good White Hats will not let a captain select the option to 'Kick.'"

If the weather is very bad, or something really weird is at work (which I'm sure the coach will tell either me or my umpire before we go out to the field), only then is the kick option a rational choice under any circumstances. Defer, receive, or field position are the only rational choices. Kicking would fall under defer and field side virtually all the time and I'm hard pressed to think of a situation of when a team MUST kick the ball to start the game. I guess if they have a near perfect onside kick recovery unit, but if that's the case, the coach will tell me prior to the game when I ask for such things.

Both my umpire and I always ask our captains, "do you know what you want to do if you win the toss" prior to walking out to the middle. So I guess in the absolute worst case scenario, we'll have confirmed a kick option with the coach before leaving the sideline.

[Ed Hickland]

Once had a captain choose to kick, tried talking him out of it, but he would not have it. Their record was 0-6 coming into the game.

Before the kickoff asked the coach if he told his captain to kickoff and the told proudly said yes, they were a defensive team. Of which, they went on to lose 61-0.

Guess their defense was better than their offense!

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

"only then is the kick option a rational choice under any circumstances. Defer, receive, or field position are the only rational choices."

A pretty successful, now retired, long time High School coach often chose to kick off for the opening Kick Off. His contention was that playing defense is more natural than playing offense and that at the start of a game, when young players are nervous or excited, instincts will serve them better, when they are cold, hitting than being hit.

He claimed to have field position statistics that bore out his theory.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Brandon Kincer

If the winning team of the coin toss chooses to defer choice to second half, What happens in the first half as far as who recieves the ball?
Again I know it sounds like a stupid question I just want to be sure im getting this right.

CANADIAN MECHANIC:

if the team winning the toss defers to the second half, the team entitled to the first half choice has one of three choices:

1. to receive the kick-off
2. to kick-off
3. to choose which end zone to defend for the first quarter

If they choose 1 or 2, the other team (the team choosing in the second half) chooses which end zone they wish to defend in the first quarter.

If they choose 3, the other team (the team choosing in the second half) must choose between option 1 and 2.

[Texas Aggie]

His contention was that playing defense is more natural than playing offense

Then he chooses to DEFER, not kick. Even if the other coach is wise to what he wants to do, he is NOT going to make the kick choice, so as to kick off both halves. In the one or two times a career that what Ed speaks of happens, just get the game over as fast as possible and get out of there -- regardless of what you have to do! Besides, remember I used the term, rational. If the coach decides to be irrational, then we get into another issue.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Then he chooses to DEFER, not kick. Even if the other coach is wise to what he wants to do, he is NOT going to make the kick choice, so as to kick off both halves. In the one or two times a career that what Ed speaks of happens, just get the game over as fast as possible and get out of there -- regardless of what you have to do! Besides, remember I used the term, rational. If the coach decides to be irrational, then we get into another issue.

I second that.

If a coach for whatever reason decides it is better to essentially kick off both halves, let them do it and don't slow down the clock.