Touchdown Signals

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I can't see any harm, unless it's an official who is going to dispute the TD call, in which case he would not mirror the call.

Covering official signals TD.

You mirror his signal.

Covering official is wrong.

What's that make you?

[jaybird]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Covering official signals TD.

You mirror his signal.

Covering official is wrong.

What's that make you?

A Dumbo.

[Forksref]

Walt has it nailed. NO mirroring of TD signals.

Also, we do not "mirror" beanbags. ONLY the official who has seen the fumble drops the bag, for the same reason. What IF it was an incomplete pass? Is Mr. Hochuli in the room?

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by jaybird

A Dumbo.

Perhaps the term "mirroring" is the problem, or at least how and when it might be used.

Is it mirroring when a LJ, on one end of the goal line sees a player, in possession of the ball, clearly cross over the goal line, on the other sideline, and sees the HL, in position to rule on whether he crossed the goal line inside the sideline signal TD, to signal TD, so all the players on his side of the field know the play has ended?

Does a BJ, at the center of the endline, who observes a player complete a catch inside the endline near a sideline, after checking with the HL who's ruling on the sideline aspects of the catch, repeat the HL's TD signal?

Is signalling something you have personally seen, although it may be instantly following another official's signal, mirroring?

The NFHS Officials manual cautions;
"A. Only official(s) who actually see Touchdown should give TD signal.
B. Officials not observing TD do not mirror signal.

Maybe dumb is assuming that "one size fits all" about anything related to football.

[SNG10]

How does everyone treat the old "pileup" when looking for the score? If you don't see it, just wait until the pile is cleaned up ?

[Jim D.]

Originally Posted by SNG10

How does everyone treat the old "pileup" when looking for the score? If you don't see it, just wait until the pile is cleaned up ?

Pretty much. You have to find the ball before you can signal. Coaches, players and spectators will understand the delay. Sometimes the umpire can tell you that A had possession of the ball in the endzone before the pile up so you can call a TD based on that. Otherwise, keep digging until the ball is located and see what that gives you.

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by SNG10

How does everyone treat the old "pileup" when looking for the score? If you don't see it, just wait until the pile is cleaned up ?

Someone has to be digging. When the ball is found, it's location will determine if it is a score or not. We can't rule on how it got there. Also, we are going away from "secret" signals by the umpire. In reality, they are not so secret. We will be going to a verbal signal from the umpire. Remember that the signal from the umpire only means he has the ball over the line. The knee of the runner could have touched down before the line.

[SNG10]

So, if the knee was down, but no one(on the crew) had the ball at the time, and the U has it in, we'll have to go with the td, correct ?

[Jim D.]

Originally Posted by SNG10

So, if the knee was down, but no one(on the crew) had the ball at the time, and the U has it in, we'll have to go with the td, correct ?

Yes, if I understand your question correctly. Once any official sees the ball in the endzone, it is a touchdown.

In the play we discussed with the pile up, if the umpire had seen the ball in A's possession in the endzone the play is dead and it's a TD. He will let the wings know what he has and then they would normally signal TD. He checks with the wings first though to make sure they didn't have a knee down at the 1, for example. In this case, there is no need to dig through the pile because anything that happened after A had possession in the endzone is just a struggle for a dead ball.

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by SNG10

So, if the knee was down, but no one(on the crew) had the ball at the time, and the U has it in, we'll have to go with the td, correct ?

How can you say the knee was down if no one saw it down?

If either wing does not have it down and they can't see the ball or knee and the U has it in the EZ, then we have a TD. But the U will not raise his hands. He will communicate to the wings that it is in and they make the decision to signal a TD. He should NEVER raise his hands for the TD signal. He will communicate verbally, either in a conference with the wings or in the procedure I've described below.

Our crew will use this procedure: If the U sees the ball in the EZ he says after the ball is dead, "I've got the ball." He will NOT grab his whistle or use any visible signal that the coaches or pressbox can see. Upon hearing him say that, the wings will either signal TD or be marking a spot. Therefore, there will be no contradictory signal that can get the crew in trouble. The last thing we want is for a coach to see him grab his whistle and a wing marking a spot that is short of the GL. If he doesn't say that, then he saw that the ball wasn't in or he didn't see it at all.

[KWH]

AJMC, aka Alf, aka ALupstateNY,

Before you begin your hollowed routine of lenghty and nefarious attacks against actual on-field officials, perhaps you should consider what some on this board are suggesting, which, quite frankly is, YOU need to look in the mirror!

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by ajmc

The NFHS Officials manual cautions;
"A. Only official(s) who actually see Touchdown should give TD signal.
B. Officials not observing TD do not mirror signal.

Well, Al, I think you have your answer right there in front of you. Seems you're the one who is once again mistaken and is now in full backpedal mode.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Well, Al, I think you have your answer right there in front of you. Seems you're the one who is once again mistaken and is now in full backpedal mode.

So what exactly are you suggesting Walt? When more than one official sees an action should he signal, even though the other official has signaled, or are you suggesting he should not "mirror" the call.

It seems you want to split hairs about words so fine, they tend to lose any relevant meaning. You ask a loaded question to try and sound like a guru, that provides no guidance or insight. If the covering official makes a call, that you also saw, and agree with, are you suggesting you not signal for fear of possibly being wrong?

That's not why your out there. If you see something you should respond to it. If an official differs with another official's call, rather than signal the opposite, going to the other official and discussing the call to try and detrmine who had the better view and agreeing on a call before signalling is a better approach.

It's not about being mistaken, Walt, or backpedaling, or changing your mind. It's far better to consider modifying or adjusting a position based on what's discussed here, than insist on doing something that can otherwise be done better. Doesn't mean you have to change, but there's no harm in considering a different approach.

Once you accept the reality and face the inevitable fact that you don't already know everything, it's a lot easier to focus on learning what you need to know to get better.

[Admiral]

I suppose I should have been more descriptive with my question. It isn't about mirroring, although it is a good discussion. Last season, I had a goal line play. Team A runs up the gut into a pile. U had the ball in, I thought it was in, but was looking at the blocking - not the ball position. BJ was on end line, and couldn't see the action. I checked both wings - HL was crashing in with a spot, LJ straddling the goal line. HL did not have a clear view of the ball once the runner hit the line, but saw his knee touch. LJ had his view completely obstructed. U relayed he had the ball in before the knee touched, but neither wing would signal. In a situation like this, is it acceptable for U to signal? It turns out that A fumbled into the end zone on the next play and B recovered.

[Mike L]

The U should be relaying to the HL he had the ball in before the knee touch. The HL, realizing he did have the knee down but had no idea where the ball was when it happened, should accept the U's call, go up with TD and thank the U for being there for him to help with the call. (Unless of course the HL feels where the knee down happened makes it impossible for the ball to be in since you really don't say at what yd line he had the knee).
The U going up with the signal just looks like cr@p.
The LJ should not be straddling the goal line unless he has it in.