taunting USL Conduct

[JRod37]

Had a situation a few weeks back (HS varsity) and would like to get an opinion.

After a tackle a B player was giving A a textbook prolonged hard stare down as to intimidate the other player. I was the covering official. I went to B and told him to knock it off three times. He kept staring. A's sideline (behind me) was going crazy, and I don't blame them (although that had little influence on how I handled this play, it's just important to note at this point). The game was beginning to get "chippy". So I flagged him for baiting/taunting.

A few plays later a player A does the exact same thing. Only since I threw the first there was little room for a talk-to. I had little sympathy for not giving much of a warning partly because there was already a flag thrown and because A's sideline was going crazy to call the first one.

The A player was giving the old "what did I do?" As he was walking away from our referee he dropped the old "F-ing-heimer" at him. Our referee threw a second USL which got him ejected.

Any thoughts from the community on what happened? As you can expect we caught some heat from the AD, coach and parents. By the way, this kid was one of the leading rushers in the state.

[REFANDUMP]

It sounds like you handled the situation properly, although I think one warning on the first violation would have been enough. If the player didn't respond to that, I'd have flagged him immediately.

[ppaltice]

I can envision the scene, but staring is not something that needs to be flagged. Why does A's sideline matter?

Personally, I would not have said anything in this situation. It is ok to be menacing in football. There are lines that players cannot cross and staring is not one of them.

[JRod37]

The sideline mattered to me is 1) it paints the picture for everyone, and 2) it's really hard to have much sympathy for any arguing that may have come from them for the second flag.

Perhaps the real reason I brought up the sideline was because their reaction to their kid getting ejected made me want to think about the whole string of events and get some opinions from others.

I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that if anything should have been done differently it would be a matter of personal form. As I said in the original post, the game was beginning to get chippy. After the kid got ejected the rest of the game was surprisingly civil. (I'm not advocating ejecting players to control a game. NO WAY!! The kid got himself ejected by cursing at our referee)

[whitehat]

Jrod, sounds to me like you did your best to not flag the kid by warning him and then when he wouldn't let it go you did what I would have done. Same thing for the other kid. I tend towards a lot pf preventive officiating, getting between players, backing them off, but there comes a point where I just think enough is enough and toss the flag. Nobody here is in a position to second guess your actions as there is no substitute for being there, seeing the dynamic, etc....If we let it go too far then it ends up in a brawl and multiple ejections.

One thing I have done twice in my career when it got to a point in a game where there was a lot of "chipping" and marginal taunts, I would call time out, ask for the coaches and the captians of both teams, meet in the center of the field (of course the PA announcer is speculating over the PA as to what might be going on)and have a little heart to heart with the threat of starting to eject players and/or the crew walking off the field if they do not get it under control and just play the game. Twice I did this and twice a miraculous "tone down" of attitudes ocurred and the game went on...
Why can't kids just play the game and why can't coaches just let them.....?

[mbyron]

I don't know whether I'd flag mere staring. But once you warned him to return to his huddle and he refused, THAT was USC. Good call!

[ppaltice]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I don't know whether I'd flag mere staring. But once you warned him to return to his huddle and he refused, THAT was USC. Good call!

JRod, when you told a player to go to his huddle for staring, you put yourself in a position that spiraled into an eventual disqualification. At the most, you could make your presence known to both players by stating: 'Play's over!' Do I think you were right in giving an USC to the player for ignoring your request 3 times: yes. Do I think you should have made the request: no.

The second player you flagged, if I am correct, was for staring at his opponent (and not for ignoring your request to go to his huddle 3 times as the first)? Essentially, you made staring an USC foul.

Maybe it is because I am in the heart of the SEC, but officials throwing capricious unsportsmanlike fouls are coming under fire.

I may be alone, but I think you handled the situations poorly.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by ppaltice

JRod, when you told a player to go to his huddle for staring, you put yourself in a position that spiraled into an eventual disqualification. At the most, you could make your presence known to both players by stating: 'Play's over!' Do I think you were right in giving an USC to the player for ignoring your request 3 times: yes. Do I think you should have made the request: no.

The second player you flagged, if I am correct, was for staring at his opponent (and not for ignoring your request to go to his huddle 3 times as the first)? Essentially, you made staring an USC foul.

Maybe it is because I am in the heart of the SEC, but officials throwing capricious unsportsmanlike fouls are coming under fire.

I may be alone, but I think you handled the situations poorly.

I agree that there's a fine line here. Preventive officiating sometimes requires stepping in and actively sending players back to their huddles. On routine plays, though, you're right to try to stay back and watch.

If I judge that I need to step in and the player ignores my repeated instruction, we'll have a problem. I like to think that I don't step in overly often (had one in a JV game this year), and try to use the tools of preventive officiating with discretion.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by ppaltice

Maybe it is because I am in the heart of the SEC, but officials throwing capricious unsportsmanlike fouls are coming under fire.

I may be alone, but I think you handled the situations poorly.

With all due respect to a great football conference, perhaps the SEC should reexamine their definition of "capricious", as there seems to be an awful lot of needless back and forth jawing going on during their games.

Once a player has been instructed to do something by an official, it should be expected that he comply. If you want to be overly technical, which shouldn't be necessary, refer to NF: 9-5-1-g.

Although far too many spectators seem to have forgotten, learning sportsmanship on the high school level, is still one of the major objectives of the entire effort of playing this game. Lowering the standards of this great game is something we are all supposed to avoid, despite popular opinion.

Trash talking, preening and intimidating your opponent is not, and hopefully will not become, accepted at this level. It's a shame it has spread as much as it has to other levels, but that's another issue, beyond our control.

[JRod37]

Thanks everyone for both sides of the argument!!! Great discussion.

Perhaps in Minnesota we're much less tolerant of baiting and taunting. The player wasn't just "staring." He was committing and act that was meant to intimidate and incite ill will on an opposing player. The only difference between what he did and hovering over a player on the ground in an intimidating manner was that the opponent wasn't on the ground. The action is meaningless to the game of football other than inciting ill will (unlike say a rip move by a DE which is essentially throwing a sucker punch in the direction of an opponent - that is a meaningful football move). It's an action that precludes something much worse such as throwing a punch - you don't get the chance to "knock it off" in that case.

All great things. Perhaps my initial flag was too quick. Perhaps I let A's bench get in my head a little more than I'm willing to admit, so my flag came out quickly. The one thing you can't change I guess is that player committed acts that were meant to intimidate and incite ill will, which is against the rules. Just because they let players get away with that on Saturdays and Sundays doesn't mean anything for Friday night.