N. Carolina/Tennessee

[RealityCheck]

If no one on the field counted the UNC players in formation, then the replay booth should have. That was a 15-yard illegal participation foul without question.

Both college and NFL rules create the chaos in end-of-half situations, and both sets of rules are bad. Both players and officials are being put into bad situations because of the current rules. I believe CFL timing rules should be adopted to eliminate the end of game chaos, and this would allow the NFL to get rid of the artificial 10-second runoff.

1) Game clock automatically stops at the end of every play until the ready for play in the last three minutes.
2) If the ball is marked ready for play with time still on the clock, you must RUN THE PLAY even after the clock hits 0:00. This rule would also be in place at the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters. Sick of seeing NFL coaches waving at each other and hitting the locker room with 25 seconds still on the clock when the other team has no timeouts left. College football is getting just as bad.
3) Play clock should be at 25 (it is always 20 in the CFL) in the last three minutes which starts at the ready for play. Tired of seeing 1-score games out of reach with over 2:00 left.
4) Delay of game in the last three minutes should be loss of down on 1st-3rd downs and a 10-yard penalty on 4th down with the clock starting at the snap.
5) Team timeouts per half should be reduced from three to two (you only get one in the CFL).

[silverpie]

I think 3-4-3 should have been applied.

The referee shall order the game clock or play clock started or
stopped whenever either team conserves or consumes playing time by tactics
obviously unfair. This includes starting the game clock on the snap if the foul is
by the team ahead in the score. The game clock will start on the ready-for-play
signal after Team A throws an illegal forward or backward pass to conserve time
(Rule 3-3-2-e-15) (A.R. 3-4-3-I-V).

Snapping a ball that shouldn't even have been snappable (since B had not had the opportunity to counter A's subs) seems to fall into the category of "tactics obviously unfair."

[RealityCheck]

Originally Posted by silverpie

I think 3-4-3 should have been applied.



Snapping a ball that shouldn't even have been snappable (since B had not had the opportunity to counter A's subs) seems to fall into the category of "tactics obviously unfair."

That rule is never enforced in end-of-half situations since it would be unfair to the defense stop the clock and unfair to the offense to allow time to run out. Just points out more that there are too many loopholes in the current rules structure...too many to repair.

Adopting CFL timing rules and maybe even substitution rules...no subs allowed after the officials signal the gates closed just after the ready for play with arms outstretched...is the best answer. Tinkering with the current flawed NCAA and NFL rules will only make the situation worse.

[APG]

Play was handled correctly.

NCAA officials chief backs calls in Pinstripe, Music City Bowls - Campus Rivalry: College Football & Basketball News, Recruiting, Game Picks, and More - USATODAY.com

[RealityCheck]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Play was handled correctly.

NCAA officials chief backs calls in Pinstripe, Music City Bowls - Campus Rivalry: College Football & Basketball News, Recruiting, Game Picks, and More - USATODAY.com

Not surprising considering the biased source. Can't admit that the UNC-Tennessee crew screwed up and that the excessive celebration calls/non-calls in the two Big Ten crew games were absolutely inconsistent.

Probably most posters on this board are more qualified to be the NCAA officials chief and Big Ten officiating supervisor than David Parry is. He has NO credibility.

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by RealityCheck

Not surprising considering the biased source. Can't admit that the UNC-Tennessee crew screwed up and that the excessive celebreation calls/non-calls in the two Big Ten crew games were absolutely inconsistent.

Probably most posters on this board are more qualified to be the NCAA officials chief and Big Ten officiating supervisor than David Parry is. He has NO credibility.

But if he had supported YOUR point of view he would not be biased? ? ?

Incredible

[RealityCheck]

Originally Posted by TXMike

But if he had supported YOUR point of view he would not be biased? ? ?

Incredible

I have seen Dave Parry suggest suspensions for non-BC$ conference players when similar yet worse hits by BC$ conference players are not considered suspendable. Will the flagrant Tennessee spear on the first reviewed play in the last few seconds draw a suspension? It should, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

One man should not be both the officials coordinator for a conference (Big Ten) and the NCAA officials coordinator at the same time. That is biased on its face when he speaks as the NCAA cooordinator but is defending his Big Ten crews as the conference coordinator without properly reviewing plays in question.

I fully expect a retraction from Parry once he realizes (I'm sure he has no clue now) that there were 12 players in the UNC formation as has been clearly pointed out in this thread. The call would have been correct under current rules with 11 players in the formation, but that is not how the play went down.

I stand by my earlier rules change suggestions.

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by silverpie

I think 3-4-3 should have been applied.



Snapping a ball that shouldn't even have been snappable (since B had not had the opportunity to counter A's subs) seems to fall into the category of "tactics obviously unfair."

I agree that the U should have came up over the ball to prevent the snap. If they snap before we are able to get up to the ball to prevent the snap we are supposed to shut it down and have a "do over" to allow B to matchup. But then Team A would still line up and get a play either. Regardless this play will be one talked about next year and will become an education tool to make us all better. That is what we are all trying to do regardless of the level we work.

As for 3-4-3: The bulletin that TXMike posted from NCAA shows that the clock status was proper, even though I disagree with it, but it is the way they want it done so in my games I will follow it just as they did in this game.

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by RealityCheck

4) Delay of game in the last three minutes should be loss of down on 1st-3rd downs and a 10-yard penalty on 4th down with the clock starting at the snap.

That makes no sense. There is no down to not be replayed as the down never started. I guess you just want to completely skip a down because of a foul.

[RealityCheck]

Originally Posted by Cobra

That makes no sense. There is no down to not be replayed as the down never started. I guess you just want to completely skip a down because of a foul.

That's exactly how the CFL calls it in "stop time" in the last 3:00 of each half. The right to run the play is lost when the ball isn't snapped in time.

A team shouldn't be rewarded for running time off the clock at the end of a half or game, take a delay penalty, and then still get to run the play over again.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by RealityCheck

That's exactly how the CFL calls it in "stop time" in the last 3:00 of each half. The right to run the play is lost when the ball isn't snapped in time.

A team shouldn't be rewarded for running time off the clock at the end of a half or game, take a delay penalty, and then still get to run the play over again.

LD used to be the penalty for any failure to snap in time in Canadian football, and it had a certain "use it or lose it" logic. However, that logic fails when you realize team A could always commit a foul preventing the ball from being put in play with a second left on the time count, and loss of down seems much too great a penalty for most such infractions.

However, this whole business of setting up fast to spike the ball is an artifact of a more basic distortion-inducing timing rule: handling timing between downs differently depending on how the ball last became dead. Address that one and you'll be on your way to getting rid of the chaos.

[bisonlj]

"Illegal procedure" may be a fairly recent removal (6 years ago) but I know any meeting or clinic I go to, a good sign of a guy who is not current is the guy using the term "illegal procedure". Same as the wing who argues he can work better starting on the field rather than the sideline. The game evolves and anyone using the term "illegal procedure" is either a coach, announcer, or an official who is not current.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

Same as the wing who argues he can work better starting on the field rather than the sideline.

Oh goodie...let's start that argument again.