Sugar Bowl Safety

[Andy]

Originally Posted by ajmc

What struck me as most significant about this play, was that the Referee and Wing official, immediately got together to confirm what each had seen and only then was a decision made and a non-hesitant signal given.

Apparently, both agreed that the play was still alive when the ball was fumbled. As both seemed to be in proper position to make a call (from opposite directions) their confirming each other's perspective seems like excellent and appropriate mechanics.

I agree that the two of them getting together to discuss what they saw was excellent and looked good as officials.

My question, since I am not a football official, is what would happen if the two of them had disagreed? Since there was no whistle to stop the play, what if the Wing came in and said that he had forward progress stopped at the 2, and the Referee said, no, I've got a safety? Do you just discuss it and come to a decision? It seems like this would happen more often in football with two or more officials looking at the same play from different angles.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Andy

I agree that the two of them getting together to discuss what they saw was excellent and looked good as officials.

My question, since I am not a football official, is what would happen if the two of them had disagreed? Since there was no whistle to stop the play, what if the Wing came in and said that he had forward progress stopped at the 2, and the Referee said, no, I've got a safety? Do you just discuss it and come to a decision? It seems like this would happen more often in football with two or more officials looking at the same play from different angles.

The wing has forward progress, the Referee does not. So who cares if they disagree, the Referee cannot rule on a play they are not in position to make. I am sure the Referee gave information to the wing as to if he eventually got away. And one thing non-football officials need to understand, the whistle means little or nothing to this play. There are plays that do not have a whistle at all, somehow everyone knows the play is over.

Peace

[youngump]

[One of many board hoppers on this question]
The thing I wondered about this play is what you'd do if the defense did this on purpose [I realize that'd be awfully tough in realtime.] But hit a guy at the one and drive him into the endzone. Realize that you're in the endzone and then let go. Can the runner do anything at this point to regain his forward progress or does he now have to attempt to advance out of the endzone?
________
SEXYCHIKU

[Mike L]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The wing has forward progress, the Referee does not. So who cares if they disagree, the Referee cannot rule on a play they are not in position to make. I am sure the Referee gave information to the wing as to if he eventually got away. And one thing non-football officials need to understand, the whistle means little or nothing to this play. There are plays that do not have a whistle at all, somehow everyone knows the play is over.

Peace

As an R, because I do not have spotting responsibility, the only thing I would have done in this situation is ask the wing did he have progress stopped or does he have a safety since there is no indication by him of either at the end of the play. In fact it would have taken a longer conversation because I would have asked if he REALLY did not have progress stopped because it sure looked like it and a cheap safety is not something we want to award. So I think this assumption the R is somehow "sharing" information is just that, an assumption. None of us have any idea what is being said by whom and to whom.
And when I have progress stopped with a player being driven back I have a whistle and a hard one at that. If you don't, you are simply asking for a boat load of trouble. I think it's obvious from a play like this, there are times when everyone does NOT know the play is over and it's your job as the official to make sure they do know.

[Coach Jinx]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The wing has forward progress, the Referee does not. So who cares if they disagree, the Referee cannot rule on a play they are not in position to make. I am sure the Referee gave information to the wing as to if he eventually got away. And one thing non-football officials need to understand, the whistle means little or nothing to this play. There are plays that do not have a whistle at all, somehow everyone knows the play is over.

Peace

how about when the opposite wing has forward pregress at the 2? You see the L in the place almost out to the hash saying he had forward progress at the 2. I wonder how that went in the locker room. L is sprinting in with arm up before player gets tackled in the EZ.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And one thing non-football officials need to understand, the whistle means little or nothing to this play.

It would have meant everything if the whistle had blown when forward progress was stopped.

peace

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by Andy

I agree that the two of them getting together to discuss what they saw was excellent and looked good as officials.

My question, since I am not a football official, is what would happen if the two of them had disagreed? Since there was no whistle to stop the play, what if the Wing came in and said that he had forward progress stopped at the 2, and the Referee said, no, I've got a safety? Do you just discuss it and come to a decision? It seems like this would happen more often in football with two or more officials looking at the same play from different angles.

Part of the rule includes this statement: " When in question, forward progress is stopped." The wing is the primary official for ruling forward progress on this play.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JasonTX

Part of the rule includes this statement: " When in question, forward progress is stopped."

But the question is not merely whether his forward progress was stopped, rather whether he was so held that his forward progress was stopped. So the key word in determination is "held".

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by ajmc

What struck me as most significant about this play, was that the Referee and Wing official, immediately got together to confirm what each had seen and only then was a decision made and a non-hesitant signal given.

Apparently, both agreed that the play was still alive when the ball was fumbled. As both seemed to be in proper position to make a call (from opposite directions) their confirming each other's perspective seems like excellent and appropriate mechanics.

What am I missing? What fumble?

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by waltjp

What am I missing? What fumble?

You don't see a fumble? What play are you watching?

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by Welpe

You don't see a fumble? What play are you watching?

After reading some of these replies I wonder if I was watching the right game.

[Hooah30]

Originally Posted by JasonTX

Do any of you remember the Super Bowl play that Carey had? He had a play where he was "close" to shutting down but the QB was able to break free. My comments here may not apply to the play in question but just regarding forward progress in general. I look at forward progress as a person trying to climb out of a window. There is an area where you aren't in the house but you also aren't out of the house, you are on the window sill. When you are in that area you can still go back in or can go all the way out. Forward progress is similar in the way that I don't think we rule the runner down when he is moved back 6 inches, I think we wait to see if they push him back further. As long as you judge the runner to still be on the "sill" the ball is still live. For this play, each of us has to determine if that runner was on the "sill" when he escaped.

Good explanation Jason. Based on that definition I would say the runner was on the commode by the time the first tackler fell of of him.