Sugar Bowl Safety
 

Can anyone support the call?

Sure. The back broke the tackle and in a separate act tried to get out of the end zone. His forward progress wasn't stopped in the judgment of the official.

If the back had broken free and run the 102 yards for a touchdown, I'm sure John Cooper would want forward progress stopped and the ball placed back on the 3 yard line. Right.

(In other words, why should the offense always get the benefit of any doubt?)

I was not in love with the call, but when the player disengaged he allowed the opportunity to continue to play. I guess the better question is if the ball carrier would have fumbled the ball at that point, would we have considered the ball live or said that forward progress was stopped? I think you can make a case for both a safety and forward progress being stopped in the field of play. I would have likely shut it down, but I can see both sides of this.

Peace

In my opinion progress was stopped at the 2.

My question to you then is.... When is forward progress stopped? He was driven backward for 5 yards and as is typical in the college game there was no whistle.

The whistle does not make the play dead, the play is already dead by rule. If that play happen at the 50 I would have likely had forward progress back at the original spot that the player was going backwards.

Peace

didn't see the play - but keep this mind. Was he trying to gain yardage? If you want the right to gain yards, you have to accept the responsibility of losing yardage or fumbling.

Admittedly having watched this with scarlet and gray glasses on, I didn't see a separate act or even a broken tackle. It didn't appear the RB ever stopped being driven back or disengaged from the first tackler (he still had a hold on the RB's legs) before being wrapped up by the two new tacklers.

That said, the RB needs to know to go down when he's wrapped up at the 2. And for Brutus' sake, don't call a play where you hand off 5 yards deep in the end zone. < shudder >

Certainly the whistle doesn't make the play day... Just wondering why they wear them around their neck?

In the youth leagues that I've called in my brief experience, I've been instructed to err on the side of player safety, that is, when the back had been pushed back several yards on the initial hit, kill the play with the whistle. I don't know if the rule regarding forward progress is different, but college officials tend to allow more second opportunities, and it makes for a more exciting game.
Players and coaches all know if you are driven back, you get to keep what you got in the first place, but if you run forward again, however slightly, then you reset from where you've been moved back to. He had to know he was behind the goal line and he made a decision to keep working instead of just giving up and taking his no-gain. That was just a bone-headed play by an otherwise talented RB and he got caught.
Moral of the story--your goal line is the most evil mark on the field, don't mess with it!

Here's the video: safety starts at 1:50.

<iframe title="YouTube video player" class="youtube-player" type="text/html" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/IpelusEmjW8" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Were you watching a bowl game from 15 years ago? ;)

100% official's judgment. The covering official judged that the back broke free of the tackler in the EZ.

No rule was misapplied in the play. If you want to argue judgment, I'm sure you can find a fan site to entertain you.

The top statement is the point. If he would have just gone down then the play would have not been a safety. But when players often try to fight for extra yardage and they get away from these kinds of tackles, you let the play continue. Now if the one tackler had brought him down I agree without a question this is not a safety. But the player broke away and had 2 or 3 other players ultimately tackle him. This is not youth ball, these are great athletes. How many great plays do we see on SportsCenter when we think a player is down and they run for a TD or make big yardage after the first contact? The player has to know where he is on the field and stop fighting for yards. A similar thing happen earlier in the game when it appeared an Arkansas player could have been stopped, but was fighting for more yards and had the ball stripped out of his hand. If you are stopped, go down. When you continue to fight for yards, you are responsible for what happens after that until you are ruled to be truly stopped.

Peace

What are the usual guidelines used for this judgment?

On the replay (which wasn't shown in what you posted above), it looks like he was driven back 7 yards and tackled. In live action (above) the RB's lean forward as the first tackler falls off his upper body to his legs make it appear that he is moving forward even though his position on the field is still moving back.

What is it that he would have seen that would have lead him to the judgment?

Overall, I thought the crew did a pretty good job. The only other call I didn't care for was the no call on the pass interference where the Arkansas player's legs tangled with the receiver's legs. It looked intentional to me rather than just legs getting tangled.

This can't be overstated: as the RB don't put yourself in this position and you don't have to worry about it.

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.

I have to admit I would have had a whistle before the "breakaway" and had progress at the 2. Being driven back 4 yds is beyond enough for me to say progress is stopped. Then again, I'm not a bowl official either.

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 would have also probably ruled the play down in the field of play as well, but I doubt I would have had a whistle. But that is why it is a judgment call and has nothing to do with the officials and their stature. We all just do not have the same judgment.

Peace

If I hadn't been coaching and officiating high school football for almost 20 years perhaps a fan site would be more proper... Since I don't officiate or coach college, I thought and still do think my question has merit.

I am anxious for you to answer my question... When is forward progress stopped. Do you people really expect a player to give himself up?

Keep in my mind the following two things...
1. Giving yourself up is not a natural instinct... Youth football to the pros... Giving up in that situation is to allow the defenders to collapse you... Ever had that happen? I thought that is why officials carried whistles... If not why not just let every play end with a person on the ground or out of play then spot the ball accordingly?

2. Given that there was no indication that the play became dead, should the back assume he was spotted outside the end zone?

The point I am stuck on is officials judgement... That is an easy out but there has to be some basis for that judgement and the answer that as long as the runner is fighting for yards is not the right answer. It simply is not. At some point an official must decide when a player's progress has been halted. If 5 yards of being driven backwards is not enough, pray tell what is? Is it 6, 7, 50 yards?

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.

Why not?

Judgement is judgement. There is the answer to your question.

I do not officiate football, but other sports and have learned that judgement is one thing that cannot be taught. We can teach rules and positioning on the field or court, mechanics, etc., but judgement is judgement. It's prretty safe to say that to get to the level of calling a BCS bowl game, those officials have shown good judgement in their careers.

You can't put a basis for judgement in black and white...much like the flag for the excessive celebration penalty in the Pinstripe bowl as was discussed here at some length. In the calling officials judgement, what that player did was a foul and earned a flag.

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.

This has nothing to do with a natural instinct. If you go down and realize the play is over, then you cannot worry about what else will be called. And officials carry whistles to rule they have stopped the play, which is why I said a similar play in the situation where an Arkansas player would have just went down he would not have been ruled he fumbled the ball.

The player should realize where he is on the field and stop trying to get away. Maybe you have not been coaching or officiating in 20 years but I see players all the time go down when they are in certain areas of the field or the game is in a critical moment. Heck 20 years ago our coach told us to do that when he had a lead to not fumble the football.

Well what else do you want? Do you want anytime a player is pushed back to be a dead play. So that would mean that any second effort play would result in a play being over and many first downs or extra yardage plays would not happen. And it is not about going backwards, is about being in control of the ball carrier. It is arguable that he was not in control and he did get away. You do not have to agree and I do not have to agree, but it was clear that one player was not able to bring that player to the ground. And when the ball carrier was grasped he was also fighting to get away. You allow that to happen on some level, whether that applied here or the play was over is always going to be in the judgment of the officials on the game. It is easy to sit here and say what we should do, but I see these plays all the time and the runner gets away. You cannot have it both ways.

Peace

I would not want to give a cheap safety. But the player in question tried to get away and did, so I would have doubted the decision for sure. Again, the player goes down this is not an issue.

Peace

I've got progress stopped in the field of play. Not a safety.

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

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.

[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

What would you do at anytime a defensive player lets go of a player with the ball on purpose?

Peace

Time warp, I guess. Tressel. I actually had to look that up. One of my least favorite programs in all of college sports. Every time I hear a player introducing himself and he says "THEE Ohio...." I want to throw a brick through my TV.

I'm not sure anyone would've blinked at a loss of yardage if this happened at midfield. Why should the end zone be any different? If he broke the tackle (and he did), then I'll let him gain yards, but I'll also let him lose yards and/or fumble.

I like the window sill analogy, but I don't think it applies here since the tackle was broken.

I would have, especially after watching the slow motion replay they showed during the game. He didn't break the tackle, the defender still had him by the legs when the second group of defenders engaged him.

I think it was a defensible, but ultimately wrong, call (but as I said, I'm biased).

I also thought the wing hurt himself by conferring with the R. What possible information does the R have that affects the call on forward momentum? It looked like the wing was confused as to what happened.

But you said you probably would have ruled it progress stopped. So if you would have ruled it that way, what reason is there for not sounding the whistle?

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.

I would have ruled it that way based on the first look I got. That does not mean I would have blown it before the play finished. I do not know about you, but the whistle is not in my mouth at all times. And certainly in not a play like this or as the wing official. Heck there are plays my crew did not have a whistle at all in the last two years and the play someone ended. Interesting how that happens.

Peace

Why would you need to ask? Whatever the wing ruled he does not need to necessarily tell you. It looked to me like the wing was asking for assistance on if the runner got away. Now none of us know that sitting here, we would have to talk to the officials to know for sure. But they did make eye contact and say something to each other before a signal went up.

And I did not necessarily ask you what you would do. If you feel you need to get on the whistle quickly that is you. My training as told me that can be slow and deliberate and if the play is over my whistle is not going to change that.

Peace

I just watched the play again on the DVR. Seeing it in full speed, and from the press box angle, it looked like he should have had progress at the 2. From the goal line angle, B1 makes the initial hit, drives him back, and falls to the ground on his back/right arm, letting go. At this time A1's left foot is on the ground, pushing forward. He takes one more step mostly towards the sideline, and is contacted by three B players almost simultaneously. He takes an additional step with his right foot before the B mass drags him to the ground and his show end's up on a giant "S".
I do feel dumber having listened to the announcer say so many times "Because there was no whistle, that was still a live play." I would totally get HD though, if I could have the option of muting just the announcers and still hearing the band/crowd noise.

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.

The calling official was the one at the top of the screen. The ball was facing him and he would have been the best person to make the call. So what the other official was doing is really not relevant for many purposes.

Peace

well unlike the R, both wings have forward progress & if you have one sprinting in with forward progress it at the worst looks bad if u move it back or to a safety


your quick to say this or that but it is relevant if one wing has it, just because he was closer doesnt mean he was right

It is very relevant if he was signalling the ball dead because of forward progress prior to the runner getting tackled. If that's the case, it's at least an inadvertent signal. He ruled forward progress based on his signal so he should have at least been a part of the conversation.

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".

I was taught that nothing good happens in those pile ups when the runner is not moving forward. There will be a fumble, fight etc. Shut it down.

Question, if the ball had been stripped while being pushed back would you have allowed it.

I wouldn't and I'd bet these guys wouldn't have either. I think this wing gave up his spot and was then screwed. Defensible call, but not a good one in my opinion.

I'd need to ask because the wing official is giving no indication of what he has. He's wandered off the progress spot and he's not giving a safety signal well after the player is down. And if he's looking for help from me on a spot with this play, we have some serious problems.

As for the whistle, I still can't understand why, if you have progress stopped you would not blow the whistle. What does that accomplish other than open you up to a lot of problems? Problems like this play, problems like the ball suddenly coming out of there and a scramble for it, problems like the ball carrier getting hammered by a bunch of players because you have failed to do your job of indicating the play is over. Yeah, there are plays that are "over" with or without a whistle, but I can't see how you can possibly say that on a play that involves YOUR judgement whether it's over or not. It's YOUR judgement. So how are players supposed to know by YOUR judgement the play is over if you fail to indicate that? It could easily go either way as has been indicated on this play and the opinions here. It has nothing to do with whistles in the mouth or so-called quick whistles. It has everything to do with doing one of our primary jobs. There is a very lamentable trend within the officiating community of this "my whistle does not end the play, the play does" being used for not doing one of our jobs that manages the game. We ARE expected to have whistles at the end of plays. We should have whistles at the end of plays. Some plays, it cant' be done because we don't know if that runner in the middle of the pile still has the ball. But that doesn't mean on plays where we clearly must make a ruling, and can see the status of the ball, we get to be lazy and try to pass off our responsibilities.

Well I would rule if the defender has his arms wrapped around him and has driven him back 4 yds, he was pretty well held.

Awesome Post Mike!

I do not know what you guys do or what your crew does, but where I work we do not confer on things like this if one official has made a ruling. Not with a safety or not with a TD. If someone has a spot they go with that spot. We do not have to confer to make a decision. Just because some guy on the other end of the field has an opinion does not mean he should be involved in much of anything. If this was a TD situation, and the ball is run to the side of one of the wings I do not know much conversation that would be had if the wing ruled a TD or not. But hey, I am sure some people have to confer about everything.

Peace

If one wing is marking a spot on the field and the other one is signaling safety, you're not going to confer?

Using JRut's logic, if an official across the field thought he saw a runner down and blows his whistle with the runner at the 2 but the closer official clearly saw he wasn't down and scored a TD, there is no reason for the IW official to come in with his IW because the covering official had the TD call.

The other official should only join the conversation if he's asked or he has "knowledge" (a term I've picked up from a D1 BJ). In my example above and in the video, the "knowledge" the LJ would bring is "I may have killed the play before it was over". I haven't been able to watch the video to see the timing of the LJ signal with the end of the play but it's possible the LJ felt his signal was not prior to the ruling by the H so there was no possible inadvertent signal. Only if he was absolutely certain he wanted to try to talk the H off the safety call should he run in.

And if the H obviously has no clue what happened? (At least that's how he looked to me.)

If you would stop trying to tell me what to do maybe you would understand. The whistle has nothing to do with why or what I will rule. If I do not see leather (which could have been the case here) I am not blowing the whistle at all until I find leather or rule that the player securely has the ball. I will not blow the whistle until then. I have had 2 IW in 15 years and both of them for when I tried to "stop everything" and one time a player did not have a ball secure on a fumble and the other a player was fighting for yards. The only time the whistle comes in play when players and coaches want to claim they should not be flagged for something because the whistle was blown in their opinion. And at the end of the day your claim has nothing to do with this play. If the officials had his forward progress ruled in the field of play then that is what would have happened, their whistle I am sure would not have been blown anyway where that place was ruled. And I know the whistle is not in my hand or mouth during plays. So when I blow it might vary as I have to grab it before I can put air in that little device. Also you need to look at the football fundamentals; the whistle is a tool not a deciding factor to make decisions.

Peace

I love people that add stuff to the play that clearly did not happen and then want to debate that was not a factor.

Here is my logic, if that was a factor then that opposite wing did not feel it was enough to mention. And at that level that play could have been reviewed without a challenge. If there was such a problem with that play as you state there must be, then they certainly let that go and I fully expected at the time to have the play reviewed as it was a close I think many here are doing a lot of assumptions based on something they think happen rather than what actually did happen on the play and start talking about what should have happened. But then again that is what people do here, take a simple situation and turn it into something that does not relate to the level or the people that are commenting on it.

Peace

Jeff, you're the one who said it wouldn't matter if the other wing had a spot in the field of play when the question was asked.

Is this play reviewable? I'm fairly sure forward progress is not reviewable in the NFL but I have no clue about the NCAA.

Forward progress has been reviewable in the NFL for year, it happens quite often on very close spots where there is a possible first down. And anytime they rule on a TD or not, that is a forward progress spot. It is also reviewable at the college level as well for the same reasons. Both have taken place a couple of times this year, but college does not need a challenge.

And when I said it would not matter, I mean that if the official has made a ruling I find it very hard to believe that a wing where the play is going away from is going to be considered heavily in such a play. And did it matter? Obviously it did not in this very situation. ;)

Peace

I know that the spot is reviewable, but you're saying whether or not a player's forward progress was stopped is now reviewable in the NFL? For example, a coach could challenge when a RB fumbles that his forward progress had been stopped and actually win that challenge?

And likewise they could have reviewed this play and potentially ruled on review that his forward progress was stopped at the 2 and spotted the ball there?

I'd say he should figure into it more than the R, but that's where he went for help. On the other hand, maybe he just forgot where they were going for drinks afterward and wanted reminding.

The forward progress SPOT is reviewable. Whether forward progress is stopped is not. Enormous difference.

Whew, I was worried I'd missed something big.

I'm not trying to tell you what to do, I'm still trying to understand this statement. In it you state you probably would have ruled progress stopped but would not have a whistle. So how far back do you allow them to be pushed before you blow the whistle? Do they actually have to be tackled? How do you indicate you have progressed stopped and the ball is now dead to everyone there that is the judgement call you are making? Or do you ever blow the whistle because they are just supposed to figure it out and then see where you happend to be standing?

Call obstruction, but then I call a different game.
________
Effects of zoloft

Tressell (or Cooper) was trying to challenge. I'd assume the U was telling him he couldn't.

If the issue is you have a safety or not, you can review that. Does that mean the call on the field will change? I am not sure, but they can review it. If they do for plays where a first down is in place, I think they can do that here.

I do not think I said anything different than this.

Official confer on many things during these sitaution especially when points are at issue. I do not see why this different than many other situations in the game. Officials confer a lot on scoring plays when there are multiple coverage on the play.

Peace

Then do this, chalk it up to I do not feel the whistle is that important and your life apparently depends on if you hit the whistle or not. If I have progress stopped at a place, I mark that spot where FP is stopped in my judgment. You need a whistle to do that? So if the whistle is not blown when you like I cannot mark the spot I have judged at that place whether it is a safety or a TD, the whistle has to be blown?

Peace

My life does not depend on a whistle, and this attempt at....what....I can't fathom other than some childish attempt to deflect the question. Or maybe you can't help being an insultive ***, I'm not sure which. But if you say you can stand there and mark a forward progress spot while the pile is getting pushed backwards and have no need to indicate the play is over is quite simply about one of the worst officiating ideas I have ever heard. You keep trying to redirect the question to just the spot which only causes me to suspect doing half your job is good enough for you.

I answered your question. You just do not seem to like the answer. I have said this before and I will say this again, do what works for you. I will do what works for me. ;)

Oh brother…….:rolleyes: Did I not say in my games this year on my regular crew we had several moments when a play was ruled down and no whistle from the 5 officials anywhere on the field. Not our two the two wings, not our umpire or me that is the back judge felt compelled to blow a whistle and somehow no major discussion was had and we marked a spot. And if we talk about scoring plays I am sure it happen more or the whistle was not blown at all as well. And for the record I have worked 15 years and I am the youngest on the crew as it relates to years and even experience. I guess they are wrong too according to you and somehow we did not need to discuss the spot in great detail.

Do not twist my words. I did not say you never blow the whistle, I said that the spot is not going to change because of the whistle. The play is dead before the whistle is blown. The whistle is just going to stop everyone else if possible, but that does not always happen.

This is clearly on page 79 of the NF rulebook and a Fundamental under Dead Ball the first one:

"An official's whistle seldom kills the ball. It is already dead by rule."

Not sure how many ways I can answer that question for you.

And unless I am on trial for something I do not have to answer the way you like. Even then I do not have to answer as you like as the answer is clear.

Peace

What am I missing? What fumble?

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

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

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

Perhaps you were actually watching the Tidy Bowl?

you cant review if forward progress was stopped & then pushed backward, you could review if someone got in or our of the ez but not forward progress in a pile and a fumble or a situation like this. Back to something you said earlier. Closer wing has a guy in the ez for a td, further wing has a knee down & a bounce in. You dont talk about that? It was not the best call, most agree on that. The wing runnin in at the 2 I thought was something they would talk about in the locker room. I dont think anyone thinks the wing that called was a 100% sure what he had.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cX2zq_8VZcY about 11:35 on the clip

I believe in trusting my partner and I believe that someone across the field is not going to have a better angle than an official standing all on top of the play at least on a play like this. You can talk about anything you want, but I do not see official talk when they have the ball in the EZ during normal play so why would there be talk in this situation as you suggest. This is not a pass play and even those we do not talk, we might make eye contact, but we do not talk and go over all the situations, we make a call.

Peace

Certainly you've heard of cross-field mechanics? The far wing *frequently* gets the progress spot of a player stopped in bounds. Matter of fact, that wing has a far easier time since he doesn't have to worry about bodies coming at him.

Yes I have, but that does not involve a conversation. It usually means that when the umpire gets the ball he picks the guy that has the best spot. I have never seen where there is a lot of debate over which spot is chosen. And most of the time it is a mirror of the calling official's spot. And in this case if the official standing near the play thinks the player spun out of tackle (a judgment call), who cares what the other guy has. Again we are not talking about a spot where a person is down, we are talking about a guy that was pushed back and the issue is if there is a player in the grasp rather than a knee being down. Not sure how cross field mechanics is going to necessarily get that right if the calling official makes a judgment. And the whistle also has nothing to do with that ruling. You either have the person at one spot or another. The whistle being blown is irreverent to that spot.

Peace

To me, it means that when progress is stopped in the field of play the cross-field official gets the progress spot and then the near wing mirrors that spot.

If the cross-field official had progress stopped in the field of play, he should've had a whistle and killed the play.

New link:

YouTube - Forward Progress Sugar Bowl 2011

with new link - video.

you can clearly see he breaks the tackle 2:49. then 2nd tackle.

Yeap, sure does. I'd only seen the reverse of this angle before.

I am not disagreeing with you on the usage of cross-field mechanics; I just do not think it is appropriate for every kind of play. And to have forward progress on a play where a player is being pushed back would be really hard considering how many things I have to be sure about. This is why the wing went to the Referee for some kind of help and did not pay much attention to the opposite wing (based on what people are claiming). This was an issue of not a knee being down; this was an issue of being under control. Not sure how a wing on the other side of the field with a lot of players around can make this determination. If they are, they better see leather and now they could in this situation are beyond reality in my opinion.

Peace

What's your point - the safety was the correct call?

How far back does a runner have to be pushed while being controlled by the defender before the whistle is blown? The point that the runner broke free 2-yards deep in the end zone is irrelevant. His forward progress was stopped at the 2-yard line.

Horrible, horrible call - and the LJ knew it. He had the play stopped at the 2-yard line and started to come in with his hand raised, taking no fewer than 8 steps toward the middle of the field before dropping his hand and acquiescing to the H and R.

Nice reverse angle, but I still would've ruled progress before he "broke" the tackle. He's wrapped and driven back 4 yds. That's enough for me.
How far do you let him get driven back before you stop the play? I'm not being sarcastic here. I just want to know how many yards you allow before you say "enough".
And on a side note, this is not a play where cross field mechanics would be necessary. There is no reason the H should need that help on this play.

I don't officiate, and in the instant case I'm not sure whether I'd've killed the ball or not, but if I did have to make such rulings, the distance a ballcarrier was driven backward, or for that matter the total distance a ballcarrier was ridden while moving backward under an opponent's force, would not be a factor in my deciding whether the player was "so held as to stop his forward progress". Time would probably figure into it, but not distance.

Not just time, but if you feel he was completely in the grasp of the tackler. That is always going to be a judgment call and why you will not have everyone agrees on this play. And if the player is fighting to get away I am going to be more careful to judge a completed tackle especially when it is only one guy making the tackle. If there were a couple of more people than I would have no problem saying his progress was stopped. But one guy and a physical back I am going to let that go a little longer. No one size fits all, but I do not assume anything with these players.

Peace

It was an absolutely atrocious call. It makes no difference whether or not he broke the tackle. The ball carrier isn't penalized for the defensive player being a poor tackler. The ball carrier was forced backwards by the defensive player and not under his own power. He can break the tackle in the end zone and run around for 15 seconds back there, but no matter if he is tackled there, he still gets the 2 yard line.

This idea is at the very root of scoring a touchdown when the ball breaks the plane of the goal line. If the ball crosses the line, that is forward progress and the TD is scored. A defensive player can't hit the runner one yard INTO the end zone, drive him out, let him go and have someone else tackle him and avoid the touchdown. Same goes here. Once he got out of the end zone and didn't go back in on his own, the possibility of a safety should have been gone.

If he is ruled down at the 2 yard line then the ball is dead immediately. There is no running around for 15 seconds or getting tackled. If he does that he would be open for delay of game foul.

One other thing. This idea that the ball carrier should have just gone to the ground is absurd. It isn't his job to know where forward progress is...that is the official's job. The runner got to the 2, so maybe he should have been aware of that, but what if he'd only gotten to the 6-inch line? Surely he should not be expected to drop like he'd been shot on first contact at the 6-inch line! He would have no idea if he'd gotten all the way out or not, so he is going to fight to get out once driven back. As an official, it's my job to know he'd gotten out and that is the spot as his forward progress.

Again, think of it as at the other end of the field. No one would suggest that a running back just drop to the ground when driven back from six inches into the end zone. You'd expect him to keep fighting for the goal line. However, even if driven back, escapes, and tackled at the 5 yard line, it is still a touchdown as soon as the ball's forward progress breaks the plane.

That's not true. The play doesn't immediately end when forward progress is stopped. The play is over when the official blows the whistle or the runner is down. If a runner gets to the 35 and is hit, driven backwards to the 32, but still fighting to escape (as every runner should), the official should wait until he feels escape isn't going to happen, and blow the whistle. Forward progress is still the 35.

By rule, it most certainly does.

I guess those coaches who teach to play to the whistle are right after all. :cool:

LOL I also said when the runner is down. Our association preaches slow whistles, with good reason. Make sure the ball isn't loose, no inadvertant whistles and things like that. Well, had a case where the runner was down on two knees. After making sure he has the ball still, as I'm bringing the whistle up to kill the play, the ball carrier gets blasted. Of course, I got to hear a bunch of complaints that the whistle hadn't blown yet. Of course I was very patient when I explained that the runner is down when he is down, not when the whistle is blown.

However, when that whistle blows with him in the grasp, then the play is over on the whistle.

IMHO One thing I haven't heard anyone mention is why does the Umpire go to the bench to explain the call!? I don't see that he is in any position to provide any insight on the "judgement" used. Guess when in doubt, send your largest crew member over to subliminally intiminate the coach.:) It's also intersting the official who ran in 12 steps to mark the ball on the 2 blew off Coach Tressel inquiry as to what went on. You would think he would know waht happened.

On a safety he is on the sideline and probably like most times a coach is asking him what happen and he is telling them what happened. Coaches have no idea most of the time who is the covering official, they ask anyone that is in a striped shirt. The Umpire I am sure knew of the conversation and was relaying what he knew. And if I am not mistaken the OSU side was the chain side where the Umpire would be located by mechanic on the ensuing kickoff.

Peace

I am vey aware of the kick-off mechanics. I still think it is funny he happened to be the largest guy on the crew and twice the size of Tressel. I would think that in a situation as critical as this, the white hat could have found it iin his heart to visit with the coach; since it was he who confered with the covering official and not the umpire. Even more strange was the lack of communication from the linesman. But every crew has its way of working things out. And the bottom line is that it WAS a judgement call.

My point was I think he was the guy that happened to be talking to Tressel when the camera showed the sideline. I do not think it was any more than that as he seemed to be over there. I know it is not uncommon to be asked questions even when you are not the person that had anything to do with the play at hand. Probably the reason no one mentioned it is because it was not as big of a deal as you are making it (size and all).

Peace

Uh not sure I was making it a "big....deal". Sorry I violated any of the discussion boards guidelines.

You do not have to be oversensitive about the issue, you did not violate any guideline. But you did seem to make it seem like it was very unusual for an Umpire on an ensuing free kick is not every going to talk to a coach. Remember you said they sent him over there but he would have been over there anyway.

Peace

One of the cool things about these sites is that we can argue our opinions. Rarely do we get an "answer" to our arguments. In this case we do. Rogers Redding, national director of officiating of college football included this play in one of the CFO videos and stated that "progress was stopped and this play should have been shut down". Put that in your pipe and smoke it.:o

Which one of the videos was it in?