Proper spot and down?
 

Offense has the ball, 3rd and goal on the 4 yard line. Shotgun snap goes over QB's head. Halfback fall on the ball at the 14 yard line. Head Linesman blows the play dead, assuming HB has recovered the ball. The ball squirts loose and the defense recovers. After the officials meet, they confirm the whistle had blown the play dead at the 14. A coach from the defensive team runs out on the field, berates the officials, and receives an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. The ball is placed at approximately the 3 yard line and third down is repeated.

Is that the correct placement of the ball and should it still be third down?

You have an Inadvertent Whistle, which means the offended team (the team with the ball) has the option of taking the place where the ball was ruled dead or they can replay the down. Anytime you have a penalty, the penalty must be administered if accepted. It sounds like the team with the ball choose the option to replay the down and since the USC penalty was administered as well; the ball would be placed after the penalty half the distance to the goal and repeat the down. It sounds like they got it right considering they had an IW.

Peace

Agreed: the IW explains why the down was repeated; 2 USC fouls explain the spot.

Well it depends on if there was an IW or not. It sounds like you guys decided the player was down? If you decided the player was down and there was no IW then you would have fourth down from the 7 (half distance to GL). If there was an IW then you would replay the down and half the distance for the enforcment of the UC would be the two.

Read the OP again: the poster knows what happened (down repeated, strange spot), he just doesn't know why.

Well his question was ,"Is that the correct placement of the ball and should it still be third down?"

You stated yes that two USC fouls explains the spot? Explain your answer to me.

Ball should have been placed at the two repeat third down.

The choices on this play are:

(1) Player ruled down at 14. Count the down, penalize B half the distance. 4th and goal on the B-7.

(2) Inadvertent whistle. Down must be replayed, penalize B half the distance from the previous spot. 3rd and goal from the B-2.

thank you for the replies. I am actually a coach (for the offensive team) looking for clarification. We were not given any options. The referee said we would replay the down and that he would mark off the distance for the UC penalty.

The head coach of the defensive team is throwing a fit about the play. We threw an interception on the next play anyways, so I think they caught a break as well.

Well that is what your captains are for, they probably agreed to that option. So maybe you were never personally informed, but I do not see much of a conversation needed to go to you when the choice is more obvious. I doubt you would want the ball 5 or 6 yards away from the EZ and it did not have to be much of a conversation with the captain.

Peace

Ah, I see your point (and tomes's). Of course if we replay the down, it won't be from the B14, and the basic spot for USC is the succeeding spot (in this case, the B4). Yep, there's probably a goof in this enforcement: sounds as if the crew regarded the B14 as the succeeding spot, enforced 2 USC fouls, then applied the IW provisions to replay the down.

Hard for me to imagine how a player could "fall on the ball" and yet the whistle be inadvertent. Either the description is faulty, or there was some strange judgment that the player lying on the ball, even if it subsequently "squirted out", was not in possession of it. Did one of the other officials have a better angle that enabled him to see the ball was merely deflected off the side of the player rather than trapped between the player's body and the ground?

Happens all the time: official sees player jump on the ball but does not see possession (typically the player's back is to the official). Official blows whistle while the ball is still loose, and an opponent recovers. Classic IW.

This is why when coaches talk about "You must blow the whistle" why we should not blow the whistle when we "think" the player is down. The ball may not be actually in possession. It happen in our state final game a few years back and our crew member ruled a player down. Well the video showed he was not in possession of the ball, but that is what he ruled at the time so we went with that (and we do not have IR).

Peace

I ignore coaches that ask for quicker whistles. I know what happens when we try to speed up the whistles.

You're kidding, right? I'd say that MOST of the IW's I've seen were blown by an official who thought they saw the play end, when everyone else saw the ball loose.

I had one the other day just like this. Luckily it was in a freshman game, I still wanted to go hide under a rock!

We all have one. The trick... just have ONE.

I've had 2 in my career.

One was in a freshman game where I was dealing with 16 year olds working the chains. I had a ball disappear into the line and I thought I saw the football. Whoops. The varsity coach was laughing and yelling at his players working the chains to pay attention so I could work the game.

Another was in Week 1 one year when I hadn't gotten any field work in. The QB got absolutely smeared and I reached for my flag to flag roughing and I accidentally blew my whistle (what, did I think I was working basketball?). Fortunately for me, the ball was intercepted, so the RTP took precedence anyway. Lesson? Why didn't the whistle drop at the snap like it normally does?

Now I'm a white hat most of the time and it's rare I ever blow my whistle.

My one happened in my first 4A game a few years back. WR and CB on my side were getting chippy. Ball is snapped and all of a sudden they start beating the crap out of each other. Flagged it, blew the whistle, got out of the way and started writing down numbers as it got worse.

Only after things settled down did my WH mention in the way only he could... 'Hey, um ... did you notice we had a play going on over here when you whistled it?"

Beer was on me that night.

Beer is on me tomorrow night and I don't drink
 

Friday night I was admiring a tackle by the back of the helmet and looking for a facemask call when the runner went down and I blew my whistle and didn't drop my flag...at that point I see the defense running down field with the ball...I'm still kicking myself!:eek:

We often have plays with no whistle at all. So that should tell you what I think of coach's requests. ;)

Peace

I had a game last week and a coach must have said 100 times near the end of a play "blow and whistle and save a kid." That got real annoying!

Canadian Ruling
 

CANADIAN RULING:

If the play was not over by rule, then we have an IW. Team A will opt to replay the down. Also assess the 10 yards for the B coach on the field. Result is Team A 1D/G @ B-2.

If the play was over by rule, then we do not have an IW. Assess the 10 yards for the B coach on the field. Result is Team A 4D/G @ B-7.

If the down was the last down (3 downs in Canada), then we have a turnover on downs, and we get Team B 1D/10 @ B-7.

I would have stopped that, by saying, "Then they need to find another sport to play. Football is not for them." ;)

Peace

Of course they are. But then there'd have to be something wrong with the description we were given of someone's having fallen on the ball, and then its having squirted out. Maybe what he meant was that, due to parallax, one official thought he saw the player fall on the ball, but actually fall between him and the ball.

You've never seen a player fall ON a football and it squirts out the other side?

The more you talk, the more I suspect you've never been on the field or possibly even watched a game on TV. Seems to me that when a player dives on a football - MOST of the time, it squirts somewhere. Especially if that ball was still moving. This has nothing to do with parallax - it has to do with a player landing on a ball and one official assuming he recovered it, when in fact he did not. REALLY a rather common occurrence. Good officials, however, will not blow that whistle unless they see ball AND possession, and not assume.

I coach. Probably the problem here is that we have in mind different standards for the control of the ball required for player possession.

If I saw a player actually fall on a ball that was on the ground, unless the player wound up with some strange part of the body like his back or his legs on top of it, I'd consider that moment of trapping of the ball between body and ground possession. I don't think it does any good for the game to encourage opposing players to pile on top in the hope that the add'l pressure will cause the ball to squirt out, or to try to fish under a player's body for the ball. If you do, then it becomes completely arbitrary as to when you kill the ball and try to determine who got control of it first. A ball sandwich -- ground, ball, frame of player -- is a bright line you can rule on, instead of the muddy line you'll probably get if you allow play to continue. Sure, you could get lucky and have it pop right into some player's hands, but the great majority of the time you'll wind up with a pileup and take a guess.

That's not consistent with the definition and interpretation of "possession".

The ball must be held or controlled.

I've seen players trap a fumble only to knock it loose from themselves with nobody else around them.

And if we called possession and the ball popped out, you would be livid that did not give the ball to your team.

If I saw a player actually fall on a ball that was on the ground, unless the player wound up with some strange part of the body like his back or his legs on top of it, I'd consider that moment of trapping of the ball between body and ground possession. I don't think it does any good for the game to encourage opposing players to pile on top in the hope that the add'l pressure will cause the ball to squirt out, or to try to fish under a player's body for the ball. [/QUOTE]

Well then they need to find another sport, because that is what happens in football. Maybe wrestling would be better as you do get thrown and have another person jump on top of you. Or better yet maybe volleyball would be better as you can avoid all personal contact with another person. That is why they have pads on to protect them.


Yeah, I can tell you do not officiating. ;)

Peace

Based on the rest of your post, you are right. We (meaning all officials vs you) have a different standard. If you coach, you should be more aware of this, as your description is WAY off. Laying on a ball is NOT possession. Trapping a ball is NOT possession. Stuck between an elbow and a knee is NOT possession.

Think of the word Possess. Think of the word Control. That should get you a lot closer than what you describe. Or, if you prefer, think of it this way... Can the player currently do something on purpose with the ball in a controlled way. Yes - probably possession. No - definitely not. Grey area? Probably not.

Hands holding the ball is a decent indicator too.

That's why we coach them not to fall on the ball, but to slide next to it while tucking it in. But if I were officiating, I'd never want to have to draw the line on how much control a player whose body is on top of and in contact with the ball has. When play continues in that situation, it hardly ever leads to a clear-cut resolution of who first controlled it. It usually winds up between bodies, often with a struggle continuing for some time.

In bounds, the ball is not dead until a player in possession of it is down. With a pile-up occurring, you will not see when that condition obtains. It will almost always occur well before you know it, because you can't see who controls the ball. So the players are wrestling for control of a ball that should be dead but isn't. You could whistle on the assumption that someone must have possession of it, but then how is your presumption any better than mine as laid out above?

Where does it say that in the rules? It just says "held or controlled"; it doesn't say how.

Sufficient but not necessary.

How about this, show us where what you claim is sufficient? I have never read what you suggests applies to the ball being in possession. There has to be and interpretation, a video play or something that suggests sitting on the ball is possession. Your argument rings hollow.

Peace

You know, that's kind of why they pay us and make us wear funny shirts.

Well ... to be honest, if you were officiating, you would have had some modicum of training. This would likely disabuse you of this sillyness.

Ditto.


I was trying to help you, not get into a thesaurus discussion. You don't want the help, that's fine by me - just don't try to put on the stripes.

We rule on many things that aren't specified in the rules, but just to humor you here's a definition or two...

Hold -- to have or maintain in the grasp.
Control -- to keep within limits

Notice that nowhere does the word momentarily enter into the definition.

Saw a Big 10 official do that on a fumble into the end zone at Wisconsin a couple years ago. The pile ensued and he stopped the clock to find the ball. What he didn't know (nor did any of the players on the pile) was the ball had come out the other side and was loose when the whistle blew. They had to treat it as an IW and Wisconsin took the ball at the spot of the fumble.

MOST of us believe in ... No ball, no whistle. Robert's assertion might be what he sees in his area ... but not mine.

I remember that play. Felt so bad for the guy.

I've never seen anything saying hands are necessary either. I don't even coach hands for a player taking a handoff; we want it pinned under their elbow and surrounding limb bits, although we have them use the hand of the opposite arm momentarily to guide it in. The muscle chain holding onto the ball at the bottom of the arm and top of the forearm is shorter than the one that leads to the hands. Try using your hands to wrestle somebody for the ball when it's tucked in there; you have a much better shot at dislodging it with your elbow, which is why I coach use of the elbow or shoulder to pry the ball loose.

Do you guys actually get videos showing the ball in contact with different parts of the body and captioned this is possession, this is not?

Then if you don't whistle because you can't see the ball, what authority do you have to get the players off the ball? Does the ball stay live until the players get tired of laying in a heap surrounding it and go home?

I suppose you're being sarcastic, but I'll answer anyway.

The play kills the play. The whistle doesn't kill the play (unless it does!). The play is dead when the play is dead - even if my whistle doesn't go off. NO, most good officials (around here) will not blow the whistle when they go in to clean up a pile.

But if you don't know the ball is dead -- because you can't see it -- what authority do you have to clean up the pile?

Well you need to demostrate some control with something else other than the ground if you want to show you are in possession. Now if that is not what you think, so be it. But every reasonable person is not making such a claim that you are and no video at any levle have ever said that simply laying on the ball was possession. Again it is clear you do not officiate because that is not going to have a competent official rule possession and then blow the whistle. I guess that is just something you will have to get over, because no one teaches this and I have never heard such a silly thing suggested until reading your post.

You better be doing more than pinning the ball on the ground to show possession and I have never seen a single video with what you suggest. I have seen passes caught or secured with other parts of the body, but that does not involve the ground and if it did in every case I can think of possession was not interpreted by simply laying on the football.

Peace

Are you familiar with rules fundamentals?

Peace

Seriously? We have all the authority we need out there.

You don't see a player in possession of the ball, so you can't rule that a runner is down. So what right do you have to interfere with play of a live ball?

:eek:

Yes, let's just let them kill each other while we try to determine if the ball is down. Please be sure to tell the NCAA and NFL officials that they are not doing it properly either.

Look at NFHS Fundamental III-1. The whistle seldom kills the ball -- it is already dead by rule.

So you're just guessing that somebody has possession of it, because you can't see it and it's somewhere in a pile of bodies. Explain why that reason for treating the ball as dead is any better than mine.

Because it is. When's the last time you dug a ball out of a pile?

Wednesday, but what's that got to do with anything?

Was this at practice?

Yes.

Robert ... you seem to be wanting to say the current way we deal with these situations is wrong, but you offer no converse way to deal with them. I've lost your point, if there was one. Can you clarify what you are really getting at here. Just seems like pointless disagreement for the sake of disagreement at this point.

I have a couple of points. One of them is that control of the ball does not require hands on it, and I gave a practical example from my coaching that shows a player pinning the ball to his body with proximal parts of the upper limb has better control of it than does another player trying to use hands to take it away.

The other is that although a ball's being momentarily sandwiched between the front of a player's frame and the ground may not even satisfy the idea of control of it, calling it in possession at that point will give you a clearer possession ruling than you will almost always get by allowing play to continue and having bodies pile up around and hide it. It may not be what the rule literally demands, but it will save you from situations where your eventual ruling will be more arbitrary and no more justified. It would be hypocritic to argue otherwise.

I get where you are coming from as a coach, but as an official that is absurd. If we rule possession like that coaches will go crazy if we rule possession and someone else has the ball. And most times no one just holds the ball by simply laying on it. So any attempt to fall on the ball the ball will squirt out or clearly not be stable. And if you truly have possession you will end up with it after the pile takes place or it will be clear well before then.

With all that being said this is clearly your issue not one of any rules committee or any interpretation.

Peace

How many times on an on-side kick, fumble, etc... have you seen someone that you thought clearly had the ball but when the "digger" clears everyone out, he doesn't? I can say that I have seen this a lot, at all levels, and that is why we don't give it to the guy who looks like he has it. I teach my players to wrap it up on the bottom of a pile and hold on for dear life. If someone takes it from them under the pile, then they didn't really have it or they are just too weak and don't deserve it.

Ah. OK. So noted. Was hoping there'd be something concrete in there. I somehow managed to not tune out after "control of the ball does not require hands on it". Mmmuuurrhhh, what? Incorrect. Moving on.

I guess you're talking more about what you wish would be true (which is ok, as long as you acknowledge that this is what you're talking about) rather than the way it's actually called.

Absolutely and that's just part of the game. That's why we bother to dig the ball out.

Happens all the time, but how do you know he didn't lose the ball after it was dead?
Then what you're saying is to keep grabbing for the ball while officials are trying to sort it out.

So you're saying continuing action after the ball is dead is just part of the game. I don't see why you think bending the rules that way is better than bending them my way.

When it doubt, it is a fumble. So, if I'm not positive that someone has it, I won't signal until I dig the pile. Yes, keep fighting for the ball if you can but don't pile on. If we have a 6-man scum, I pick them off one at a time. If I reach in and feel/see that you don't have it, I say, " you're out #25." I keep going until I know. I've never thrown a flag for two guys on bottom of the pile still going for it. But when I say you are off, then you are off. If you don't clear off, that is where the USC comes in. I'm a coach and a referee. So, I got two dogs in this fight and I want them both to win. :D

There are really no options. If it was an IW during a loose ball, the down has to be replayed. Should an IW happen while the ball is in player possession, then a team would have options.

I have no idea what you're actually advocating, all I know is that it is perfectly possible when there's a pile that the ball can change hands several times and the officials may not be able to see it. In that case, the ball goes to who had it last. That's just football, hold on to the ball! Officials aren't clairvoyant, we can't tell when little Jimmy at the bottom of 15 players has the ball because well...there are 15 players in the way.

Why are we even discussing this? :confused:

Simple: that when the front of a player's frame falls on the ball away from anybody else, you call it dead and in his possession at that point. It'll give you a clearer ruling and require less distortion of the game than what you'd get in almost all cases of requiring something more. Once in a great while the ball will squirt far out and result in uncontested possession somewhere else, but usually you'll just wind up playing another game with rules like that of oncelost77, or anything else that isn't strictly football.

Again you are missing the point. Often the ball is not still or clearly in any form of possession. The ball pops out all the time in those situations and you want us to stop the play just to satisfy some silly point of view that has no rules basis. Sorry, not going to happen because you want it to.

Peace

Even in your silly little interpretation of possession, the responsibility of determining possession falls on the official. (an unbiased view)

We'd still have judgement on the official's part and now have another definition of possession to boot.

Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. :confused:

I didn't take a shot at you, so don't take one at me. I played high school and college ball and currently ref high school and college ball. I also coach a 12yr old team. It seems by your comments that you don't understand strictly football and you want to bend the rules to support your agenda. Did you lose a game that hinged on this issue?

What about receiver downfield blocking? The whistle blows but he stays on his block another second, do I flag him for playing after the whistle? What about coaches trying to influence a call or questioning our calls? Does that warrant a flag everytime? The rule book calls for it. How is not going for the ball under a pile, not strictly football? What sport do you play? Watch Friday night, Saturday or Sunday football and you will see what I am talking about.

So, I guess you are advocating that if we see someone close to or kinda has it secured, to shut it down and give it to him. If a player is on a ball and I don't see it moving, regardless of location of opposing players, I blow it dead and give it to him. I referenced a pile up, didn't I? In my case, I don't see clear possession but there is a RB that fumbled it on the bottom. Do I say, well he was the closest to it when the pile up happened, offense's ball?

This forum, not just this thread, has some of the most stubborn, catty people I have ever seen. We can disagree without pointing fingers or making statements that we can't back up. Dead horse officially beaten, let's move on and discuss politics! It is safer. This forum strikes me as a site that caters to those that want to argue, not debate, but argue.

oncelost, can you send me a PM? Have a question for you.

Thanks

And apparently you want to keep it that way!
But the way some of you want to play it when the near inevitable occurs (a pileup) -- the ball sort of alive, sort of dead -- has no rules basis either, and doesn't draw a clear line.

No, I just see this case being discussed and the mishigos of its being an IW rather than just calling it a correct ruling of dead ball in possession.
If someone clearly got to it first, and you lost sight of it because it was sandwiched between the front of his frame and the ground, and not because of parallax, then yeah. Whatever other ruling you make -- because you can't see the ball as players struggle over it, and therefore don't know when it's dead -- will be arbitrary. You can make up a game like the one you described wherein you allow some players to continue to wrestle over it while you gradually eliminate others, but that has less cx with actual football than does my assertion of dead ball as soon as someone sandwiches it with the ground.

Actually it is not what I want; it is what it is and always has been. And if there is clear possession we rule accordingly before any pile up takes place. Clear possession is not going to stop a pile up in many situations; it just depends on where the ball was fumbled. Actually if you had officiated you probably would realize that the pile up is often a formality. Then again, just because you do not like something is not going to change the reality. I guess you will just have to be upset when the whistle is blown or when possession in your mind is ruled.

Peace

I have never, in over 30 years of officiating, seen a player sandwich a ball to the ground with the front of his frame.

Tell you what. Take your kids out every day this week and have them flop directly on the football with the front of their frame. Try it with the ball at rest, then try it with the ball bounding about. Shoot, you can even have the kids standing directly over the ball at rest while they flop down on it.

Then, get back to us on how many times the ball stayed beneath them.

Also include the tally of the number of broken ribs your guys suffered by teaching this ball recovery method.

You know, I asked you to clarify where you were coming from because I thought there might be a point in there somewhere. I was wrong. Every time you speak, you dig your hole just a little deeper. Stop now before you become Carl Crawford.

I don't teach it, but it happens. If it does squirt out, it doesn't squirt far, so it stays close to the body of that player, and a pileup results.

So your idea of possession is "it stays close to the body of the player"???

WOW :eek:

This is A-11 like thinking.

No, the idea is to prevent it from being live and close to his body. I'm describing the situation that almost inevitably occurs if you allow the ball to remain live after a player falls prone on it. The ball hardly ever moves far from that spot, so you have that player's body and a bunch of others piled up around it, and will wind up taking a guess as to who has possession, or following some other non-football procedure to decide it.

Whoever has it when we unpile 'em gets it. That's the way the game is played. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

Also,

The ball isn't dead until the person in possession of the ball has part of his body other than hand or foot contacting the ground. If we can't see the ball, we don't know if someone has possession of it and therefore we don't know if the ball is dead.

We aren't allowed to assume that the ball laying under a mass of humanity is actually possessed by someone. We have to witness the possession.

Ever hear "See the ball!"?

We are also discussing this with someone that does not officiate. He does not know any better because he has never had to make that decision on his own. And he does not realize the scrutiny personally of what must be done and why you cannot just kill the clock when someone is on the ground with the ball near them. He even does not realize that there are times before the pile we can and do rule on possession, but just like anything in life we like to confirm that decision by not having another person show up with the ball. That is one of the reasons you see on TV games where players start pointing before the pile is unraveled as the officials are likely in some cases communicating what they have. Robert things if we rule on possession that dramatically players will stop going after the ball. That does not happen or is not very realistic.

He is just another coach that thinks the whistle is a dramatic device that automatically stops everything. This is why we hear coaches say, "But you did not blow the whistle." :rolleyes:

Peace

We had a play last night on a wet field where a fumbled ball was fallen on in the backfield not once, but twice -- and both times the ball came out on the side of the player I could not see. Naturally, since I didn't see the ball, I didn't blow the whistle. I was the white hat. Since the LJ (on the other side, who would've seen the ball) didn't blow the whistle, I knew it was either loose or in a pile.

All of a sudden I'm in a sprint for the goal line. The ball ended up in a defender's hands and it's off to the races.

There's a reason why we don't hurry to blow the whistle. Only bad things can happen when we're quick to a whistle.

Therefore you're not allowed to unpile them until you see someone in possession of the ball. You can't interfere with play of a live ball, can you?

BTW, the part-of-the-body-other-than-hand-or-foot business hardly ever comes into play in pileup situations. Even if he's supported off the ground by bodies of other players, his progress is nearly always stopped.

No, I don't think that's going to happen. What will happen is that the ensuing pileup will be irrelevant, and you won't have to take a guess as to who actually gained possession and when the ball became dead.

Well I just watched the end of the Michigan State-OSU game on an onside kick and the ball was not clearly judged until the pile took place. And the first player that landed on the ball as you said, the ball popped out immediately and all you could see before the pile were arms and bodies. Not sure who any of the officials could have giving the ball to and that was in slow motion. So again what you just said makes no sense what so ever and cannot be done in live time often with everyone diving for the ball and the ball did not have possession with one person falling on it clearly. I think you should just stick to coaching or become an official and go right ahead and make those rulings and see how fast you are not working at certain levels. ;)

Peace

If all you could see were arms and bodies, how do you know the ball popped out immediately?

Because it was clearly shown on my television screen?

So we have a difference between what you could see on TV and what someone else could see. All sorts of things are brought up in this forum based on what someone could later learn on video, with slow motion, etc. I want an answer from the other guy, who couldn't see anything but arms & bodies, who I gather was at the field.

You do realize that I am talking about a TV game right? You do realize this was just one example right? You do realize if this happens on replay in slow motion often that this likely happens in other games right? BTW, I have seen the ball pop out when a player tries to fall on it initially all the time in my games. That ball does funny things sometimes, which is why your position is silly.

Peace

I haven't had an IW since I started dropping the whistle from my mouth at the snap (about 5 years ago). Now, as a white hat, I don't even start with it in my mouth. It's a hard habit to break and we still have a few guys in our association who resist dropping it at the snap. I was mentoring a rookie on Saturday and I got him to start dropping it. Yea! :)