Would you rule USC on B??

[bigjohn]

I mean, come on! Anyone ever called this?

d. Indicating objections to a game official’s decision.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

I mean, come on! Anyone ever called this?

d. Indicating objections to a game official’s decision.

Yes. It is not that common.

Peace

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

I mean, come on! Anyone ever called this?

d. Indicating objections to a game official’s decision.

The only case I can think of are excessive and pointless bickering. We have one school (a private school) that has a well funded football program. They have 5 coaches and several trainers. Before the "3 in the box" change, they always assigned one guy to ride the wing up and down the field chipping away at everything. The "Hey! He's offsides!" or "Come on ref, you gotta call holding on that one..." or "Why'd you spot the ball there?!?" When it got annoying, we flagged him. The rest of the game he was much more subdued. I never saw it in any of my games, but he's been tossed several times. It got to the point that we decided to start flagging the HC instead to fix the problem.

Well, the "3 in the box" pretty much killed that tactic. With only 3 coaches, losing one would probably be too much for them. Since then, they've been far less annoying, and no longer have the assigned rider.

[Welpe]

No I wouldn't rule USC on this here because it's not USC.

[bigjohn]

PENALTY: Unsportsmanlike conduct (Arts. 1, 2) – (S27) – (S7-27) – if dead
ball, 15 yards. Also disqualification if flagrant – (S47). In Article 1a, the player
must remove the offending item before he is allowed to participate. The
second unsportsmanlike foul results in disqualification. (See 9-8 PENALTY)


a and b deal with clapping of hands and stomping of feet, not verbage!
B1 (a) claps his hands, (b) stomps his foot,

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

PENALTY: Unsportsmanlike conduct (Arts. 1, 2) – (S27) – (S7-27) – if dead
ball, 15 yards. Also disqualification if flagrant – (S47). In Article 1a, the player
must remove the offending item before he is allowed to participate. The
second unsportsmanlike foul results in disqualification. (See 9-8 PENALTY)


a and b deal with clapping of hands and stomping of feet, not verbage!
B1 (a) claps his hands, (b) stomps his foot,

That's nice but it's not USC here.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

PENALTY: Unsportsmanlike conduct (Arts. 1, 2) – (S27) – (S7-27) – if dead
ball, 15 yards. Also disqualification if flagrant – (S47). In Article 1a, the player
must remove the offending item before he is allowed to participate. The
second unsportsmanlike foul results in disqualification. (See 9-8 PENALTY)


a and b deal with clapping of hands and stomping of feet, not verbage!
B1 (a) claps his hands, (b) stomps his foot,

I'm NCAA, and not FED... but the rule you posted requires the removal of the player's hands in Article 1a?

Maybe quote the whole rule, and not just a part that obviously does not apply...

[MD Longhorn]

Also, to add ... the issue that this penalty deals with is sound designed to draw the offense off. Are you guys playing your football games on hardwood or something? I can't even fathom a player being able to stomp his feet on a football field loud enough that ANYONE can hear it - and certainly not loud enough to mess anyone up. Yet you seem bent out of shape and angry over it. Are they wearing tapshoes or something?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

PENALTY: Unsportsmanlike conduct (Arts. 1, 2) – (S27) – (S7-27) – if dead
ball, 15 yards. Also disqualification if flagrant – (S47). In Article 1a, the player
must remove the offending item before he is allowed to participate. The
second unsportsmanlike foul results in disqualification. (See 9-8 PENALTY)


a and b deal with clapping of hands and stomping of feet, not verbage!
B1 (a) claps his hands, (b) stomps his foot,

In the case play: The official has JUDGED that the actions rise to the level of "for the purpose of disconcerting or hindering".

In your games, the official has judged that the actions DO NOT rise to that level.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

In the case play: The official has JUDGED that the actions rise to the level of "for the purpose of disconcerting or hindering".

In your games, the official has judged that the actions DO NOT rise to that level.

Yeah, well according to some people their "judgment" is not in accordance with the rules...

As for the "warn then flag" approach: I can imagine an extreme case where B's actions could ONLY be interpreted as disconcerting. But that's rarely what we see.

We usually see borderline cases: the point of warning is to let B know that their actions are borderline, and if they persist it might become apparent that their aim is to disconcert. And at that point, they would warrant the flag.

[CT1]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

I mean, come on! Anyone ever called this?

d. Indicating objections to a game official’s decision.

I'd say the vast majority of USCs called against coaches are for violation of this very rule.

[bisonlj]

I wonder if bigjohn goes on police web sites and criticizes them for not giving speeding tickets to guys who drive 56 in a 55 zone.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

I wonder if bigjohn goes on police web sites and criticizes them for not giving speeding tickets to guys who drive 56 in a 55 zone.

Well ... why wouldn't they? If the speed limit is 55, driving 56 is ILLEGAL. What do you think the word LIMIT means. Shees!

[bigjohn]

You boys never been to Hanging Rock Ohio I see!