Tripping

[zm1283]

I don't see tripping called very often, probably because it doesn't happen all that much, but we had it called against us recently and I am confused after watching the film.

The opposing team ran a running play and one of our linebackers got knocked on his butt by one of their linemen. As he hit the ground, his legs kind of flew up in the air, and one of their other linemen jumped over him as he was chasing the play. Our linebacker was flagged for tripping. On the film, it was clearly not intentional and the lineman just jumped over him because he was laying on the ground. (There was little or no contact) I'm assuming the officials thought it was intentional, hence the reason for the flag.

Does the person actually have to be tripped, or can it be called because the officials believe the offender was attempting to trip someone? I'm assuming the latter since the trip didn't actually happen.

[mbyron]

Tripping is defined as the "use of the lower leg or foot to obstruct an opponent" (2-45). It is an intentional act: falling over someone on the ground is not being tripped.

In the case you describe, it does sound as if the official judged that your player intentionally tripped an opponent (tackling the runner by tripping is legal).

[ajmc]

"Beauty" is not the only thing judged by, "the eye of the beholder", who in this instance would be, exclusively, the covering official. As for the contact, depending on the circumstance, " a little contact" can produce the same status as being a, "little pregnant".

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by ajmc

"Beauty" is not the only thing judged by, "the eye of the beholder", who in this instance would be, exclusively, the covering official. As for the contact, depending on the circumstance, " a little contact" can produce the same status as being a, "little pregnant".

From mbyron's definition, it doesn't make any difference if there was a little contact or a lot of contact if the act wasn't intentional, which in this case it was clearly not after watching it on film.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by zm1283

I don't see tripping called very often, probably because it doesn't happen all that much, but we had it called against us recently and I am confused after watching the film.

The opposing team ran a running play and one of our linebackers got knocked on his butt by one of their linemen. As he hit the ground, his legs kind of flew up in the air, and one of their other linemen jumped over him as he was chasing the play. Our linebacker was flagged for tripping. On the film, it was clearly not intentional and the lineman just jumped over him because he was laying on the ground. (There was little or no contact) I'm assuming the officials thought it was intentional, hence the reason for the flag.

Does the person actually have to be tripped, or can it be called because the officials believe the offender was attempting to trip someone? I'm assuming the latter since the trip didn't actually happen.

CANADIAN RULING:

Must have intent. It doesn't happen much up here. It's cheesy to trip people and we're pretty nice people.

[Robert Goodman]

Interesting to compare the opinions in this thread to those we had a while back regarding blocking below the waist in cases where the action seemed accidental or a byproduct of other intended action.

What about where the contact could be said to be unintended but foreseen? Ever hear of the shoeshine or superman block? An OL dives prone parallel to the lines of scrimmage, and against a tightly packed defense can often take out 2 defenders using his body from shoulders to hips. However, in the ensuing backroll he can also easily leg whip or at least trip an opponent close to the position he left to do the move; is that tripping if it looks like a byproduct of his intended move?