Not NFHS!
 

In my opinion this is pure BULL$HIT!!!!!

It might be the case in that state. BTW, Massachusetts uses NCAA Rules.

Peace

NCAA (as well as Texas UIL ... I can't specifically speak for Mass HS's ruling body) has been VERY clear to both officials and coaches/teams how they want this called. It's not the official's fault if the coaches have not ensured their players know this. You may consider it BS - but the NCAA clearly wants this behavior to END and have decided the overly strong consequence is the way to end it. If you don't call this (especially in a visible game), you won't keep your job.

Direct your ire toward the rules makers if you have to... or more accurately to those who would not stop this behavior before the penalty became this potentially severe.

And who made those rules again? ;)

Peace

Really?!?!?

The NCAA wants this behavior to end? A quick spontaneous display of emotion during a huge play? A display of emotion that is not delayed, excessive, prolonged or choreographed? A display not directed at an opponent that don't demean an opponent or provoke ill will? Say what you will about BJ... but he's right on this one.

I can't find a rule that makes the action illegal under NCAA rules. At the end of the day, someone exhibited extremely poor judgment in this situation. I don't know if it was the game official, the game official's assignment chair, or the MA governing body; but it was someone.

:(

You do not have to find it in the rulebook, the NCAA put out a lot of literature and showed video to have these things stop. Now we can debate if that is the proper call or not, but we also do not know what Massachusetts said to their officials about the issue either. They could have been more specific. The NCAA did not want diving or antics before players got into the EZ. If they did not want a rule to be ambiguous or leave it up to some judgment, why create a rule? This is why coaches should not be creating rules, they do not have to enforce them. They probably know nothing about enforcing the rules as well and you get situations like this taking place.

Peace

- Joe Cacciatore, the assigner for officials in the Catholic Conference and Greater Boston League

That's all I need to know. If my assigner says its right, its right.

TOO 'in funny.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

That and 99 cents will get me a large ice tea at McDonald's.

That tea is $1.00. Assuming his opinion is worth 1 cent is a big stretch.

My response already indicated that I wasn't ready to put the blame on the calling official. It might have been his assignor. It might have been his state association. The blame belongs to someone, though. It was a horrible call. That IS the debate. Any time you'd like to respond to the topic at hand, please do so. As a state finals back judge, would you have thrown the flag? As a college official, would you have thrown the flag?

If not, stop supporting it in a roundabout way.

My state does not use NCAA Rules so this is not an issue at the HS level. Based on the information we are given this would not be something I would call without some specific guidance.

At the college level if I got specific instructions to do so, yes. If this specific situation was not said to violate the rule, then no. It appears this was part of their interpretation to outlaw this.

Remember we all work for someone and that is the premise where I am coming from. I honestly do not care either way as long as this has been the standard. And according to the article this is what the people wanted. I look at it the same way as when the Washington QB was penalized against BYU for throwing the ball in the air. The rule was clear and the interpretation was clear. The call basically affected the outcome and the officials were absolutely right while many thought it was a bad call. The problem is rules makers are not officials and come up with these rules and then it comes back in these situation. Get in the damn EZ and you will not have much to worry about. It really is that simple.

Peace

If you are going to flag this then you will be a very busy beaver as there are tons of defensive players you will have to start flagging for the small celebrations they perform following their tackles, pass break ups, interceptions and fumble recoveries. No wonder we saw this since one of the guiding documents on uns conduct from the rules editor says "If it feels wrong, flag it" . It opened the door to these type of "close calls".

That is why I put not nfhs in the title. That is why the NFHS will never make this a live ball foul (I hope) and you and I both know some are for this just because BigJohn is against it.

Whoa, now I am writing in the third person.

I can promise you that NFHS will make this a live ball foul if it becomes a major problem at the HS level & they feel it's the only way to stop it.

Do you think NCAA really wanted to have points taken off the board? Of course not!

I think it is coming to the NF level.

And if you look at NCAA games, you hardly saw this called at all because players got into the EZ. The one time I can remember it took place was in a blowout. It is coming because someone will think it is a great idea. They have already took on rules that care over to the kickoff, this is coming too.

Peace

No, it was the exact correct call. If you choose to say it's a horrible rule, feel free. Calling this a horrible call implies you're blaming the official.

Hell yes, in both cases (I officiate in Texas where this rule is the same). Why? Because I like my job and I don't tend to make ruling against my SPECIFIC instructions just because I don't like a rule.

To answer your question from a previous post, YES - this specific act is included in both the literature and the training films. This IS what they want stopped. What's more --- teams know it. If the kid didn't know it, that's on his coach. If the kid did know it, and couldn't keep himself from doing it, or chose to do it anyway - that's on him.

Not sure anyone's saying they are FOR this... just saying the NCAA is (as is Texas, and I'm assuming as is Mass). I don't like the rule either. For the same reasons you guys don't. But it IS the rule, and videos I've seen make this ruling unambiguous to this particular case. Call it or don't work.

I'm not a football official. Saw this story elsewhere. Coming here for clarification.

1. Is this penalty marked off from the spot of the foul?
2. I assume it can be called even if the play does not result in a TD?
3. Have you ever called or seen it called on a defender?
4. Does it only apply to the kid with the ball? We often see a QB throw his hands up in celebration while a receiver is heading to the EZ.

Any thoughts on better ways to write the rule to enforce its spirit?

It is enforced like any other live ball foul but in this case, yes it is marked off from the spot of the foul.

Yes, the type of play does not matter as the foul is simply unsportsmanlike conduct.

Yes, but not this year.

No it does not, it applies to all players (the live ball foul that is). In my opinion, a QB throwing his hands up is NOT unsportsmanlike conduct, just like the play in this video is not either. A QB getting in the face of a defender and taunting him would be a foul and if the ball is live, a live ball foul as well.

Unsportsmanlike conduct is a very subjective call and efforts have been made to create consistency at the collegiate level on how to call this, there are still disagreements all the time about these calls. The biggest litmus test is that if the act is not specifically prohibited, the official has to judge whether or not the act "feels right". If not, a flag should be thrown. I have a hard time understanding what was wrong with this play.

STUPID RULE calling this excessive.

Next thing there will be penalties for ANY celebration....no more chest bumps...no more high fives....no more fist bumps....from now on we score and then we walk in a straight single file line to the sideline for remedial coaching.

The reason the rule is there, is because players would do all kinds of things before getting into the EZ. They even told players a year before the game that this was coming. Now the rule is here you do not hardly see it anymore. And it appears the Mass. that uses these rules (only Texas uses them at the HS level as well) told them they want this called. The officials are following the rules. Now if someone says no fist bumps, then that is the way it goes. I do not like the rule either, but there is a reason the rule is there. Coaches have been allowing these things for years and not the gauntlet was dropped. Once again at the NCAA level the coaches are the only ones that create these rules, then they ask the officials to follow it. If you cannot call it in the high profile games, then when. I bet everyone will think twice the next time, even at the college level as this is now a national story. ;)

Peace

Yes
Yes
Absolutely - defenders score too.
It applies to everyone. However, the videos in training all refer to the scoring player - on someone else it would have to be easily recognizable as taunting.

The rule is written the way they do want it enforced. There is no lack of clarity. The issue is that most don't like the rule.

I agree that it sucks that the NCAA had to go this far, and yes, I consider it an over-reaction. However - there WAS an issue that they had to react to - and players wouldn't stop because the penalty was not severe enough to stop them (15 on the kickoff? So what - at least in the players' eyes). We see taunting (what most normal people would call taunting) WAY WAY less now that the foul has been turned into a live ball foul. So ... the effect of the change worked. Unfortunately, part of the cost of the change is what we have in the OP.

Agreed.

Yep. When a defensive player makes a sack and his teammate comes up to congratulate him, that better be flagged too. I don't see how what this kid did is any worse than that. Flag the QBs too for pumping their fists after a TD pass.

I am in the same boat. If this was unsportsmanlike and he supposedly taunted someone, then who did he taunt? He wasn't even looking at the defensive players and it was not prolonged or excessive in any way.

The problem I have with the "Well the coaches make the rules" thing is that in this case, these HS coaches don't make the rules. The NCAA committee does and then Massachusetts decides to use NCAA rules. The HS coaches in that state have nothing to do with what rules are put in place.

Can one of you defending this call show a video in an NCAA game this year where something this innocent is flagged? Do you HONESTLY believe that if LSU and Alabama are playing for the national championship and this happens that it will get flagged? You're full of poo poo if you really believe so.

This is clearly a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. NCAA rules are pretty clear on this subject, which received a lot of attention prior to and during this season. As in most cases like this, the violation is clear and had the gesture been ignored, there would have been a justifyable howl for the penalty not being applied.

As stated above the call was correct, the mistake made was made either by the coach, for not informing his players of this prohibition, or the player for ignoring his coach's warnings.

Here is one from the LSU/Florida game by the punter from LSU...

LSU punter Brad Wing flagged for taunting Florida - YouTube

At least on that one he turned toward the Florida players and held his arms out. I still think the rule is awful, but I can somewhat understand it with this play.

99 cents in NC.

No idea how much it is in Ohio.

Actually, I suggested this rule change to our state represntative 3 years ago. This was after the NCHSAA made this type of foul an ejectionable offense, which results in a 1 game suspension.

Next year, I will likely not have such strict restrictions placed in my area, and will probably have to explain to coaches who "heard all during the summer" that anything involving raising the hand above the head is USC, and that the bully who just ran through his entire defense and humiliated them needs to have his score nullfied.
All because some people back east can't follow the same rules everyone else follows at HS.
Guess I'll have to brush up on my quips, to include, "Not unless John Kerry is your Senator", or "Did you have to drive on the Masspike to get here?"

... Yep, definitely gotta come up with some good quips.:p

Please point me in the direction of video/documentation supporting this call. Interestingly enough, the MIAA seems to go out of its way to imply the call was a mistake.



MIAA statement on Cathedral-Blue Hills Super Bowl
Wednesday, December 7, 2011 | Home - BostonHerald.com | High School Football
STATEMENT REGARDING DIVISION 1V-A FOOTBALL CHAMPIONSHIP

Franklin, MA Dec. 6, 2011 - - In response to inquiries regarding an unsportsmanlike penalty called in the Division IV-A football game the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association (MIAA) issued the following statement:

The official involved reported he had determined a violation of NCAA Football Rules and Interpretations of Rule 9, Section 2 covering Unsportsmanlike Conduct Section A. He called the violation and assessed the penalty.

There is no provision in MIAA rules (or rules for any other sport at any other level) to overturn an officials’ call after a game has been concluded. Once the final whistle is sounded the game is over. (Reference – MIAA Handbook Rule #17, Page 24) The Cathedral coach chose not to challenge the call when it was made.

At the start of the season the MIAA and football officials took comprehensive measures to ensure that everyone understood this rule. In fact, the officials at this game reminded the captains and coaches that there would be zero tolerance for any unsportsmanlike actions. Likewise, this message was communicated in the pre-playoff game administrative meeting, as well as the MIAA”s Super Bowl Breakfast with coaches and captains.

Anyone may parse the language of rules and apply them as they see fit. Contest officials must familiarize themselves with the rules, both the letter and the sprit, and bring their judgment to bear in calling the game. Per the Points of Emphasis in the NCAA Rulebook: “When an official imposes a penalty or makes a decision he is simply doing his duty as he sees it. He is on the field to uphold the integrity of the game of football, and his decisions are final and conclusive and should be accepted by players and coaches.”

MIAA Philosophy reflects that high school students who participate in educational athletics learn many things from that experience including lessons that we believe will be helpful as they go forward in life. While we hope and wish they would all be from positive experiences sometimes that is not the case.

Losing a game, having an official’s call go against you, even occasionally having an officials’ mistake go against you or your team are all part of sports. Athletic officials try hard to do the best job possible but they are human. Athletes must learn to put these things behind them and move forward. During their lifetime they will experience similar situations where they feel “wronged” by a superior or authority figure and they must learn to deal with that situation.

Finally, we would hope that in people’s reaction to this situation they would consider the students and coaches at Blue Hills Regional Vocational Technical School who feel their properly won championship is being tarnished and discredited.

Imply?

It's either a mistake or it isn't. There's nothing in this release that says it was a mistake.

He is correct--there definitely is an implication.

"The Cathedral coach chose not to challenge the call when it was made."

"[H]aving an official’s call go against you, even occasionally having an officials’ mistake go against you or your team are all part of sports. Athletic officials try hard to do the best job possible but they are human."

Are you being intentionally obtuse?

haha, really? what if your assignor doesn't know the rules?

because that's the case here.

there is zero rules foundation for this call. for those who say there is, please point to the rule reference. I do college and MA highschool. (I'm on the same board as the assignor you quoted; I work for other assingors though.) there is nothing in ncaa Rule 9 that supports this flag.

those of you who've said there are memos or videos from the powers that be saying that this sort of thing should be flagged--can you please post one? I have never seen any literature suggesting that raising a fist in celebration = unsportsmanlike conduct.

I don't personally know the official who flagged this. but i've since spoken with officials who've said "Hey, the book says you can't raise your hand."

this is the problem. there are officials who simply don't know the rules.

so what to do? we could point out the mistake, all learn from it, and as a local board become better for the education.

or we could circle the wagons, get defensive, blame the player, blame the media, stubbornly cite rules that don't exist, or just chalk it up to a "judgment call."

ugh.

if you have some ncaa literature that mentions this SPECIFIC ACT, I would love to see it.

not being a smart-a$$. I just have never seen it. I've seen other literature that describes other acts. and i've seen literature that urges officials NOT to flag small acts.

please post the memo I've missed and i'll gladly admit to being wrong.

since we're talking posting literature, here's an excerpt from Rule 9 on unsportsmanlike conduct:

Specifically prohibited acts and conduct include:
1. No player, substitute, coach or other person subject to the rules shall
use abusive, threatening or obscene language or gestures, or engage in
such acts that provoke ill will or are demeaning to an opponent, to game
officials or to the image of the game, including but not limited to:
(a) Pointing the finger(s), hand(s), arm(s) or ball at an opponent, or
imitating the slashing of the throat.
(b) Taunting, baiting or ridiculing an opponent verbally.
(c) Inciting an opponent or spectators in any other way, such as
simulating the firing of a weapon or placing a hand by the ear to
request recognition.
(d) Any delayed, excessive, prolonged or choreographed act by which
a player (or players) attempts to focus attention upon himself (or
themselves).
(e) An unopposed ball carrier obviously altering stride as he approaches
the opponent’s goal line or diving into the end zone.
(f) Removal of a player’s helmet before he is in the team area
(Exceptions: Team, media or injury timeouts; equipment adjustment;
through play; between periods; and during a measurement for a first
down).
(g) Punching one’s own chest or crossing one’s arms in front of the chest
while standing over a prone player.
(h) Going into the stands to interact with spectators, or bowing at the
waist after a good play.


and here's a memo that came from the NCAA rulebook editor:

•Remember that the game is one of high emotion, played by gifted teenagers who are affirmed by playing a game at which they are exceptionally talented.
•Do not be overly technical in applying this rule.
•Do allow for brief spontaneous emotional reactions at the end of a play.
•Beyond the brief, spontaneous bursts of energy, officials should flag those acts that are clearly prolonged, self-congratulatory, and that make a mockery of the game.

A list of specifically prohibited acts is in (a) thru (h) on FR-122,123; this list is intended to be illustrative and not exhaustive. We can all agree that when these acts are clearly intended to taunt or demean, they should not be allowed—not only because they are written in the book, but because they offend our sense of how the game should be played. We now have enough experience with this rule to know what “feels” right and wrong. Note that most if not all of these actions fall outside the category of brief, spontaneous outbursts. Rather, they present themselves as taunting, self-glorification, demeaning to opponents, or showing disrespect to the opponents and the game.

When such a situation arises, officials should wait a count, take a deep breath, and assess what they feel about what they have seen.

If it feels OK, let it go.

If it feels wrong, flag it.


lastly, here's an exerpt from an NCAA memo from this past august:

Unsportsmanlike Conduct: Taunting
9. Second and five at the A-45, early in the second quarter. Ball carrier A33 breaks out into the open and has a clear path to the goal line. At the B-2 he suddenly makes a sharp left turn and trots along the B-2 as the Team B players begin to catch up to him. He then carries the ball into the end zone. A33 next runs to the stands and begins to exchange “high-fives” with the fans.
RULING: A33 is charged with two fouls for unsportsmanlike conduct, one live-ball and the other dead-ball. Both penalties are enforced and A33 is ejected from the game. First and 10 for Team A at the B-32. (9-2-1-a)

I understand the crackdown on taunting. I get it why they are wanting to address it. I just don't see how you could judge this particular play as taunting in any way. If he had turned around and pointed at the defensive player as he was running, fine. If he high-stepped, fine. I just don't see how this is anywhere close to anything like that.

This would be like a baseball umpire ejecting a head coach the first time he opens his mouth about ball/strike call in a game. Balls and strikes are off limits by rule, but do you eject the first time a coach says something? Of course not. It seems that good judgment was sorely lacking here.

Baseball has nothing to do with this call. Football made a rule to remedy a problem that was unique to their sport. We do not have penalties in baseball that add strikes or balls to an offended team for unsportsmanlike conduct like you do in other sports with either yardage or awarding an opportunity to score like in basketball. The NCAA was specific about this. If any rules body wanted to change a rule in baseball and award runs or award bases based on an unsportsmanlike act, then this would be a good comparison. But that being said umpires in baseball eject coaches and players for all kinds of things that are not stated in the rules, like drawing a line in the sand with a bat. And umpires debate all the time what they can or cannot handle from coaches and players. Mostly those debates are about personal standards, not clear rules or guidelines. This rule has many example of what was over the limit and this was one of them. It is unfortunate, but it is the case.

Peace

If I choose not to follow my assigner, I will no longer be assigned.
Kind of hard to officiate when you aren't officiating.

Maybe your state allows independently booked crews but some of us are basically working for a cartel.

Bravo, Chymechowder!

You old copy and paster LOL!

I can copy and paste too.

From the refstripes.com NCAA thread

chymechowder

Posts: 157

Re: UNS Rule affects Mass. HS Championship Game
« Reply #28 on: December 05, 2011, 01:32:01 PM »Quote Quote from: NVFOA_Ump on December 05, 2011, 01:22:15 PM
So today we apparently get the rest of the story - from an attendee at the game. As noted earlier, the hand goes up around the 24-25 yard line. But that's not all - it's followed by the altered stride high step at the 9-10 yard line. The actual flag was at the 9 yard line explaining the next snap going off from the 24 yard line. Also, during each pre-game conference, the R+U gave the coaching staffs the reminder that there would be no unsportsmanlike actions tolerated from either team, and that any such actions prior to a score are treated as a live ball fouls this year.

So after all, there was more than just a hand in the air, and the call was justified.

So since you knew it on 12/5, why continue with the "rant" here on 12/7?

uh, I'm not sure if you're serious. but in case you are:

1. that exchange you've posted from refstripes was on 12/5. that was BEFORE any of us had seen the video. LOL, did you not read the rest of that thread? shortly the posts you cite, the video was put up and everyone agreed that there was no highstep. NVFOA himself said afterwards that he had been told incorrect information about the high-stepping. for what it's worth, I had always said pre-video that if the kid did actual taunting or if he highstepped (or violated a spelled out rule), then the flag would've been justified.

2. as for "ranting" in two places. it's a separate forum and a separate conversation. are we only allowed to post about it on one forum?

That is not how baseball works. There is nothing in the rule book which says that "balls and strikes are off limits". How it actually works is they are not allowed to leave their position to argue ball/strike after being warned. So your example of ejecting someone the first time they say something doesn't work. Even if he leaves his position to argue he still must be warned to stop before he is ejected.

Sounds like the opposite to me. They mention several times that the teams were made to understand this rule and that they were reminded multiple times. In fact... this letter would be one of those items I'd point you to to support the call.

Otherwise, I welcome you to come to an NCAA clinic or a HS clinic in Texas or Mass - you'll get plenty of video documenting the support of this call.

In what way? There is no specific rule telling the umpire to do that. No video shown 15 times at the first clinic of the year telling them to do that. What rule? You insist on documentation on the OP, but then invent rules and then create analogies about them... there is no such rule.
No, you don't... because you're not told to, in any book or clinic. You DO, however, eject them if they come back out after you tell them to cool it.

If you honestly think that was a statement of support, we have nothing left to talk about...