IG or Not?
 

At this point, who cares?

Peace

I see.

Obviously the call was wrong. He can only spike the ball after a hand to hand snap. What kind of discussion are you expecting about something that was obviously wrong?

The coach is wrong, it isn't a 15 yard penalty.

And in NCAA this is legal.

Or the description of the play was wrong... all we have is the coachs' comments on the play. Got video?

Kind of stupid of the offended coach to get an, um .... 13 yard (!!!!???) unsportsmanlike penalty at that moment to make this an easier field goal, don't you think?

The offensive coach makes it sound like it wasn't a spike but more of a shovel pass to a RB that is not completed. That is a huge judgement call that you would have to see in person or on film to have any kind of opinion.

Why am I not surprised that a coach, "with NFHS rule book firmly in hand", doesn't know that the penalty for IG is five yards (+ LOD), not fifteen?

And on top of that, they got a 15-yard USC penalty that allowed a shorter FG attempt?

Good grief.

Recheck that math ... apparently this USC was the very special 13 yard variety.

Talk about the "blind leading the blind", it's amazing these two coaches made it as far as they have, knowing what they know, or don't know.

Broncos coach Kohl is partially correct in that is is a violation of NFHS 7-5-2-e, in that "a pass intentionally thrown incomplete to save yardage or to conserve time." is an Illegal forward pass, which calls for a 5 yard penalty (not 15 yds) and loss of down (the down is not repeated) and is enforced from the spot of the pass.

The stated exception to this rule states: It is legal to conserve time by intentionally throwing the ball forwardto the ground after receiving a direct hand-to-hand snap.

The key word in this situation is "intentionally" which is always a judgment call make by the covering official, usually the Referee.

Liberty Coach Frigon introduces his own terminology into the equation by creating the term "Pistol Formation" which may exist in his surroundings but does not appear in any rule book. A shovel pass to another back (a fullback) as long as directed forward does constitute a legal forward pass, and unless deliberately thrown to be incomplete would not constitute an illegal forward pass, however, other than the actions of the passer, and possibly the receiver, the Referee has absolutely no way of knowing if the pass is thrown deliberately and intentionally to save either a loss of yardage or to save time, unless of course the coach of the passing team acknowledges that fact, after the game is over.

The Referee apparently judged the action he witnessed, an incomplete forward pass thrown to an eligible receiver behind the line, as not being a deliberate action. The fact that the Broncos received a 15 yard penalty for Unsportsmanlike Conduct, allowing the opponent the opportunity to successfully complete a winning field goal is entirely the responsibility of Coach Kohl for failing to maintain the level of composure required of him, as the adult supervisor of a team of student athletes.

I would suspect the Liberty School Administration and the supervisors of whatever governing body convened the contest, would take serious punitive action against Coach Frigon for acknowledging publicly that he deliberately instructed and encouraged his players to CHEAT by deliberately violating the NFHS rule against throwing an Illegal Forward Pass.
.

The Chcago Bears QB did a hesitation before his grounding the ball after a hand-to-hand snap a week or so ago which resulted in a 10-second run-off and proved to be the final play of the game. Oops!

Not all Coaches or AD's see circumventing the rules as cheating. You often hear coaches say, it isn't illegal if they don't call it!


If you aint Cheating, You aint Trying, is an old Coaching Adage!

I disagree with the philosphy but I can see the merit in it! :(

It sounds like this comes down to the WH not being able to get into the QB's head and determine whether a pass thrown underhanded (shovel pass) towards an eligible receiver was intentionally thrown to save time.
There's a couple of possible tests that can be used to assess intent. If the ball is thrown directly at a receiver's back, thrown to the front of his body and he makes no attempt to stop it from hitting the ground, or thrown to his feet where he couldn't get to it, then there is a good case for intentional grounding.
I'm not buying the "we work in pistol formation" argument. There is nothing that stops a team from practicing the hand-to-hand snap, in order to know how to execute the mechanic that is explicitly described in the rules as the exception to an act that would normally be a foul. That would be like me telling my boss I can't drive the manual transmission work truck because my personal car is an automatic.
The article referenced is baised, and not all that well written. It's a pronoun soup that hurts to try to decipher, and the writer has a very obvious perception that the call on the field was wrong.

A lot of thieves also think if they ain't stealing it ain't trying, and if they don't get caught it's no a crime. We each get to set our own standards.

Most of the coaches who feel cheating is OK if you get away with it, aren't stupid enough to admit their character deficiency publicly

Yeah, same thing.



Of course all the guys in the joint got framed too!


No but I have heard many of them speak at clinics and they say, hey we teach this technique, it is illegal but it is never called so what is the downside?

The the shovel pass hits the FB on the back when he did not turn around for it...and the R flags it for IG...the offensive coach is going to argue that the QB and the FB had different plays in mind, the FB was supposed to turn around and catch it, etc, etc... If that happened it probably was an attempt to ground the ball intentionally, but it's going to almost impossible to justify the call.

As for the article, it sets it all up like QB took a shotgun snap and then spiked it....clearly grounding, end of story. Reading on, the article describes that the QB took a snap in the 'pistol' formation and then threw an incomplete shovel pass. You would bascially have to judge intent from a pass that otherwise did not look like in intentional throw to the ground.

In regards the shortened USC penalty yardage the ball was on the 29 yard line. Thus USC penalty would only be half the distance.

Thus only being a 14 1/2 yard penalty.

Look, I'm not a mind-reader. If a passer takes a shotgun snap and throws a shovel pass forward in the vicinity of an eligible receiver and it hits the ground, it's incomplete. It sure doesn't sound like IG from the description of the play -- just sounds like a coach who knows this isn't going to get called by reasonable officials.

I had a similar play on the last play of the half of a second round playoff game. The ball was shoveled forward and landed at the feet of a back. First, the coach wanted me to call this a fumble. Then he wanted grounding. All I could think was -- it's halftime no matter what I call, but in my mind there was no doubt that the pass was an intentional act.

Without video, this thread is pointless.

Even with video, which can be very helpful with many situations, judging whether a pass is intentionally thrown to be incomplete, is best judged by observing the demeanor of the passer. Seeing the passer's face and eyes, and judging the level of stress and concern he's dealing with when the pass is thrown, is perhaps the best indicator of what his intentions were, and they will rarely be visible on any type of video.

The basic officiating requirement of certainty, directly clashing with the level of doubt directly inherent to this particular occurrence may well be responsible for what may seem to some as a reluctance to assess this penalty.