The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 15, 2012, 12:20am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 45
numbering exceptions

At what age level do you quit letting the coaches get away with telling you when there is a player who is going to be eligible for a pass even thou he's numbered illegally.

I.e. Coach tells you 56 is eligible and you then tell the defense instead of making him change a Jersey?, junior high, jv, peewee? what's you're opinion
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 15, 2012, 12:38am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,898
When the league tells you. It should be a subject of preseason meetings.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 15, 2012, 01:06am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtridge View Post
At what age level do you quit letting the coaches get away with telling you when there is a player who is going to be eligible for a pass even thou he's numbered illegally.

I.e. Coach tells you 56 is eligible and you then tell the defense instead of making him change a Jersey?, junior high, jv, peewee? what's you're opinion
Funny, I had a HS varsity player wearing number 56 tell me that tonight on a fourth down play where the team lined up for a field goal.

I didn't tell anyone anything.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 15, 2012, 01:15am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtridge View Post
At what age level do you quit letting the coaches get away with telling you when there is a player who is going to be eligible for a pass even thou he's numbered illegally.

I.e. Coach tells you 56 is eligible and you then tell the defense instead of making him change a Jersey?, junior high, jv, peewee? what's you're opinion

We never allow this. Rec ball, middle school or JV, we always require the correct numbering. Teams have a jersey for every kid. Give eligible numbers to backs and receivers and 50-70 toi linemen. Tell coaches it has to be done and they'll do it.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 15, 2012, 01:35am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by BktBallRef View Post
We never allow this. Rec ball, middle school or JV, we always require the correct numbering. Teams have a jersey for every kid. Give eligible numbers to backs and receivers and 50-70 toi linemen. Tell coaches it has to be done and they'll do it.
Same here. Never have this problem. Except once where my crew was working a first round state game and the visiting team sent 93 out to play left guard with only 4 50-79s in the game. Flag. Another play, another flag.

Finally I had the linesman tell the coach he'd better call a timeout so I could explain to him why this was happening. It was a surreal experience, that's for sure.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 15, 2012, 07:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 69
By association agreement with the local schools we do not enforce the numbering rule except at the varsity level. The main reason for this is that sub-varsity jerseys are normally old varsity jerseys. If a team has a player that is too big/small for the available jersey of the correct number we just allow them to wear what ever they can get their hands one rather then make them alter or purchase a new one.

We did get a team (varsity) that tried to use #93 as at left tackle, after getting called for a few penalties he disappeared (later to reappear as #79). It was mentioned during an early season meeting to watch for the team doing it again. The coach apparently gave the excuse that it was the only jersey that fit, but they were able to find a a jersey to put him in.

I was the umpire for the same team the next 2 weeks. The coach was warned during the pre-game meeting with the head coach. And again #93 again lines up at LG. The first time he was flagged and it was again fixed, and then the next week we mentioned it to the coach again in the pregame meeting and as soon as the meeting is over we see #93 going off to change into the #79 and they finally got it right without being penalized.

Jasper
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 15, 2012, 09:41am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by stratref View Post
By association agreement with the local schools we do not enforce the numbering rule except at the varsity level. The main reason for this is that sub-varsity jerseys are normally old varsity jerseys. If a team has a player that is too big/small for the available jersey of the correct number we just allow them to wear what ever they can get their hands one rather then make them alter or purchase a new one.

Sorry but that's just an excuse by the schools not to put kids in the proper uniform number. The schools here are now better off than anywhere else, yet they still find a way to get kids in the proper number. It's an issue of having it as a priority.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 15, 2012, 12:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,193
I will not allow a 50-79 to ever be eligible. However, the other night, we allowed a 36 to be an interior lineman and count towards the 5 required numbers (NCAA) in a JV game. They only had about 16 players and we just dealt with it by letting the other coach know and telling 36 not to go out for a pass.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 15, 2012, 02:38pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
Same here. Never have this problem. Except once where my crew was working a first round state game and the visiting team sent 93 out to play left guard with only 4 50-79s in the game. Flag. Another play, another flag.

Finally I had the linesman tell the coach he'd better call a timeout so I could explain to him why this was happening. It was a surreal experience, that's for sure.

IMHO it never should have gotten to the second flag without the coach being informed by the wing as to why the penalty was assessed. Granted, by the time a team reaches the state playoffs they should know better but even still we do everything possible to prevent issues before they occur.
__________________
Yo Lama....How about a little somethin' for the effort...
--Carl Spackler
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 15, 2012, 10:24pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN BB Ref View Post
IMHO it never should have gotten to the second flag without the coach being informed by the wing as to why the penalty was assessed. Granted, by the time a team reaches the state playoffs they should know better but even still we do everything possible to prevent issues before they occur.
You're going to take time after the first play? In a playoff game? BTW, the wing told the head coach what the foul was, it was his choice not to fix the problem.

(Edited to add: Looks like that's exactly what was said. We agree. The head coach was fairly thick, combined with the fact that I believe the other crews he had in his previous 9 games looked the other way at the requirement. I really had no choice but to throw a flag and when he didn't correct it after being told about it on the second play, I decided to shut it down and talk with the coach myself.)
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:49am
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,263
refresh our memory!

Wasn't there a high school coach a few years back touting a new offense? In his system, the QB was 7 yards back, and by rule this is a punt formation. I believe from a punt formation the eligible numbers rules isn't enforced in the same way. He would send in players on a constant basis with with more than 5 players that weren't numbered 50 thru 70.

The players would shift from the line to a yard back (or more I guess), or shift from a back position to be on the LOS. As long as they had 4 in the backfield. Does anybody recall the exact specifics of this, or what was done about it in the form of a rule change.

I don't recall what actually the coach was doing, but this is as close as I can remember. Perhaps some of you guys know what I'm talking about. Just something I had on my mind reading the thread. I have noticed some teams really spreading the formation on a punting down now.
__________________
I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 16, 2012, 06:02am
Chain of Fools
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,648
Steven,

You have recited what we call in the business "The Offense That Shall Be Named" but what he called The A11 offense in which all offensive players were allegedly eligible based on formation and numbering attempting to skirt the scrimmage kick formation exception.

The NFHS legislated it out..
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 16, 2012, 09:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 785
Are you guys talking about coaches wanting #XX to be eligible the entire game, or just for one play at a time?

The referee declared Bengals #74 eligible about half a dozen times today.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Sun Sep 16, 2012, 10:01pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Altor View Post
Are you guys talking about coaches wanting #XX to be eligible the entire game, or just for one play at a time?

The referee declared Bengals #74 eligible about half a dozen times today.
That's fine in the NFL. It's not fine at levels below that.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Mon Sep 17, 2012, 01:34am
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by HLin NC View Post
Steven,

You have recited what we call in the business "The Offense That Shall Be Named" but what he called The A11 offense in which all offensive players were allegedly eligible based on formation and numbering attempting to skirt the scrimmage kick formation exception.

The NFHS legislated it out..
Thanks
__________________
I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Numbering Exceptions Patton Football 7 Sun Oct 24, 2010 03:17pm
Illegal Numbering Tom Hinrichs Football 3 Mon Nov 10, 2008 02:29pm
numbering FATUMP Football 8 Tue Nov 14, 2006 01:25pm
numbering ref13 Football 9 Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:44pm
Louisiana Exceptions wadep1965 Basketball 2 Sun Jan 06, 2002 02:16am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:17am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1