Coach going across the field

[legend]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Nothing to get over, sir. And no offense intended. You quoted a rule that does not apply, then when questioned on it, implied you would use that inapplicable rule in the situation at hand. Sounds like rule inventing to me, but I'm open to hear your explanation (hopefully an actual explanation rather than a flippant response). I STILL say it's not a foul. Not as described in the OP.

You would have to call something here. If he is able to get past all of the officials and make it to the other sideline, you absolutely have to flag him. You have to put him on notice that his blatent disregard for our authority won't be accepted. This guy is proably the type of guy who always thinks the rules don't apply to him, and by putting this in the memory bank you have done a disservice to every official in the chapter for which you work. Also a flag for this action may potentially keep him in check for future situations, If not then he should become accoustomed to being flagged for unsporting actions.

[InsideTheStripe]

Originally Posted by legend

You would have to call something here. If he is able to get past all of the officials and make it to the other sideline, you absolutely have to flag him. You have to put him on notice that his blatent disregard for our authority won't be accepted. This guy is proably the type of guy who always thinks the rules don't apply to him, and by putting this in the memory bank you have done a disservice to every official in the chapter for which you work. Also a flag for this action may potentially keep him in check for future situations, If not then he should become accoustomed to being flagged for unsporting actions.

Our job is not to put coaches "on notice", nor is it to "keep them in check". You sound like an baseball umpire.

Other than offending your sensibilities and thoughts on decorum, what RULE VIOLATION did the coach in the original post commit?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by InsideTheStripe

Our job is not to put coaches "on notice", nor is it to "keep them in check". You sound like an baseball umpire.

Other than offending your sensibilities and thoughts on decorum, what RULE VIOLATION did the coach in the original post commit?

If the coach went across the field to confront another coach, they did a few rules violations IMO. Rule 9-8-1 says that the examples that are given are not limited to those actions listed in the rule. Now that might not be what some are looking for, but not sure I would just let it go if a coach did this or any sport for that matter. And yes on some level we are there to keep coaches and players from crossing lines. That is not a baseball thing, that is a sports officials thing. We do the same thing in basketball too and put a stop to actions of coaches and players or they will suffer the consequences.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by InsideTheStripe

Our job is not to put coaches "on notice", nor is it to "keep them in check". You sound like an baseball umpire.

Other than offending your sensibilities and thoughts on decorum, what RULE VIOLATION did the coach in the original post commit?

First off, an authorized conference during a timeout can't be held in that location (in front of an opponent's bench) so if you wish to find a rule, there's one. That's enforced as UNS, BTW.

Secondly, the officials have wide latitude for calling UNS in just about any situation where it's warranted. Doesn't sound like the visit was to discuss where the coaches were going for afternoon tea.

Thirdly, the swipe against baseball umpires is unnecessary. I'm a baseball umpire and a football official. My role is no different on either field.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Rich

First off, an authorized conference during a timeout can't be held in that location (in front of an opponent's bench) so if you wish to find a rule, there's one. That's enforced as UNS, BTW.

Secondly, the officials have wide latitude for calling UNS in just about any situation where it's warranted. Doesn't sound like the visit was to discuss where the coaches were going for afternoon tea.

Thirdly, the swipe against baseball umpires is unnecessary. I'm a baseball umpire and a football official. My role is no different on either field.

Well said.

[WestCoaster]

Originally Posted by Rich

First off, an authorized conference during a timeout can't be held in that location (in front of an opponent's bench) so if you wish to find a rule, there's one. That's enforced as UNS, BTW.

Secondly, the officials have wide latitude for calling UNS in just about any situation where it's warranted. Doesn't sound like the visit was to discuss where the coaches were going for afternoon tea.

Thirdly, the swipe against baseball umpires is unnecessary. I'm a baseball umpire and a football official. My role is no different on either field.

This is correct. The rules governing this situation are in 2-6-2. This coach is allowed on the field during a timeout. We see unauthorized conferences all the time, either a sideline conference that wanders outside the numbers or a between the nine conference where more than one coach comes out. We correct these situations with a warning, and if they comply and correct the error immediately, no flag is thrown. This situation is the same. He should be warned that he may not be past the hash mark on the opponents side of the field, and if he doesn't comply, he should be flagged for USC. The fact that no one stopped or warned him makes it a stretch for me to flag him in this situation.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by WestCoaster

He should be warned that he may not be past the hash mark on the opponents side of the field, and if he doesn't comply, he should be flagged for USC.

What if he goes around the field?

[jchamp]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

What if he goes around the field?

2-32-10 defines a coach to be in the category of "nonplayers".

9-8-3 states that a nonplayer shall not be outside his team box (except for three in the restricted area).

The team box does not extend "around" the field. Therefore, he has gone outside his team box. If someone isn't uncomfortable banging him for that, you've also got 9-9-5, with the "travesty of the game" clause.

[WestCoaster]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

What if he goes around the field?

Originally Posted by jchamp

2-32-10 defines a coach to be in the category of "nonplayers".

9-8-3 states that a nonplayer shall not be outside his team box (except for three in the restricted area).

The team box does not extend "around" the field. Therefore, he has gone outside his team box. If someone isn't uncomfortable banging him for that, you've also got 9-9-5, with the "travesty of the game" clause.

^What he said^

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by jchamp

2-32-10 defines a coach to be in the category of "nonplayers".

9-8-3 states that a nonplayer shall not be outside his team box (except for three in the restricted area).

The team box does not extend "around" the field. Therefore, he has gone outside his team box. If someone isn't uncomfortable banging him for that, you've also got 9-9-5, with the "travesty of the game" clause.

"Travesty of the game" would be an outright ridiculous call. You're taking the football game as subsuming the whole world, instead of being just one part of a person's life. Obviously nonplayers can leave their team box to use the bathroom, go talk to a friend, etc. If two coaches want to have a meeting, that's a level of conduct outside of and superseding the game, not part of the game and its administration. It does not interfere with the game, and the game should not interfere with it.

[parepat]

Originally Posted by WestCoaster

This is correct. The rules governing this situation are in 2-6-2. This coach is allowed on the field during a timeout. We see unauthorized conferences all the time, either a sideline conference that wanders outside the numbers or a between the nine conference where more than one coach comes out. We correct these situations with a warning, and if they comply and correct the error immediately, no flag is thrown. This situation is the same. He should be warned that he may not be past the hash mark on the opponents side of the field, and if he doesn't comply, he should be flagged for USC. The fact that no one stopped or warned him makes it a stretch for me to flag him in this situation.

I don't think that this is the point. The rule says that the coach is allowed between the hashes to "address his team" this is an exception to the prohibition of him being on the field. If it is a TO, and he is not addressing his team, he is outside the exception.

I'm sure some of you have had the situation where the coach calls a time out (not a ref/coach conference) and makes a beeline to the referee to complain. In that circumstance I tell him he can have a conference w me or his team, not both. He usually looks at me with a bewildered look, swears under his breath and storms off.

[WestCoaster]

Originally Posted by parepat

I don't think that this is the point. The rule says that the coach is allowed between the hashes to "address his team" this is an exception to the prohibition of him being on the field. If it is a TO, and he is not addressing his team, he is outside the exception.

I'm sure some of you have had the situation where the coach calls a time out (not a ref/coach conference) and makes a beeline to the referee to complain. In that circumstance I tell him he can have a conference w me or his team, not both. He usually looks at me with a bewildered look, swears under his breath and storms off.

I'm not sure what point you think I was trying to make, but I think we probably agree more than you would guess. I'm merely saying that during timeouts, coaches and conferences frequently go outside the exception, and we correct it without flags. In this instance, the crew could have corrected this before the coach ever got close to the other sideline. Since the coach was not stopped or warned, they missed an opportunity to correct this situation without even considering a flag. Any flag for USC after the fact is partly on the crew, IMO.

[parepat]

Originally Posted by WestCoaster

I'm not sure what point you think I was trying to make, but I think we probably agree more than you would guess. I'm merely saying that during timeouts, coaches and conferences frequently go outside the exception, and we correct it without flags. In this instance, the crew could have corrected this before the coach ever got close to the other sideline. Since the coach was not stopped or warned, they missed an opportunity to correct this situation without even considering a flag. Any flag for USC after the fact is partly on the crew, IMO.

You are right, we are mostly in agreement. My only point of disagreement was that the coach is not addressing his team. Thus, it wouldn t matter if he was screaming at the other coach from the middle of the field. If he's not addressing his team, he has no reason to be out there.

[Reffing Rev.]

We had a game situation where a coach who started the game with 13 and after 3 injuries and being down by 30 wanted to speak to the opposing coach about shortening the game, which is possible by mutual consent of the opposing coaches and the Referee. He called a timeout and calmly walked out to the WH and informed him what he wanted to do and the two of them calmly walked over to the opposing sideline and then we all went home.

[jchamp]

Originally Posted by Reffing Rev.

We had a game situation where a coach who started the game with 13 and after 3 injuries and being down by 30 wanted to speak to the opposing coach about shortening the game, which is possible by mutual consent of the opposing coaches and the Referee. He called a timeout and calmly walked out to the WH and informed him what he wanted to do and the two of them calmly walked over to the opposing sideline and then we all went home.

Then he did things properly. He went to the WH to explain an unusual situation and the WH calmly and professionally (from the way you described it) escorted him to the other sideline so they could have a discussion like adults. That isn't the only way to do things in an unusual situation, but it does seem acceptable and certainly within the spirit of the rules.