Mercy Rule

[parepat]

[QUOTE=voiceoflg;858865]In Georgia the mercy rule is as follows:

At the end of the first half of play, if a team is trailing by 30 points or more, the coach of the trailing team may choose to play the second half with a running clock. Quarters would remain at 12 minutes.

If the coach does not exercise the option of the running clock, the third quarter will be played with regulation timing.

If the point differential reaches, or remains, 30 or more points during the third quarter, the clock will still run according to rule for the remainder of the third quarter, but the fourth quarter will have a running clock mandated.

A running clock means the clock will be stopped only: (a) after a score and until the ball is kicked off. (b) during deliberations for penalty administration. (c) during charged timeouts or official's timeouts.

This is a good rule. I like that it gives the option to the losing coach. As stated in Ohio, there is no running clock, only shortening quarters. This almost never occurs because the coaches egos won't allow it. A running clock, on the other hand, is less offensive to them because they can fluff the blame onto us. I'm okay with that. As it stands now, nothing happens and we deal with these blowouts and all that goes with them.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by parepat

This is a good rule. I like that it gives the option to the losing coach. As stated in Ohio, there is no running clock, only shortening quarters. This almost never occurs because the coaches egos won't allow it. A running clock, on the other hand, is less offensive to them because they can fluff the blame onto us. I'm okay with that. As it stands now, nothing happens and we deal with these blowouts and all that goes with them.

The local HS here in NW Ohio had a running clock for the entire second half Friday. 40 point half-time lead.

[maven]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

The local HS here in NW Ohio had a running clock for the entire second half Friday. 40 point half-time lead.

And people scoff at the Gold Book. As goofy as some of its provisions might be, I applaud the effort to improve consistency across the state.

[parepat]

Originally Posted by maven

And people scoff at the Gold Book. As goofy as some of its provisions might be, I applaud the effort to improve consistency across the state.

Maybe a noble goal. However, the heavy handed way it was implemented was, in my opinion, unprofessional.

[maven]

Originally Posted by parepat

Maybe a noble goal. However, the heavy handed way it was implemented was, in my opinion, unprofessional.

The folks in my association who complained about Maurer being "heavy handed" are the same ones who haven't peeked at a book in 30 years. Their egos mostly have prevented them from adopting any standardized mechanics. Nobody's going to tell them how to officiate!

I don't know you, parepat, and would not presume to paint you with the same brush. Still, it hardly seems "heavy handed" to me: what's the penalty for ignoring the state? Losing playoff games? When 90% of officials don't get playoff games anyway?

[parepat]

Originally Posted by maven

The folks in my association who complained about Maurer being "heavy handed" are the same ones who haven't peeked at a book in 30 years. Their egos mostly have prevented them from adopting any standardized mechanics. Nobody's going to tell them how to officiate!

I don't know you, parepat, and would not presume to paint you with the same brush. Still, it hardly seems "heavy handed" to me: what's the penalty for ignoring the state? Losing playoff games? When 90% of officials don't get playoff games anyway?

1. I doubt that those officials who haven't looked at a rule book in 30 years are wasting their time on sites like these.

2. Threatening to suspend officials for up to two years for failing to follow brand new mechanics which were not even rolled out until August of the first year was, in my opinion, heavy handed.

[maven]

Originally Posted by parepat

2. Threatening to suspend officials for up to two years for failing to follow brand new mechanics which were not even rolled out until August of the first year was, in my opinion, heavy handed.

The only place I could find a 2 year suspension for the season was here:

Originally Posted by Gold Book

If HC Disagrees with R’s Ruling, then CREW Must Secure 3 Books, Find Ruling in the Book (s) and Show the HC. Consequences for NOT Following this Mechanic is Officials could be suspended a maximum of 2 years for Weeks 1 – 15.

Is that what you're thinking of? I admit that seems heavy handed, especially since crews around here always have a book (whether they follow the rest of this prescription I don't know).

But it's misleading to say that this threat applies to every mechanic in the book. It's just for this one provision — and I would guess it's the one the coaches fought most for.

[cdoug]

Originally Posted by parepat

1. I doubt that those officials who haven't looked at a rule book in 30 years are wasting their time on sites like these.

I very much agree with this.

[parepat]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

The local HS here in NW Ohio had a running clock for the entire second half Friday. 40 point half-time lead.

Sounds like we have some wayward rebels on our hands. WHat's next, pink whistles?