Helmet comes off during a tackle, due to prior foul?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Adam

Do you really think the NFHS rule writers took the possibility of a sideways/backwards helmet into account when writing the rule? If so, ok. I'm just not as confident.

I think that I've seen it before (Ok, sideways, not backward). I think that if I've seen it before it can't be completely unheard of.

But more importantly, asdf seems to be wanting to add his own determination as to when to kill a play out of a concern for safety. The rules makers do this for us. Anything more is not proper or appropriate. I could name 20 scenarios where someone is not "safe", depending on one persons viewpoint of what "safe" is... if we were to all make our own determinations regarding what is safe - and kill plays accordingly, we'd have a mess on our hands.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I think that I've seen it before (Ok, sideways, not backward). I think that if I've seen it before it can't be completely unheard of.

But more importantly, asdf seems to be wanting to add his own determination as to when to kill a play out of a concern for safety. The rules makers do this for us. Anything more is not proper or appropriate. I could name 20 scenarios where someone is not "safe", depending on one persons viewpoint of what "safe" is... if we were to all make our own determinations regarding what is safe - and kill plays accordingly, we'd have a mess on our hands.

This play happened to my crew about 10 years ago.....

A32 catches a froward pass at B's 17 yards line. He takes three steps and is sandwiched between two defenders with a simultaneous hit. The hit not only forces a fumble, but it causes a compound fracture to A32's right arm in the process and he is bleeding profusely. B56 recovers the fumble and advances uninhibited towards A's goal line.

Seeing A32's compound fracture, the crew kills the play so that he can be attended to immediately.


There is nothing in the book that tells us to kill the play, yet we killed it anyway. B's head coach, irate at first, understood fully when he saw A32's injury, not that it made a difference to us.

MD.... you gonna swallow the whistle on this because the rules don't tell you to blow it?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by asdf

Seeing A32's compound fracture, the crew kills the play so that she can be attended to immediately.


There is nothing in the book that tells us to kill the play, yet we killed it anyway. B's head coach, irate at first, understood fully when he saw A32's injury, not that it made a difference to us.

MD.... you gonna swallow the whistle on this because the rules don't tell you to blow it?

Most plays take no more than 7 seconds and you stopped a play that probably would not take much more then this.

And if my crew did that and gave that example, we would be in a lot of trouble here.

And I have players with many fractures, concussions and many ambulances on the field and never felt like I could or would stop play just because someone had a serious injury. As a matter of fact the play is usually over before anyone realizes a player is that hurt. And if I did notice, I would keep officiating. Just because your crew did something once upon a time ago (and it is telling it was 10 years ago) does not make it right. Glad I am not on your crew.

Peace

[asdf]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And if my crew did that and gave that example, we would be in a lot of trouble here.

Baloney

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Glad I am not on your crew.

The feeling is mutual.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by asdf

Baloney

Applying your own rules when there is rules support for specific action gets you in trouble here. And messing up a rule and certainly calling an IW is not seen in a great light either. And if I gave your justification, I would be in bigger trouble. Certainly would be the case at the NCAA level as the coaches would send such tape to the supervisor and then I would have to answer for such a thing. I have had to answer for less then this and things not on tape. I would have to answer for this.

Originally Posted by asdf

The feeling is mutual.

No, it is not.

Peace

[asdf]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Applying your own rules when there is rules support for specific action gets you in trouble here. And messing up a rule and certainly calling an IW is not seen in a great light either. And if I gave your justification, I would be in bigger trouble. Certainly would be the case at the NCAA level as the coaches would send such tape to the supervisor and then I would have to answer for such a thing. I have had to answer for less then this and things not on tape. I would have to answer for this.




No, it is not.

Peace

First, this play is a High School play, so the NCAA level means nothing to me. (A typical response from you when you know you are wrong, just change the rule set to suit your response)

Next, I would be able to defend to any superior, my decision to kill the play citing a real danger to the runner. (apparently you think no danger existed)
I would not be able to defend to any superior, judge, or jury my decision not to stop the play that resulted in serious injury to said runner.

Finally, we are both glad that you are not on my crew, thus making the feeling mutual.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by asdf

First, this play is a High School play, so the NCAA level means nothing to me. (A typical response from you when you know you are wrong, just change the rule set to suit your response)

Well just so you know these recent rules about the helmet came directly from the creation of the NCAA, not the NF. It is one of the rare occasions that the NF adopted an NCAA rules and they did not make the wording so ambiguous or come short of the actual intent. That is why I reference the NCAA because that is who though of how to handle these situations.

Also in the situation you referenced a play that involved a fracture. And then you acted like it was no big deal to stop play all together.

Originally Posted by asdf

Next, I would be able to defend to any superior, my decision to kill the play citing a real danger to the runner. (apparently you think no danger existed)
I would not be able to defend to any superior, judge, or jury my decision not to stop the play that resulted in serious injury to said runner.

Finally, we are both glad that you are not on my crew, thus making the feeling mutual.

Again, that play you described has happened many times in football. You are not the first to deal with a compound fracture as an official, let alone a football official. I have seen that happen many times over my career and never did anyone discuss to stopping the play dead in the middle. I am not trying to be funny, but with games with an ambulance on site and trainers on each sideline, it is hard to imagine a football field not being one of the safest places to have such an injury. And most of all the play will be over in seconds if not already over when the injury is discovered. I do not see this rush to stop things or better yet, I would like to know how you even realize there is such an injury if you are doing your job? The main reason I also say I am glad I am not on your crew, because these kinds of situations where people have tried to "Do what they feel is right" is the reason crews get fired or they do not get other opportunities. And it is certainly the case here as you are applying a standard that has no rules support. What is to say there are not other situations where the minute someone is hit hard and acts like they are hurt more then usual and you stop play because you have projected a safety issue onto the situation? Only to come to find out they were not as hurt as it first appeared? Sorry, I just have issue with that thinking. This is not like basketball or soccer where the play is continuous and we must stop play to address injuries.

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by asdf

MD.... you gonna swallow the whistle on this because the rules don't tell you to blow it?

Yes. Or moreso because killing this play early does nothing good, and lots bad.

At this point, I know you're not going to listen to anyone telling you differently, so I'm not going to keep telling you how wrong you are here... I am curious, however - what is it that you think you accomplished by blowing the whistle 4-5 seconds earlier than when the play would have ended on its own?

[asdf]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

At this point, I know you're not going to listen to anyone telling you differently,

....and finally, we agree on something....

Well over 30 years ago I worked my first athletic contest at age 13. I was schooled from day one that safety at the High School level down is of utmost importance. I don't care if it's you or any other "big veteran" on this board, you aren't changing my mind.

I've employed this mindset before and nothing "bad" happened after I killed the play. (how the heck can getting immediate medical attention to a student athlete who has two bones sticking out of his arm and bleeding profusely be bad?) I didn't get into "trouble" and I haven't missed a beat on or off the field.

In the play in the video, I say the player is in immediate danger and we as officials have a duty to try to protect him from harm since it's not inherent with how the game is played. You and my other detractor on this subject feel otherwise. I cannot fathom how one could look at a player with his helmet on backwards, vision blocked, still running, and judge this is normal to the game of football......... But that's just me.

This is my final word on the matter. You all can ridicule me all you want or change the scenarios to suit your position as you are want to do.

I can sit here knowing that I've never wavered on my point of view.

Have at it. Have fun......

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by asdf

I've employed this mindset before and nothing "bad" happened after I killed the play.

An IW is bad. Pretty much always. Yes, sometimes you get bailed out by a penalty. But the "good" in your scenario is zero. The "Bad" is the IW.

In the play in the video, I say the player is in immediate danger and we as officials have a duty to try to protect him from harm since it's not inherent with how the game is played. You and my other detractor on this subject feel otherwise.

What Jeff and I are trying to tell you is that there are literally thousands of conceivable instances where a player is in "immediate danger" - but we don't kill the play in 99.9% of them (and on the ones where we do, it's because a rule tells us to. "That player is in danger" is not the standard you should be using when deciding whether to kill a live play.

I cannot fathom how one could look at a player with his helmet on backwards, vision blocked, still running, and judge this is normal to the game of football......... But that's just me.

Again, a mistaken standard. "Not normal to the game" is no reason to kill a play either.

This is my final word on the matter. You all can ridicule me all you want or change the scenarios to suit your position as you are want to do.

I don't believe I've been ridiculing you, personally. I'm trying to get you to see reason and back down from the idea that you should kill a play any time a player might not be safe. This is football. Everytime 225 lbs Goliath lines up against 95 lb David - David is not safe. But we don't kill the play when we see it.

I can sit here knowing that I've never wavered on my point of view.

If that's what's important to you - unwavering in the face of logic - more power to you, and enjoy your JV and 2A Varsity games. Perhaps a different approach would help you. You don't know Jeff or I from Joe Internet Referee yet. That's fine. But surely you belong to an association of some sort that allows you to work high school games. PLEASE, I implore you --- don't go ask your buddies, or even your crew chief or mentor ... go ask your rules guy. Or bring this up at the next clinic. Believe them.

[Rich]

The piece that nobody seems to be mentioning is that on this play, I'm not sure that I even *see* the helmet sitting on the player's head backwards anyway.

If I'm the R, I *might* see it, as I'm the one getting the foul. But maybe not as I'm throwing the flag after the face mask foul and turning my attention then to the blocking I'm charged with watching.

If I'm a wing, I'm not looking at the runner, I'm looking at the point of attack blocks and activity.

When the helmet comes completely off, our attention is turned to that and we're easily able to kill that.

It's easy for us to say what we'd do from the safety of our keyboards.

BTW, I would not have a problem with a crew mate killing the play here. I wouldn't consider it an IW (for the purposes of the crew member buying all night at the establishment we visit on the way home). I would have no problem telling a coach or an assignor why it was killed, either.

However, the rule says "completely off." Those words were put there for a reason and I have no problem following that, either.

[REFANDUMP]

Originally Posted by Rich

The piece that nobody seems to be mentioning is that on this play, I'm not sure that I even *see* the helmet sitting on the player's head backwards anyway.

If I'm the R, I *might* see it, as I'm the one getting the foul. But maybe not as I'm throwing the flag after the face mask foul and turning my attention then to the blocking I'm charged with watching.

If I'm a wing, I'm not looking at the runner, I'm looking at the point of attack blocks and activity.

When the helmet comes completely off, our attention is turned to that and we're easily able to kill that.

It's easy for us to say what we'd do from the safety of our keyboards.

BTW, I would not have a problem with a crew mate killing the play here. I wouldn't consider it an IW (for the purposes of the crew member buying all night at the establishment we visit on the way home). I would have no problem telling a coach or an assignor why it was killed, either.

However, the rule says "completely off." Those words were put there for a reason and I have no problem following that, either.

Rich, I agree with everything you say here except I believe you have to treat it as an inadvertant whistle, even though I wouldn't make my crewmate buy either. We'd have a real mess on our hands if we'd have not thrown a flag on this play and then ruled a runner down while he was still running and the offensive team had to take a loss of yardage with no option of replaying the down. Admittedly, this was a pretty obvious foul and I hope that one of us would get a flag on this, but we can't assume that will happen.