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

[mgussy]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well I don't and I am fine with my stance. Not in something like this for sure. And this is not even close. Again the players have some responsibility for their own safety as well. If they cannot see why would you run like you can? You are also taking away an opportunity from the defense to strip the ball or make another play that benefits them too. Our actions as officials also does not "save" players from injury. They are likely already injured by the time we take action at all. And if you blow the whistle, it better be treated as an inadvertent whistle by rule, not some "The play was stopped" crap which I am reading.

Peace

If you want to consider an IW it will be ignored because A will accept the penalty. You argue that you are taking away the ability for B to make a play and strip the ball or gain an advantage. Even if they do, A will accept the penalty and keep the ball.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mgussy

If you want to consider an IW it will be ignored because A will accept the penalty. You argue that you are taking away the ability for B to make a play and strip the ball or gain an advantage. Even if they do, A will accept the penalty and keep the ball.

If you have been paying attention, I am not arguing just this specific play.

Peace

[mgussy]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If you have been paying attention, I am not arguing just this specific play.

Peace

Yea sorry about that, I didn't get to the second page of the thread before responding. Now I see you are arguing for the sake of arguing. I recall why I don't visit this site much anymore because of all this B.S. between fellow officials. Rut, you are a Hoot. I wish you and Big John would get it rolling again, was always a good read. Well back to the Best Officiating Forum I go.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mgussy

Yea sorry about that, I didn't get to the second page of the thread before responding. Now I see you are arguing for the sake of arguing. I recall why I don't visit this site much anymore because of all this B.S. between fellow officials. Rut, you are a Hoot. I wish you and Big John would get it rolling again, was always a good read. Well back to the Best Officiating Forum I go.

It is arguing to be arguing that we apply a rule that has a clear interpretation? Forgive me, but I cannot even imagine having this discussion off this site, because the people that have experience would shut this silliness down immediately and those would know their place and shut up. We always have "that guy" and "that guy" is anyone that suggest we apply an subjective standard to something like "safety" when there is no rules support to do just that.

Peace

[asdf]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

We always have "that guy" and "that guy" is anyone that suggest we apply an subjective standard to something like "safety" when there is no rules support to do just that.

Peace

I was "that guy" 10 years ago when I heard the player's scream. That scream told me this was not just an ordinary hit and fumble. A further look and quick observation told me that two bones sticking out of a young man's arm and blood flowing profusely out of the wound was not an ordinary situation. I don't need a manual to know what my job is.

I was "that guy" on that night, I'll be happy to be that guy if it happens again, and I'll certainly be "that guy" if a runner get's his helmet turned around, placing him in jeopardy........

and I'll be working the following week.......and the next week......and the next week......

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by asdf

I was "that guy" 10 years ago when I heard the player's scream. That scream told me this was not just an ordinary hit and fumble. A further look and quick observation told me that two bones sticking out of a young man's arm and blood flowing profusely out of the wound was not an ordinary situation. I don't need a manual to know what my job is.

I was "that guy" on that night, I'll be happy to be that guy if it happens again, and I'll certainly be "that guy" if a runner get's his helmet turned around, placing him in jeopardy........

and I'll be working the following week.......and the next week......and the next week......

I said what would happen here.

You are hired first by your crew, then by the assignors(conferences) who gives the crew the actual games and then the state if you make the playoffs.

I did not say you would not ever work for doing such a thing, but being fired or being "that guy" might not be the best thing for your career. In other words when you have to bounce from crew to crew, then there you go. And we have a lot of those guys for doing similar things. And many of them cannot figure out why they are in that situation. And it is not uncommon that many of those that are "that guy" that have a hard time breaking in to places they want to. I am sure you are a good official, but this stuff you are advocating to me is from another universe.

Peace

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I said what would happen here.

You are hired first by your crew, then by the assignors(conferences) who gives the crew the actual games and then the state if you make the playoffs.

I did not say you would not ever work for doing such a thing, but being fired or being "that guy" might not be the best thing for your career. In other words when you have to bounce from crew to crew, then there you go. And we have a lot of those guys for doing similar things. And many of them cannot figure out why they are in that situation. And it is not uncommon that many of those that are "that guy" that have a hard time breaking in to places they want to. I am sure you are a good official, but this stuff you are advocating to me is from another universe.

Peace

I know some officials in your area that work HS, college (small and D1) in your area. I ran this by them as well to see if it is a regional thing and it was unanimous that this play should be shut down. It sounds like you are not only alone on this site but also your geographic peers.

If you do want to use rule support, Rule 1-5-1 says the helmet must be properly secured. 1-5-3-c-9 says it must be used as intended by the manufacturer. I would guess backward is not the way it was intended to be used.

Let me ask you this question. If a small child gets away from his parents and goes running on the field while the ball is live. Are you going to shut it down? What is your rules support? Sometimes it's better to do the right thing than do things right.

[Scuba_ref]

Originally Posted by mgussy

Yea sorry about that, I didn't get to the second page of the thread before responding. Now I see you are arguing for the sake of arguing. I recall why I don't visit this site much anymore because of all this B.S. between fellow officials. Rut, you are a Hoot. I wish you and Big John would get it rolling again, was always a good read. Well back to the Best Officiating Forum I go.

Where is this other Forum? I also get tired of certain egos that can't see another point of view and are never wrong.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Scuba_ref

Where is this other Forum? I also get tired of certain egos that can't see another point of view and are never wrong.

He's wrong sometimes. So am I. But not on this one.

Do you see any of the other very experienced officials disagreeing here? There's a reason why you don't.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Scuba_ref

Where is this other Forum? I also get tired of certain egos that can't see another point of view and are never wrong.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

For one I see the other point of view, I simply do not agree with it and have yet to see a rule to support stopping the play when the player is not down by rule or that it fits the situation where the helmet comes off. It is not about being right or wrong, just show a situation where it says that in the rules or in the casebook? If you can do that then OK I might agree. But you no one have found anything like that but claiming what they feel should be done. That is a dangerous standard to broach when numerous people will have different standards by the ambiguousness in the wording.

Peace

[Scuba_ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Peace

Oh, I'm not going anywhere. There are too many other good officials on this site whose opinions, insight and knowledge are invaluable. After all forums are just like camp…sometimes you simply nod your head and say thank you, while thinking what a pompous know-it-all and sometimes you find something that works for you. I just got excited that there might be another forum from which I can learn.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Scuba_ref

Oh, I'm not going anywhere. There are too many other good officials on this site whose opinions, insight and knowledge are invaluable. After all forums are just like camp…sometimes you simply nod your head and say thank you, while thinking what a pompous know-it-all and sometimes you find something that works for you. I just got excited that there might be another forum from which I can learn.

And that is all fine. You just sound like one of those guys that when you go to the camp, the clinicians say, "He does not get it" and we move on. And those same guys wonder why they are working JV ball most of their careers as a result. As MD said, you do not see any of the big veterans disagree with this point. There is a reason that is the case.

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by mgussy

Now I see you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

Sorry you feel you must leave. Even when people disagree, this site is a good source for officiating help.

He was not arguing for the sake of arguing.

He (and I) are disagreeing with the idea that plays need to be killed anytime an official suddenly feels conditions for a player are unsafe. A few "extreme" situations have been presented, none of which (to me) justify killing a play before it's done. And as a semi-related aside, in my many years of many sports I've seen more injuries happen as a result of some people stopping play and others not stopping than any other situation. Killing play when it didn't naturally end is more likely (imho) to cause an injury than to save one. Also, in the extreme situations used to justify killing it early - on most of them the injury had already occurred... killing it at that point serves no purpose at all.

Other than that one in a billion situation where a life might be at stake and seconds matter (had an older gentleman pitching hit hard in the sternum who went down immediately once where this applies), I can really only envision one situation where killing a play early would actually help anyone...

that would be where someone is clearly hurt badly (neck or a break perhaps) and on the ground, and something happens in the play to cause it to move back toward that injured player lying on the ground. I've never had that happen or seen it happen, but I can see the possibility.