Wouldn't this be considered hurdling? and be a flag!!

[bigjohn]

Coach, troll, what is the difference? Clearly you guys are going defend other officials that make terrible game changing calls.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

Coach, troll, what is the difference? Clearly you guys are going defend other officials that make terrible game changing calls.

And I'm sure you would defend your coaches if they made terrible game changing decisions. What's your point. This is a site whose purpose is to allow us to discuss situations and all try to improve. Your posts do nothing to further that purpose.

[bigjohn]

I would not defend a coach who did something wrong. I have called out many coaches for being unsportsmanlike, unethical and not protecting player.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

I would not defend a coach who did something wrong. I have called out many coaches for being unsportsmanlike, unethical and not protecting player.

Apples vs Eskimos.

[Robert Goodman]

I'm not sure it met the technical requirement of hurdling, and if it did I'm not convinced penalizing it would be in the spirit of the rule. It looked like the ballcarrier more or less jumped in place (although I couldn't see his feet when he started to leave the ground), although he did extend his right foot forward while in the air. The attempted tackler may have had his feet on the ground, but was bent very low at the waist, and more went under the ballcarrier than the ballcarrier went over him. This is not the classic case of someone leaping forward crotchwise over the head of an opponent, and if there was a chance of contact with that opponent's head, it was caused more by the tackler than by the putative hurdler. The ballcarrier went mostly over the attempted tackler's back.

I'm not sure whether the rules definition of "hurdle" should be eliminated (and thus have people fall back on their general understanding of what it means) or made more detailed. The current definition captures some cases in line with most people's intuition, but not others, and I'm not sure whether the distinction could be easily set out in words. In the present case, although a different viewing angle might change my mind, I don't think the officials erred in not flagging this.

I'd also consider broadening the rule to encompass other efforts to go over erect opponents, including diving head first, inasmuch as there may be dangers there that are unjustified leaving in the game as distinct from those of hurdling per se.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I'm not sure it met the technical requirement of hurdling

Yes, it did. Pretty much exactly. None of the rest of your post is really relevant.

That said --- this is a REALLY REALLY dumb rule. Why should this action that we see in the video be illegal?

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Yes, it did. Pretty much exactly. None of the rest of your post is really relevant.

That said --- this is a REALLY REALLY dumb rule. Why should this action that we see in the video be illegal?

Agreed on your first point 100%. When a player goes over another player, they generally do it one of two ways: head first or feet first. If they land on their feet they likely went feet first (as in this video). If they went head first they will land on something else.

The reason this is a foul is it could be very dangerous for both the hurdler and hurdlee. The hurdler could be flipped and land on their head. The hurdlee could take a knee or foot to the head or chest. I've seen several videos where either of those happened. Rather than encourage players to try it because they MAY clear with no issues, the rules committee has decided to make the attempt a foul.

[APG]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

Coach, troll, what is the difference? Clearly you guys are going defend other officials that make terrible game changing calls.

The difference is one will allow you to keep posting without issue...the other will mandate a temporary vacation from posting.

And there hasn't been a single person in this thread that has defended the call.

[HLin NC]

I worked a state final last December, bigjohn. I am fairly certain that one or all seven of us missed something at some point in the game.

We don't know if it was a game changing call, or actually, a non-call. I imagine after seeing the clip, one or more said "damn, missed that one". Maybe the other 100 or so plays went off without a hitch.

The first official, coach, or player that works a perfect game will be the first. Obviously even the NFL guys- coaches and officials- make mistakes. Ask jeff Triplette and Jason Garrett.

[JRutledge]

The best officials are never going to work any post season or State Finals, because all of them do not make themselves available. I know that many officials work other things or choose to not be available for all kinds of reasons. So this idea that the best officials are the only ones working a state final is silly. And even when the best are working they make mistakes. And hurdling is so rare I am sure it gives the officials pause. I called it one time in a playoff game (the only time I have ever seen anything close) and I was talked off the call. And when we saw the tape, we agreed for the most part the picking up the flag was not a good idea.

Peace

[zm1283]

That's definitely hurdling according to the rule.

With that said, the rule is awful. I've seen defenders go entirely horizontal and dive at ankles with the top of their helmets and the ball carrier will hop over them and never get more than two feet off the ground and be flagged for hurdling. I think it often penalizes the offense entirely too much.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by zm1283

I've seen defenders go entirely horizontal and dive at ankles with the top of their helmets and the ball carrier will hop over them and never get more than two feet off the ground and be flagged for hurdling. I think it often penalizes the offense entirely too much.

That is not a hurdle. If it's being flagged, it's being incorrectly flagged.