Can offens grab facemask
 

BB guy. Watching ESPN Monday nite and they show Steve Smith of Ravens stiff arm defender and then pulling him to to the ground via the face mask. Can offense use the face mask?

Both the offense and defense have the same rules in regard to facemask in the NFL. It's not a penalty simply to grab the facemask. It only becomes a penalty when they fail to release immediately and controls the opponent or grabs and pulls, twists, push, or pull the facemask.

Saying that, I haven't seen the play in question so can't comment.

I'll post some screen grabs tomorrow. IMHO, with an official looking right at it nothing was called. What got me was the ESPN twits.

I can count on one fist the number of times I've seen a ball carrier flagged for grabbing an opponent's facemask.

Can't speak for NFL rules, but otherwise NFHS 9-4-3-h prohibits "grasping an opponents facemask", and applies to EVERY player.

Can't get a pic uploaded due to 100kb limit so you will have to go here to see pics: Laredo Optimist LL Baseball: Albums

Click on the "football" album

Can't see any "grasping" in any of these photos.

You would have to see the video to understand that the impetus for the defenders trajectory derived from the runners arm, wherever it was attached to, benefit of the doubt, horse collar, otherwise facemask?

I have seen the video. There's no grasping here, not once. "impetus for the defenders trajectory derived from the runners arm"????? That has nothing to do with anything at all. (And merely saying the term "horse collar" in the context of this play, where contact was entirely from the front, is particularly worrisome).

Don't know which rule code your suggesting, but you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear under ANY of them.

I've called it twice. Can't grasp the facemask, period.

Here's where I think the disconnect lies. We are not supposed to guess why a player's head jerks around or how he suddenly and violently is yanked back to the ground. In these plays, if we don't know, we don't throw (or shouldn't anyways).

Many times guessing on facemasks and horsecollars result in an incorrect foul being called. This is a concept a fair amount of coaches don't seem to grasp and can't believe that we missed an "obvious" facemask.

I'm a BB guy so I ignorantly used that term to refer to grabbing the front of the shoulder pads. So, without solid evidence of why the defender is going down no official will call it a facemask. Makes sense. Thanks.

Players grab each other all the time. Defenders go down all the time. It's football.

Ball carriers will often stiff-arm a defender on his face without grasping it.

I'm sure thats what the first two pics show, a stiff arm, the other two pics show the defender seemingly being pulled to the ground by who knows what. If you don't know what you don't call nuttin.

Without solid evidence that a pitcher balked, the first baseman dropped the ball, the ball hit the batter, would you rule a balk, safe, award first base?

Of course the potential offender is Steve Smith so anything is possible:rolleyes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7682UPN15us

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/7682UPN15us" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Here's the video....and if none of the deep coverage officials threw anything on it, my guess is it wasn't the facemask he grabbed, maybe under his chin/neck and shoved off...?

From that angle...you have to have nothing....hence, my signature - "Assumption Is The Mother Of All Screw-ups....."

Interesting. In BB we strive to make decisions while stopped (not always successfully). In football the officials have to make decisions while moving. I guess that's why replay hit football before it hit baseball. Among other things.

Baseball is one of the rare sports where you can do things while standing. Not the case in many other sports like football and basketball.

And in this video I see nothing that stands out as a foul. For one, we cannot see the actual contact with the stiff arm. Hard to make any concrete decision when the officials on the field saw this play life and from better angles.

Peace

Just saw this called in the Oklahoma/West Virginia game early in the 4th quarter.

I though that was a pretty bad call. Didn't even grab it.

The only thing that MATTERS is what the covering official SAW.

And he didn't see it correctly, in my opinion.

Opinions are like anal orifices, everyone has one and it's a little different than everyone elses. On a football field, the covering official's "opinion" is the ONLY one that matters (in NFHS games).

Not in college football.

Oklahoma and West Virginia are not playing in NFHS games, last I checked.

I guess I'm a little confused about what you're trying to convey here. :confused: If we have this attitude about discussing plays, we might as well shut down this forum or any discussion group.

Nothing wrong with discussing plays and even saying an official missed a play (which may have happened with the facemask play in question).

The intent is to suggest, as I presume most officials clearly understand, is that is that an officials judgment call is based on what is ACTUALLY seen, rather than what might be suspected, possible or even apparent.

An official judging he didn't see a hand grasping a facemask, or helmet openting, doesn't mean it didn't happen, only that the official didn't see it happen. As a n official we don't have the luxury of presuming. Absent any constructive suggestion (rule knowledge, mechanics and positioning advice or some material instruction that might benefit future calls) there doesn't seem to any real value in complaining about something someome else did, or didn't, actually see (without benefit of detailed review and assessment)

I think his point was, that if you have that attitude, you can dismiss every single thread with that logic.

Thankfully, the majority of responses raise specific questions, suggestions or comments related to rule interpretations, rule philosophies, suggestions or comments about positioning or specific mechanics and their benefit in securing the optimum observation positions. Differences related to the specific, applicable rule codes, are also helpful to recognizing and understanding the impact of differences which can help avoid future unnecessary misunderstandings .

Observations limited to opinions as to whether a purely judgment call was, or may not have been, correct don't seem to hold much value or contribute anything positive to any meaningful discussion.