So glad that I don't work in Ohio...

+1. I would rather not be chastised because I let the coin hit the ground instead of catching it or because I wind the clock three times instead of two. College coordinators couldn't care less about that stuff, not sure why Ohio insists on micromanaging every detail.

The key benefit here is they are trying to be consistent across the entire state. That is very difficult to do with so many officials at the HS level. There will always be things people will disagree with. I would love to have someone with a level of authority monitoring these types of things and communicating issues to coaches and officials. Even if you only agree with 80% of them, everyone will be doing the same thing.

Consistency is fine, but some of the comments rub me the wrong way. For example:

No problem with the substance of the comment, but the writing style just seems... weird. Why not say something like this:

It's not like anyone's getting downgraded solely on that kind of stuff or it's all about the superficial, those are the nitpicky small things that separate the best and are part of the overall package.

I get it's not for everyone, and probably wouldn't work in a larger state like Texas with a different system. But I for one have found the uniformity and detail to be quite welcome. With three dominant urban centers but dozens and dozens and dozens of small towns in rural area, with fill-ins and substitutes relatively common, esp at the subvarsity level and playoff level where individuals vs crews are chose, I like knowing exactly how the guy across from me will signal and move and position himself.

Maybe since I was in the military I'm more comfortable with detailed standard operating procedures, but I think having that detail isn't stifling at all. Quite the contrary, it *frees up* time and effort since so much of the mundane is specified and we can concentrate on other things, like how to read a run play, what to look for, etc. Sure, 5-10% of it is busywork garbage - the value of the 90-95% is worth putting up with that to me.

And frankly, bigjohn, I think it's kind of a jerk move to post the bulletins with a perjorative title like "scolds". It frames the entire thread with a negative tone. Again, I get it -not for everyone and has its downsides. But I think it's improved every year and is an invaluable tool for new guys to have a uniformity in training and standards.

See, that's nonsense. A coin hitting the ground doesn't make a referee worse than one that catches the coin. Uniformity for uniformity's sake in areas like this mean some people have way too much time on my hands.

(I catch the coin on a grass field and let it hit on turf. So there.)

Ok, I'm fine putting that one in the 5% of needless garbage, agree that's fairly meaningless. Yea, Bruce has a couple pet peeves. Was speaking more overall.

Your example is a good one. What is meant by "Pretender" other than a dig at the official? Keep the bulletin professional.

2 officials signaling incomplete is bad advice, too. That means that someone may be signaling that doesn't actually see the ball hit the ground. Or what about when the R needs to decide if the passer's arm is empty or going forward with the ball and signals incomplete -- some other random official needs to start signaling, too?

12 players in the huddle isn't a foul. Sloppy writing.

Perhaps he should have someone write in English rather than in his shorthand.

While I agree with much of the criticism leveled at the Ohio coordinator, at least their officials are getting *some* feedback. That's more than what many areas of the country provide.

5, 6 0r 7 officials is PERFECTLY correct, "IF" any, or all 5, 6 or 7 individually determined the pass was, in fact, incomplete. Presuming that any multiple signals, "means that someone may be signaling that doesn't actually see the ball hit the ground" is absolute nonsense. If that were the case there is a much deeper problem to contend with, about the purpose, and proper reason for, signalling.

As for the Referee determining whether a passer's arm was moving forward, or not, for competent officials that is the Referee's call and other officials should look to "the covering official" for guidance BEFORE signalling. If there is disagreement the next step should be consultation and discussion rather than a contradictory signal.

The question is, "Who are you signalling to" and when there is a field clock and a clock operator, your target for the signal is the clock operator because that is the only person who can actually deal with the clock. The objective should ALWAYS be to signal the clock, as acurately as possible, to start, or stop, the clock. EVERYONE else responding to the signal is SECONDARY.

The objective of other officials to REPEAT the initial clock stoppage signal, whether by repeating the incomplete signal or signalling to stop the clock, is for the benefit of the clock operator and the ultimate accuracy of the game clock.

The most perfect, artistic and classic signal THAT NOBODY SEES, in reality, NEVER HAPPENED and doesn't accomplish anything.

I said "may be signaling." Re-read what you wrote.

Quick pass right at the HL. Incomplete. Who else should signal? The R? The U? The BJ? The other wing? To have 2 people signaling we'll end up with 5 signaling just to make sure 2 signal.

Completely unnecessary.

One of the rubrics that he has used from the beginning of his tenure is a "Contending" crew vs. a "pretending" crew with respect to moving up to better games, playoffs, etc. Personally I found it off putting. I was not a fan of his micromanaging and felt that he has gone overboard at time, but, in general, did appreciate his trying to standardize things.

Coming to a new state this season, it was trying at time doing sub-varsity game where everybody had different ways of communicating on the field because there is little standardization.

You need to add pretender at the end.