Playoff scoldings from B. Mauer
 

2014 Football Bulletin 12 ? Week 13 | OHSAA Football Officials


Many of the things I have brought up are being addressed, still!

Bruce Maurer, DOD

Don't agree that # 31 is an absolute that fits all circumstances. YES, the incomplete pass signal advises that the clock should be stopped, but depending on the specific venu variables (the lighting, the elevation, the size of the wing official, is the signal given in front of the team box, etc.) even a perfect incomplete signal may simply not be seen.

The purpose of a signal (ANY signal) is to convey a message. If adding a traditional "stop the clock" signal helps convey the proper message, in a timely manner, why not include it? Is avoidance of some innocuous redundancy more important than completing a message?

Of course, a "stop the clock" signal immediately given by the mid-field officials (Umpire or Referee) responding to a sideline "incomplete signal" likely somewhat more visible (away from sideline congestion) can be very helpful in sending the intended message to the target recipient.

I agree with ajmc on #31. In Colorado, the mechanic is to have the covering official signal incomplete and the remaining 4 officials to give the stop clock signal. It reduces the chances that the clock will keep running, and it makes all officials aware of the clock status.

From the notes:
This is one of those things we seem to argue about a lot here. We ALWAYS ask the captain. In this situation we'd probably tell him "Captain. There was a facemask. I'm sure you want us to add the 5 yards to the run, right?" IMO, it never hurts to ask.
Is this an Ohio mechanic? Here in WA we have been told in no uncertain terms not to mimic NCAA mechanics (catch signal, out of bounds signal--the two hands moving to the sideline, covering official dead ball signal, etc). I don't think it is part of the NFHS mechanics book (then again, WA has issued its own mechanics manual, and I haven't seen the NFHS one in a while).

Also, we have had observers dock us for having more than 1 official signal incomplete. It means there was confusion on who was the covering official. Our mechanic is one and only one official signals incomplete.
I agree with ajmc. And more. Our mechanic is that ONLY the covering official signals incomplete, and others signal timeout. Indeed, we are told to mirror timeout signals in all cases (incomplete, out of bounds, timeouts, etc). I get what they are saying, but the clock operator needs all the help he can get.

Incomplete stops the clock. Period. An off official can grab a quick glance at the clock.

I'm glad that we don't do any of this extraneous nonsense.

Hey, for once I agree with Ohio!

I spoke too soon.

"Try‐Run or Try‐Pass: Wings do NOT signal “no score” when short of GL – the R does this. Why? What if one Wing signals “no score” & the other Wing gives the TD signal."

Really? Our covering official signals this. Confirm with the other wing first, then signal. People are looking at the covering official, not the R.

It's not for us. It's for the clock operator.

I agree with OH on this. If they didn't score, just blow the play dead. If they scored, signal the score. No need to confirm with the other wing at all.

I'd never ask on this. Ever. Do you ask on false starts, too?

(And I always ask the sidelines on penalties.)

It's an extraneous signal. It may help once in a few games, but since you can always put the time back on the clock, it's just not needed.

It amazes me how many mechanics are local/regional.

By confirm with the other wing, I mean "make sure he isn't signaling a score."

Yep. But we usually phrase it as I said. With the case of a FS, we usually say "You want it, right?"

Well, putting time back on the clocks is a challenge around here.

In this case regarding incomplete passes, our mechanic is a statewide mechanic.

I know what you mean. But that isn't even necessary if the wings are not signaling no-good on a try.

That's 5-10 seconds I do not take. Official gives me a prelim, I report, U steps off, we go.

So in a tightly contested, overtime game with a large crowd, A attempts a run up the middle for the win and is stopped inches short of the goal. Ohio would want their wings to_______?

Run and report to R and let him signal?
Make eye contact and then communicate with R a la Aquaman?
Covering official attempt to yell over the apprehensive crowd what he's got?

Those circles coming out of the wing's forehead would give it away.

I would think marking the dead ball spot would suffice.

Mayer must have taken a course in micromanaging 101. I get it to a certain extent, but come on. 30+ complaints on every bulletin?

It's the Stepford Officials!

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.