The Pigskin
Page
2013 Post-Season Week 2 Clips
TECHNICAL NOTE: For those not aware, when viewing these videos in the You Tube window, you can adjust the resolution for a sharper view. Notice in the lower right hand corner of the video player window a setting icon that looks like a gear. Click on that and you can adjust the setting up to 360p, 480p or even 720p in some cases. This will give you a sharper image.
The video page will continue bringing you clips each week which are good teaching material as we all work together to understand and enforce the sometimes complicated NCAA football rules. The videos are not meant to demean or belittle any official. They are used so that ALL officials can learn from the situations and issues other officials encounter in their games. No official has ever completed a career error-free. But by sharing our errors with others we help them avoid the same pitfalls. NCAA football officials at all levels exhibit incredible rule knowledge week in and week out. We can always get better and this page hopes to serve in that effort.
There is no doubt still work to be done with regards to targeting fouls. The poll play last week looked at another play which included a flag for on a possible targeting hit. The crew chose to call it a "simple" personal foul and no targeting. 55% of our crew judged targeting would have been the correct call. 14% chose to go with unnecessary roughness and the remaining 31% said no foul at all. This is clearly not consistency and highlights the need for further rule clarification and official's education.
Holding ? One of the things that is often discussed in rule conversations is the freedom players have when attempting to recover a fumble, backward pass, kick, or touched forward pass. They may block in the back above the waist but may not hold nor may they block below the waist while attempting to recover the ball. An if they are not actually attempting to recover the ball, they cannot block in the back above the waist just to prevent an opponent from recovering it. (9-3-3-c Exception 3 and 9-3-4-f.) Observe A75 in this play. Did he foul? Would you flag? Please view this play video and take the poll. (Please remember to scroll down and click on the DONE button after making your choice.)
Down and Coach Down Sometimes the media announcers do a genuine disservice by professing knowledge they do not have. In this play, there was some question as to whether or not the ball carrier was "down" before losing the ball. The principal issue the announcer focused on was whether or not the whistle was blown as he proclaimed the play not to be reviewable had a whistle been blown. 12-3-3-d makes this play reviewable as it was a live ball ruled dead in possession of a ball carrier when the clear recovery of a loose bal occurred in the immediate continuing action. In this play, Instant Replay went with a "play stands" ruling. Had they ruled the ball indeed was loose before ball carrier was ruled down the result would have been simply to give the ball to the recovering team at the spot of recovery. In this case the recovering team happened to be the fumbling team. Does anyone know what "down by contact" means in the NCAA game? Yes, it has significance in the NFL game but has no place in the NCAA game and should not be used. Finally, there is a reason we tell the coaches to stay out of that restricted area along the sideline. It can be most precarious as the coach learns
Batting This play was included just because we rarely see illegal bats but this was one and the crew did a good job of nailing it. However, since the penalty for batting is generally enforced from the spot of the foul, it is important we get the flag at the correct spot. The line judge's flag does seem to land at the spot of the foul (or at least at the spot of the 2d batting) but that was either a lucky shot or perhaps he served in the Marines on mortars and can put things on target even with a high parabolic trajectory toss. (Some might rule the QB's first touching of the ball at about the 44 as a bat also but it is difficult to say for sure from the video).
Unnecessary Roughness For many years, there was a general consensus among players, coaches and officials that as long as the ball was in play, everyone was responsible for his own safety and everyone was subject to being legally blocked. This thought pattern persisted even though the rules clearly protected players obviously out of the play (9-1-12). With the increased focus on targeting has come a change in the way other collisions are viewed also. There is more attention being paid to players out of the play in an effort to protect them. The hit in this video was clearly a blindside block (although not in the back as proclaimed by the announcer) and was a suspect targeting. The crew did flag the act although no penalty was enforced since the defense chose to decline it.
Personal Foul Converted to Targeting We have known Instant Replay has the authority to review a targeting call and remove the disqualification part of the penalty. But Instant Replay apparently was used in this play in a novel way. There was no initial announcement that targeting was called. After review, it was announced the targeting call was confirmed but the fouling player's number was corrected. Defenders are in a very difficult position today as they are often charged with fouls that may have well been caused by the actions of their opponent who moved their head into a position where the defender had no option but to contact it.