The Pigskin
Page
2014 Season Clips (2)
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.
Send your clip or play suggestions to videos@romgilbert.us
The video page will continue bringing you clips which are good learning 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.
Last week's poll looked at the situation where a back appears to miss the snap count and moves early. Our "crew" looked at the video and 64% said it was a false start. 31% said there was simply an illegal shift. Some of the comments: "Appears the RB misses the snap count and simulates the start of the play, but attempts to "cover it up" by going down into a three-point stance. I'd go with false start (but, then again, I'm a deep guy!)" "Movement by back wasn't simulate the start of the play as he went down to a 3 point stance. 2 players moving = illegal shift. " "RB action not "quick" enough to be considered false start (not simulation on start of play)" "Start clean. Nothing good can happen if this play continues. Player missed the snap count. Penalize & move on." "Better to shut it down, than bring back a long gain."
Players and coaches have long been adept at skirting the rules to gain a competitive advantage. This video clip is a great example of that. "It ois the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents." (7-3-8-b) Observe the actions of the receiver (A88) who starts at the bottom of the screen .How would you rule on this play? Please view this play video and take the poll. (Please remember to scroll down and click on the DONE button after making your choice.)
Chop Blocking
One of the more difficult calls for officials
is the chop block in the interior line play. Multiple players are moving in
close proximity, some are falling, some may be trying to move to another spot
but an opponent is preventing them from getting there, and there is just general
chaos in there. This week we have several chop block clips to watch and
for you to discuss with your crewmates. Remember, a chop must be either a
"high-low" or "low-high" combination block. A "low-low" is not a foul by
definition. (Low means at the thigh or below).
Chop Block 1
In this first play, there is a legitimate question to be asked about the "high
component" of the block. Was there even one? Perhaps we will bring
this play back later in the season as a poll play.
Chop Block 2
In this play, the LG (A75) goes low on B98. However, B98 was not engaged
high by another Team A blocker. B98 engaged the snapper who was attempting
to go to another player. 2-3-3 says it is not a foul if the blocker's
opponent initiates the contact. This should make for a good discussion
play for your crew.
Chop Block 3
This play is the prototypical chop block. A74 is engaged high and A50 is
engaged low. In this play, the low block seems to be the first one.
A74 could have prevented his team from being penalized by simply backing up some
more when he realized his teammate had gone low against the defender. But he
stood his ground and there was high contact. (And that brings up an
interesting point...why does A50 get all the blame ????)
Chop Block 4 A
text book example of a chop block. In this case it is a back and a lineman
teaming up to do the deed. Officials are reminded that the
rule (and Rogers Redding) have made clear that chop blocks are a 2-person foul
and therefore, numbers of BOTH players should be announced.
Good catch by the crew here to identify two team B players were wearing the same number (13) during the down. This foul does not qualify for PSK enforcement so Team A could either accept the result of the play, or take the 5 yards from previous spot (the option they chose).
Officials have discussed plays like this time and time again so it should not be a surprise when it happens. The play also shows that those who have long argued for the R to be in the goal line on KO's may have a good point. if he had been at the goal line, perhaps the R could have helped his 2 flank officials get this right without instant replay stepping in to correct. We do not know what the H and L saw but we can hope they judged that he ball never came completely out of the end zone. If they saw the ball only partially in the field of play, then they were correct in ruling touchback. Or if they judged the ball was totally in the field of play but came back into the end zone on its own, then they were correct in ruling touchback. But if the ball was totally in the field of play, possessed by team B, and then downed in the end zone, that is a safety.
Officials were told before the season to be more aware of sideline control, including keeping persons out of the restricted area outside the sideline reserved for the officials. Rule 9-2-5 is the applicable rule. There was even a pre-season bulletin that seemed to include an unannounced rule change requiring crews to give an official warning before assessing penalties for violations of the rule. The rule was tweaked a bit this year to include the continuing action just after the ball has been declared dead. This was probably done to keep that area clear as officials work to get dead ball spots and rule on sidelines and possession. However, as written, the rule does not cover the time before the ball is put in play. Perhaps this crew's conference has directed them to extend the rule coverage to the period just immediate to the snap. That would seem sensible since officials need to be focused on the line of scrimmage and player movement as the snap becomes imminent and should not have to be concerned with whether the restricted area has been vacated as he could soon be running through it. But, by the rule as written, it does not apply to the pre-snap period.
One of our crew overseas noticed this play and sent it in. This is a good example of something that may happen frequently and is never flagged, although technically it IS a foul. After the snapper is established, if a Team A "restricted lineman" moves his hand, and certainly if he changes position, has committed a false start (7-1-2-b-3) . A restricted lineman is any interior lineman who has his hand(s) on or near the ground. That means even if that player with his hand(s) on or near the ground has an eligible number, if he is covered by an end, he will be a restricted lineman. In this play, Team A shifts and the shift includes a restricted lineman (A92). That is a false start by rule.