Officials

[Gully]

The holding penalties were over the top but the play that really drove me nuts was the pass interference call where the pass was well overthrown and our db turned and ran to try to intercept the ball. Then the receiver ran up his back and they both fell down. The call.....defensive pass interference!!!!!

Did anybody see something I missed? It was right out in the open....just can't understand it.

[Scooter1]

What are you talking about? :confused:

Gratzek wasn't held one time all game long. :confused:

[TheBisonator]

During that play you talked about, the QB threw the ball in front of the line of scrimmage.

I don't think anyone else noticed that.

[Dazz]

The holding penalties were over the top but the play that really drove me nuts was the pass interference call where the pass was well overthrown and our db turned and ran to try to intercept the ball. Then the receiver ran up his back and they both fell down. The call.....defensive pass interference!!!!!

Did anybody see something I missed? It was right out in the open....just can't understand it.

Are you referring to the penalty on Eaves?

[NDSUstudent]

During that play you talked about, the QB threw the ball in front of the line of scrimmage.

I don't think anyone else noticed that.

I noticed that but that didn't beat the horrible blown call on a facemask that lead to ISU Blue getting a safety.

[Tatanka]

The officials today were, well, the product of the business end of a horse.

Even my six year old was on the Field judge--yelling that the "F" was for "FAIL".

[Gully]

Are you referring to the penalty on Eaves?

I think it was him, yes. There was another one later in the game that was questionable as well with another one of our safeties.

[EndZoneQB]

Who cares, we won. Leave it alone for a week my god. We are NEVER going to have a perfect officiated game...got it?

[Gully]

Who cares, we won. Leave it alone for a week my god. We are NEVER going to have a perfect officiated game...got it?

I'll leave alone whatever I want, thank you. Yes, I'm aware that we won the game, it doesn't make the call correct.

I don't think I've made a habbit of ripping on officials this year. Just curious if somebody saw it differently than I did.

[WYOBISONMAN]

They sure seemed poor watching the internet feed.

[Scooter1]

They sure seemed poor watching the internet feed.

Imagine what it looked like on a 50 inch plasma.....:smh:

Unrelated: Can someone go smack Patty V on the back of the head? They interviewed her and she stated that with the increased field to 20 teams, and the parity this year in out conference...we may get 2 teams.

Patty, you have the second ranked conference according to the GPI. You are supposed to be championing your league, not giving other conferences reasons to discount your conference come sellection time!!! God, you are a dumb ass!:smh:

[Civil06]

For the most part I agreed with the pass interference calls against us. On the last one, our safety (Pike?) completely cut off the route before it was an issue of establishing position. However, it was terrible when Marcus Williams had a sure interception near the south goal line, their receiver pulled his shoulder down with both hands before the ball was there, and there was no call. That was crap. I also disagreed with at least one of the blocking in the back calls and the facemask on Jose. I didn't see a good replay, but since they didn't call the facemask, how was that not an ISU TD if they recovered?

[Gully]

For the most part I agreed with the pass interference calls against us. On the last one, our safety (Pike?) completely cut off the route before it was an issue of establishing position. However, it was terrible when Marcus Williams had a sure interception near the south goal line, their receiver pulled his shoulder down with both hands before the ball was there, and there was no call. That was crap. I also disagreed with at least one of the blocking in the back calls and the facemask on Jose. I didn't see a good replay, but since they didn't call the facemask, how was that not an ISU TD if they recovered?

I think somehow one of our linemen ended up with the ball. What I didn't understand was if there wasn't a facemask why did they throw the flag? It looked to me like it was but I couldn't see for sure....I was a loooong way from that play.

The cutting off the route thing is interesting. Generally, it's not called pass interference if you're making a play for the ball and/or looking back at the ball (even though that's not exactly what the rule says). If you don't know where the ball is and simply run into the receiver in a frantic effort to catch up with him, they'll call that almost every time.

[TbonZach]

My thought on the officials half-way through the game:

"Ok, everybody that's surprised that there's another flag, raise your hand. Anyone? Anyone? Yeah, didn't think so...."

[Caves39]

I think somehow one of our linemen ended up with the ball. What I didn't understand was if there wasn't a facemask why did they throw the flag? It looked to me like it was but I couldn't see for sure....I was a loooong way from that play.

The cutting off the route thing is interesting. Generally, it's not called pass interference if you're making a play for the ball and/or looking back at the ball (even though that's not exactly what the rule says). If you don't know where the ball is and simply run into the receiver in a frantic effort to catch up with him, they'll call that almost every time.

The play you are talking about i think they through the flag on 15 and the other pi penalty was bad, the one that bugged me a lot was the block in the back on the punt return when smith set the guy up perfect for a block to the side shoulder pads.

[stevdock]

During that play you talked about, the QB threw the ball in front of the line of scrimmage.

I don't think anyone else noticed that.

I was sitting right on the line of scrimmage for this play and I was almost positive he was still behind the line of scrimmage when he threw the ball. I believe the LOS was the 40 and his last foot down was on his side of the line.

[bisoneer]

oh the refs really had it in for us today, it was terrible... Good thing our D played well even with the bad interference calls...

[DjKyRo]

After listening to Patty V's interview (and how high she was on getting more teams into the playoffs) I am more and more suspicious of last year's officiating and the horsesh!t calls of suspending Paschall and not doing anything to UNI. It wouldn't surprise me if she were protecting the top teams in conference to make herself look better. I'm sure she's a wonderful person but I'm more and more skeptical of her ability as a conference commissioner.

[Bisonwinagn]

In general I think the officials in the MVFC are the worst I have seen and that includes DII. I'm guessing it's because we get the leftovers from the FBS or the ones that get fired from the FBS.

[99Bison]

During that play you talked about, the QB threw the ball in front of the line of scrimmage.

I don't think anyone else noticed that.

I did... it was about 2 yards beyond the los.

[99Bison]

In general I think the officials in the MVFC are the worst I have seen and that includes DII. I'm guessing it's because we get the leftovers from the FBS or the ones that get fired from the FBS.

The Summit BB officials are the worst officials I have ever seen.

[BisonNeil]

True, we won, but it was a horrible piece of officiating.

The field judges were the worst. Three horrible calls, one was a non-call. Gaitlin (or Williams) in the SE corner of the stadium had an INT and the WR hit him before the ball got there, no call. The later one when the WR jumped over the CB to try and get the ball was atrocious but not nearly as bad as the one on Pike. Awful, just awful.

But yes, we won.

[yellowstreak]

Replay in FCS?

[NDSUFan_Sav]

no one mentioned this one but how about when we were on defense and the ball was under thrown and the WR for ISU came back to play defense and basically grabbed our guy away from the ball but no offensive PI was called, maybe someone got a better look then i did but to me it looked like it should of been called.

[yellowstreak]

no one mentioned this one but how about when we were on defense and the ball was under thrown and the WR for ISU came back to play defense and basically grabbed our guy away from the ball but no offensive PI was called, maybe someone got a better look then i did but to me it looked like it should of been called.

I was sitting in that endzone, he got raped

[Herd]

NDSU needs to play smarter. You need to adjust to the officiating, and we sure didn't. If you are on the offensive line, or in the kick return team, you adjust if they are calling it extremely tight like they were. I sure wouldn't want those officials back to the dome however . . . laundry everywhere!!

As for the Eaves play, he ran into the guy initiating the contact, bumping him off his route, then he turned back and looked for the ball. Probably the right call. If he had turned to the ball then bumped the receiver, it usually isn't called.

Williams play, should have been offensive interference, clearly a big miss, but the defense doesn't get much help.

[Hammersmith]

NDSU needs to play smarter. You need to adjust to the officiating, and we sure didn't. If you are on the offensive line, or in the kick return team, you adjust if they are calling it extremely tight like they were. I sure wouldn't want those officials back to the dome however . . . laundry everywhere!!

As for the Eaves play, he ran into the guy initiating the contact, bumping him off his route, then he turned back and looked for the ball. Probably the right call. If he had turned to the ball then bumped the receiver, it usually isn't called.

Williams play, should have been offensive interference, clearly a big miss, but the defense doesn't get much help.

If this is the play I'm thinking of(ISU pass to the left-side 5 yard line - ~5 min left in the 1st half - just before ISU's first TD), then it was most definitely pass interference on Eaves. Eaves made fairly hard contact with the receiver at about the 10 yard line and knocked him off his route. All while the ball was in the air and Eaves looking only at the receiver. Eaves marks the receiver visually so he knows he's going to hit him, then tries to turn his head away from the receiver to get away with it. He had no clue where the ball was, he was just trying to knock the receiver away because he knew he was beat. Obvious, obvious call. (I'm watching it on the DVR right now.)

Also, the ISU QB was not past the LOS on the throw. The LOS was the Bison 49. The ISU QB released the ball just as his hand was crossing the 50. Say what you want about the other plays in the game, the refs got this one right.

[Tatanka]

I was sitting in that endzone, he got raped

Well, raped might be a strong word but that play was right in front of me. Both of his arms had ISU Blue draped all over them. "F" Ref was standing less than 10 feet away thinking about the gallon of milk he needed to bring home to his mom so she'll continue to let him live in the basement, or something to that effect.

[Gully]

If this is the play I'm thinking of(ISU pass to the left-side 5 yard line - ~5 min left in the 1st half - just before ISU's first TD), then it was most definitely pass interference on Eaves. Eaves made fairly hard contact with the receiver at about the 10 yard line and knocked him off his route. All while the ball was in the air and Eaves looking only at the receiver. Eaves marks the receiver visually so he knows he's going to hit him, then tries to turn his head away from the receiver to get away with it. He had no clue where the ball was, he was just trying to knock the receiver away because he knew he was beat. Obvious, obvious call. (I'm watching it on the DVR right now.)

Also, the ISU QB was not past the LOS on the throw. The LOS was the Bison 49. The ISU QB released the ball just as his hand was crossing the 50. Say what you want about the other plays in the game, the refs got this one right.

Ok, well that's why I asked. From where we were we didn't see it that way. I'm anxious to see it on film because we were a long way from the play.

[Herd]

If this is the play I'm thinking of(ISU pass to the left-side 5 yard line - ~5 min left in the 1st half - just before ISU's first TD), then it was most definitely pass interference on Eaves. Eaves made fairly hard contact with the receiver at about the 10 yard line and knocked him off his route. All while the ball was in the air and Eaves looking only at the receiver. Eaves marks the receiver visually so he knows he's going to hit him, then tries to turn his head away from the receiver to get away with it. He had no clue where the ball was, he was just trying to knock the receiver away because he knew he was beat. Obvious, obvious call. (I'm watching it on the DVR right now.)

Also, the ISU QB was not past the LOS on the throw. The LOS was the Bison 49. The ISU QB released the ball just as his hand was crossing the 50. Say what you want about the other plays in the game, the refs got this one right.

Yes, that's specifically the play I am talking about. On the replay, he made hard contact without looking for the ball. That usually costs you . . . even when the pass missed badly like in this case.

[ndsubison1]

The holding penalties were over the top but the play that really drove me nuts was the pass interference call where the pass was well overthrown and our db turned and ran to try to intercept the ball. Then the receiver ran up his back and they both fell down. The call.....defensive pass interference!!!!!

Did anybody see something I missed? It was right out in the open....just can't understand it.

the call on eaves was blatantly pass interference. I thought the pass could have been caught. YOu just cant run into a guy like that and not expect a call.

I also thought it was offensive pass interference on ISU against MWILL

[Twentysix]

I noticed that but that didn't beat the horrible blown call on a facemask that lead to ISU Blue getting a safety.

The TWO handed facemask by 55 .

There were 2 offensive pass interference calls that went as defensive. One you mentioned and one later in the game where #15 nearly intercepted the ball.

[HerdBot]

The holding penalties were over the top but the play that really drove me nuts was the pass interference call where the pass was well overthrown and our db turned and ran to try to intercept the ball. Then the receiver ran up his back and they both fell down. The call.....defensive pass interference!!!!!

Did anybody see something I missed? It was right out in the open....just can't understand it.

The MVFC absolutely has the worst officials I have ever seen. They should be demoted to D3. The league needs to look hard at how they choose these guys. I'm not only talking about this game but every game I've seen over the last 3 years. They just flat out suck and in many cases make calls at times that decide the outcome of the games.

[BisonNeil]

no one mentioned this one but how about when we were on defense and the ball was under thrown and the WR for ISU came back to play defense and basically grabbed our guy away from the ball but no offensive PI was called, maybe someone got a better look then i did but to me it looked like it should of been called.

That's the one I was referencing two posts before yours. You are right.

[56BISON73]

The holding penalties were over the top but the play that really drove me nuts was the pass interference call where the pass was well overthrown and our db turned and ran to try to intercept the ball. Then the receiver ran up his back and they both fell down. The call.....defensive pass interference!!!!!

Did anybody see something I missed? It was right out in the open....just can't understand it.

Happened TWICE. The O receiver ran in to the DBack while he was going for the ball and they dropped the flag on us. WTF???

[stevdock]

The Pass Interference call on Eaves?? that everyone is talking about was definitely the right call. He never turned just like many have said.

The other one is the one I still can't believe. Pike almost intercepted that pass, obviously going for the ball and made contact while going for it. If they are going to call that why didn't they call it on the 4th and 10 at the end of the game where either Jemison or Evans (didn't catch a number) did the exact same thing. Went up for the ball to knock it down and made contact going up. Same exact play at least pretty much. Either they are both penalties or neither is a penalty.

[Gully]

Happened TWICE. The O receiver ran in to the DBack while he was going for the ball and they dropped the flag on us. WTF???

Well that's what everyone in our section saw too but a lot of people on here are saying that it was a good call...maybe it depended on the angle? One fan described it as the receiver "running up the defenders back".

[Tatanka]

Well I watched the game with an open mind today--seeing it on TV only confirmed my initial assessment.

[IndyBison]

Gully...I seriously need to get you into officiating. Then you will realize how silly you sound. I can't comment on anything from this game because I haven't seen one play but I guarantee you the officiating was not nearly as bad as you think it was.

None of you has probably put in any time to learn the rules, philosophies, and mechanics of officiating. Every official working in the MVFC has probably worked at least 15-20 years of football and had to be scrutinized in at least 1 or 2 levels of college officiating to even be considered for this level. As with the teams there may be individual officials at the D2 or D3 level better than guys working in the MVFC but collectively these are very good crews. As good as Big 10 or MAC officials? Probably not but not much below them. They are all part of the same association and work for the same supervisor.

You are all fans and you have every right to say what you want about the officials. I just hope someone reads my comments and says to themselves, "you know, these guys probably know a lot more about this than I do and there is probably some aspect of that play I don't understand." You probably won't but I can at least try right?

And I do encourage any of you to get involved as an official in your area. There aren't many parts of this country that aren't hurting for officials. You will gain an appreciation for the work they do and how good they really are. I'm sure they had some calls wrong but that will happen. No official has ever worked a perfect game.

[mgbison]

I will say the MVFC officals aren't the greatest. We were spoiled in the transition years with the Big 10 crews. IMO, there is a huge dropoff between those crews and the ones we have now. I'll take the SDSU game a few years ago in the dome and the ISUr game last year as examples of games that were badly officated. Obviously penalties don't decide the outcomes of games, but if you're a offical and are gonna call a personal foul, you better be damned well sure it is a personal foul. It sucks when they throw a flag for some bs borderline call at the end of game and that flag ultimately decides who wins or loses.

[Gully]

Gully...I seriously need to get you into officiating. Then you will realize how silly you sound. I can't comment on anything from this game because I haven't seen one play but I guarantee you the officiating was not nearly as bad as you think it was.

None of you has probably put in any time to learn the rules, philosophies, and mechanics of officiating. Every official working in the MVFC has probably worked at least 15-20 years of football and had to be scrutinized in at least 1 or 2 levels of college officiating to even be considered for this level. As with the teams there may be individual officials at the D2 or D3 level better than guys working in the MVFC but collectively these are very good crews. As good as Big 10 or MAC officials? Probably not but not much below them. They are all part of the same association and work for the same supervisor.

You are all fans and you have every right to say what you want about the officials. I just hope someone reads my comments and says to themselves, "you know, these guys probably know a lot more about this than I do and there is probably some aspect of that play I don't understand." You probably won't but I can at least try right?

And I do encourage any of you to get involved as an official in your area. There aren't many parts of this country that aren't hurting for officials. You will gain an appreciation for the work they do and how good they really are. I'm sure they had some calls wrong but that will happen. No official has ever worked a perfect game.

I sound silly because I questioned some calls? Well, I guess we'll just have to disagree. I think if you go back and read my posts you'll see that I described what it looked like from my perspective and even asked if others saw it differently, it sounds like several did. That's fine, that's why it's a discussion board, to discuss different POVs. IMO what is silly is pretending that refs never make a mistake and are above criticism just because you happen to ref.

Coaches, players, and ADs aren't perfect and get second guessed regularly, I don't see why refs should be any different. Yes, officials know the rules better than fans, just like coaches know the game better than fans. Does that mean we can't criticize coaches either? I don't think so.

Feel free to place my "silly" posts on ignore.:D

[WYOBISONMAN]

Gully...I seriously need to get you into officiating. Then you will realize how silly you sound. I can't comment on anything from this game because I haven't seen one play but I guarantee you the officiating was not nearly as bad as you think it was.

None of you has probably put in any time to learn the rules, philosophies, and mechanics of officiating. Every official working in the MVFC has probably worked at least 15-20 years of football and had to be scrutinized in at least 1 or 2 levels of college officiating to even be considered for this level. As with the teams there may be individual officials at the D2 or D3 level better than guys working in the MVFC but collectively these are very good crews. As good as Big 10 or MAC officials? Probably not but not much below them. They are all part of the same association and work for the same supervisor.

You are all fans and you have every right to say what you want about the officials. I just hope someone reads my comments and says to themselves, "you know, these guys probably know a lot more about this than I do and there is probably some aspect of that play I don't understand." You probably won't but I can at least try right?

And I do encourage any of you to get involved as an official in your area. There aren't many parts of this country that aren't hurting for officials. You will gain an appreciation for the work they do and how good they really are. I'm sure they had some calls wrong but that will happen. No official has ever worked a perfect game.

The bottom line......the officiating stunk. I could tell that from the webcast.

[Scooter1]

Gully...I seriously need to get you into officiating. Then you will realize how silly you sound. I can't comment on anything from this game because I haven't seen one play but I guarantee you the officiating was not nearly as bad as you think it was.

IndyBison, you wouldn't be one of these refs, are you? Some feel that they didn't see one play of the game Saturday, either. ;)

Referee: Don Willard • Umpire: Mike Stumberg • Linesman: Pete Schiavone • Line judge: D.Schinderle • Back judge: Kurt Walderbach • Field judge: RichardTownsend • Side judge: Craig Patrick • Scorer: Jeff Schwartz •

:bow:

Just Kidding.

[NorthernBison]

I wasn't too popular in my area of section 4 on the PI penalty on Eaves. I agreed with the call. It was tight in fron of us. Eaves cut off the route and was not playing the ball. The receiver ran into him and that is what everybody focused on but I think the official got it right.

The Pike penalty is one that I think they got wrong. There was contact but both were playing the ball and had a right to the position. I don't think the contact gave either player an advantage and it actually kept Pike from intercepting the ball.

The "facemask" on Mohler was right in front of us too. When I saw it at game speed, it looked like he grabbed the top of the helmet. On the video boards it appeared he might have gotten the inside of the helmet opening which should draw a flag. (the video quality is not that great in the dome) Since a flag WAS thrown, one official saw a penalty. I assume they picked it up because another official had a better view or was more sure of himself than the guy who threw the flag.

[IndyBison]

I sound silly because I questioned some calls? Well, I guess we'll just have to disagree. I think if you go back and read my posts you'll see that I described what it looked like from my perspective and even asked if others saw it differently, it sounds like several did. That's fine, that's why it's a discussion board, to discuss different POVs. IMO what is silly is pretending that refs never make a mistake and are above criticism just because you happen to ref.

Coaches, players, and ADs aren't perfect and get second guessed regularly, I don't see why refs should be any different. Yes, officials know the rules better than fans, just like coaches know the game better than fans. Does that mean we can't criticize coaches either? I don't think so.

Feel free to place my "silly" posts on ignore.:D

I would never ignore you Gully! You are my friend!

I said you have every right to complain about calls based on what you saw. The silly part is you don't realize how wrong fans (and even coaches and players) are about many of the things they complain about. Unfortunately most fans get their rule knowledge from TV announcers who also don't know the rules. Most fans don't realize they don't know though. They do make mistakes every game and they are held accountable for them. They gate scored on every play in every game. Make too many mistakes and they won't be working any longer. There may be a shortage of good officials at the youth and HS level but there are hundreds of good officials applying to these conferences that could replace the guys that are there.

Keep ranting as much as you want. I'm not going to stop you. But if I can get at least one person to realize these guys are a lot better than you realize or someone decides to try officiating, I've considered it a success.

[IndyBison]

IndyBison, you wouldn't be one of these refs, are you? Some feel that they didn't see one play of the game Saturday, either. ;)

Referee: Don Willard • Umpire: Mike Stumberg • Linesman: Pete Schiavone • Line judge: D.Schinderle • Back judge: Kurt Walderbach • Field judge: RichardTownsend • Side judge: Craig Patrick • Scorer: Jeff Schwartz •

:bow:

Just Kidding.

I wish one of those guys was me! Someday I hope to work my way up to that level. I'm 10 years in and probably at least 5-10 years away from getting to that level. It's going to take a lot of games, a lot of clinics, and a little luck to get to that level.

I only know one of the guys on that crew and I know he is an exceptional official. I worked a game with him last year and he was very helpful to me.

[Tatanka]

I wish one of those guys was me! Someday I hope to work my way up to that level. I'm 10 years in and probably at least 5-10 years away from getting to that level. It's going to take a lot of games, a lot of clinics, and a little luck to get to that level.

I only know one of the guys on that crew and I know he is an exceptional official. I worked a game with him last year and he was very helpful to me.

If it was the Field judge then, well, I don't know what to say.

[KilldeerBison]

Happened TWICE. The O receiver ran in to the DBack while he was going for the ball and they dropped the flag on us. WTF???

The one I remember, the receiver had no chance to catch the ball then veered into the Bison Dback, changing his course at least 2 yards sideways to hit our guy, they both went down and we got the flag.

[TransAmBison]

Yeah, I wasn't too popular with my views on the calls either. I agreed with the pass interference calls. I agreed with both calls. Yeah, I said it. I did not agree with the flag that was thrown and then picked up and they called out what foul did not happen. C'mon...seriously? Also the holding on the field goal?

The only thing that bugs me is when people complain that every single call that goes against the Bison must be a bad call. The one pass intereference was so blatant and most people in my section were absolutely appalled it was called. Really? Gully, consider yourself on ignore from now on.:D :D :D :D

[WYOBISONMAN]

Yeah, I wasn't too popular with my views on the calls either. I agreed with the pass interference calls. I agreed with both calls. Yeah, I said it. I did not agree with the flag that was thrown and then picked up and they called out what foul did not happen. C'mon...seriously? Also the holding on the field goal?

The only thing that bugs me is when people complain that every single call that goes against the Bison must be a bad call. The one pass intereference was so blatant and most people in my section were absolutely appalled it was called. Really? Gully, consider yourself on ignore from now on.:D :D :D :D

But I bet you were drunk.......;)

[TransAmBison]

But I bet you were drunk.......;)
I only had one SD jagbomb, one endzone bomb, a few rummy bears, one pudding shot +1, finished one boot, and a mess of beers. If that makes me drunk than so be it. I suppose I didn't even need to mention anything after the SD jagbomb, did I?:D :D

[KilldeerBison]

I only had one SD jagbomb, one endzone bomb, a few rummy bears, one pudding shot +1, finished one boot, and a mess of beers. If that makes me drunk than so be it. I suppose I didn't even need to mention anything after the SD jagbomb, did I?:D :D

I think your view of these plays may have been obscured by the boa, it could have been too tight and limiting the blood flow to your head? Or, maybe you were drunk.

[TransAmBison]

I think your view of these plays may have been obscured by the boa, it could have been too tight and limiting the blood flow to your head? Or, maybe you were drunk.
Ya know, that is a possibility...or maybe it was not the boa that was too tight but instead the award hanging around my neck. What award you say? I'm glad you asked. I was the proud recipient (I can see CAS trying to mouth the word while scratching his head) of the MVT award. MVT you say? Yes, the Most Valuable Tailgator award.:bow: Yeah baby!!!! That's me!!!! I'm better than all you commoners!!!!!!!!!! nanananananana!!!!!!! Just kidding. Thanks a lot 99bison and bisongirl. I showed to anybody and everybody. Good times!:D :D :D :D *






*Let the jealous abuse begin in 3-2-1

[Gully]

Yeah, I wasn't too popular with my views on the calls either. I agreed with the pass interference calls. I agreed with both calls. Yeah, I said it. I did not agree with the flag that was thrown and then picked up and they called out what foul did not happen. C'mon...seriously? Also the holding on the field goal?

The only thing that bugs me is when people complain that every single call that goes against the Bison must be a bad call. The one pass intereference was so blatant and most people in my section were absolutely appalled it was called. Really? Gully, consider yourself on ignore from now on.:D :D :D :D

Well that's fine but we both know your wife can't ignore me.:D :D

[TransAmBison]

Well that's fine but we both know your wife can't ignore me.:D :D
Yeah, but she has low standards. She did marry me after all.:D

[ndsubison1]

Yeah, I wasn't too popular with my views on the calls either. I agreed with the pass interference calls. I agreed with both calls. Yeah, I said it. I did not agree with the flag that was thrown and then picked up and they called out what foul did not happen. C'mon...seriously? Also the holding on the field goal?

The only thing that bugs me is when people complain that every single call that goes against the Bison must be a bad call. The one pass intereference was so blatant and most people in my section were absolutely appalled it was called. Really? Gully, consider yourself on ignore from now on.:D :D :D :D

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????? Every call against the Bison is a terrible call :D ;)

The student section sure looked stupid chanting bullsh!t on Eaves' PI (if that's the right play Im thinking of) because at the time it was the right call and blatantly interference on us. I am pretty sure it was Eaves

[ndsubison1]

I wish one of those guys was me! Someday I hope to work my way up to that level. I'm 10 years in and probably at least 5-10 years away from getting to that level. It's going to take a lot of games, a lot of clinics, and a little luck to get to that level.

I only know one of the guys on that crew and I know he is an exceptional official. I worked a game with him last year and he was very helpful to me.

Indy and the refs sitting in a tree... haha just playin around Indy!

[Dabison]

I wish one of those guys was me! Someday I hope to work my way up to that level. I'm 10 years in and probably at least 5-10 years away from getting to that level. It's going to take a lot of games, a lot of clinics, and a little luck to get to that level.

I only know one of the guys on that crew and I know he is an exceptional official. I worked a game with him last year and he was very helpful to me.

Good Luck! Whatever you do don't get a big head and walk around with your chest puffed. I know too many refs that think they walk on water and they are the worst referee's because of it. Some of them need to keep their ego (Flag) in their pants.

[IndyBison]

Good Luck! Whatever you do don't get a big head and walk around with your chest puffed. I know too many refs that think they walk on water and they are the worst referee's because of it. Some of them need to keep their ego (Flag) in their pants.

Thanks! I think. Some of that attitude comes from either officials who think they know the rules but they don't (extremely unlikely at the college level) or because they get fed up with stupid comments from coaches or players or fans who don't know the rules and don't handle it well.

Here's an example from our game last week. K punts the ball and it comes down short. Ball is touched by a K player who happens to be near an R player. K ultimately recovers the ball. Wing official has bean bag where K "first touched" the ball (R has the option to take the ball at this spot) and back judge has bean bag at spot of possession (end of kick). Before signalling, BJ has brief conversation with wing official to make sure R did not touch the ball. He confirms. R has the choice of taking the ball at the spot of first touching or the end of the kick whichever is better.

Coach is adamant that we bagged the spot because R touched it. We tried to explain to him that's not the case. After R scores a few plays later, I'm on the sideline for the kick off. Coach comes over to me and brings up this play again and says we are the first crew all year who used the bean bags that way and I should admit we did it wrong. Without getting into another dissertation there is nothing I can tell him that will convince him he's wrong so I just say "Coach, they did it right." He probably thought I was being arrogant by not agreeing with him.

BTW...cool part of this story. The team nickname was the Bison and their colors were green and gold!

[gotts]

Thanks! I think. Some of that attitude comes from either officials who think they know the rules but they don't (extremely unlikely at the college level) or because they get fed up with stupid comments from coaches or players or fans who don't know the rules and don't handle it well.

Here's an example from our game last week. K punts the ball and it comes down short. Ball is touched by a K player who happens to be near an R player. K ultimately recovers the ball. Wing official has bean bag where K "first touched" the ball (R has the option to take the ball at this spot) and back judge has bean bag at spot of possession (end of kick). Before signalling, BJ has brief conversation with wing official to make sure R did not touch the ball. He confirms. R has the choice of taking the ball at the spot of first touching or the end of the kick whichever is better.

Coach is adamant that we bagged the spot because R touched it. We tried to explain to him that's not the case. After R scores a few plays later, I'm on the sideline for the kick off. Coach comes over to me and brings up this play again and says we are the first crew all year who used the bean bags that way and I should admit we did it wrong. Without getting into another dissertation there is nothing I can tell him that will convince him he's wrong so I just say "Coach, they did it right." He probably thought I was being arrogant by not agreeing with him.

BTW...cool part of this story. The team nickname was the Bison and their colors were green and gold!

I'm throwing a major BS flag if the coach was bald!

[SportsLover]

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????? Every call against the Bison is a terrible call :D ;)

The student section sure looked stupid chanting bullsh!t on Eaves' PI (if that's the right play Im thinking of) because at the time it was the right call and blatantly interference on us. I am pretty sure it was Eaves

Yeah that was a pretty easy call and yes it was eaves. Me and my friends were yelling at the rest of the students to shut up.

[TransAmBison]

Thanks! I think. Some of that attitude comes from either officials who think they know the rules but they don't (extremely unlikely at the college level) or because they get fed up with stupid comments from coaches or players or fans who don't know the rules and don't handle it well.

Here's an example from our game last week. K punts the ball and it comes down short. Ball is touched by a K player who happens to be near an R player. K ultimately recovers the ball. Wing official has bean bag where K "first touched" the ball (R has the option to take the ball at this spot) and back judge has bean bag at spot of possession (end of kick). Before signalling, BJ has brief conversation with wing official to make sure R did not touch the ball. He confirms. R has the choice of taking the ball at the spot of first touching or the end of the kick whichever is better.

Coach is adamant that we bagged the spot because R touched it. We tried to explain to him that's not the case. After R scores a few plays later, I'm on the sideline for the kick off. Coach comes over to me and brings up this play again and says we are the first crew all year who used the bean bags that way and I should admit we did it wrong. Without getting into another dissertation there is nothing I can tell him that will convince him he's wrong so I just say "Coach, they did it right." He probably thought I was being arrogant by not agreeing with him.

BTW...cool part of this story. The team nickname was the Bison and their colors were green and gold!
Arrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhhhh!!!! Another ref screwin' Da Bison!!!!!!!!!!! :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::D

[Twentysix]

I think it was him, yes. There was another one later in the game that was questionable as well with another one of our safeties.

Both eaves and gatlin had offensive pass interference called on them as defensive.

[IndyBison]

I'm throwing a major BS flag if the coach was bald!

Ha ha! No but he had a good Scandanavian name (Doug Nelson).

[IndyBison]

Arrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhhhh!!!! Another ref screwin' Da Bison!!!!!!!!!!! :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::D
Yeah...that's what we did because we actually care who wins the game. ;)

[CAS4127]

[QUOTE=TransAmBison;418962]Ya know, that is a possibility...or maybe it was not the boa that was too tight but instead the award hanging around my neck. What award you say? I'm glad you asked. I was the proud recipient (I can see CAS trying to mouth the word while scratching his head) of the MVT award. MVT you say? Yes, the Most Valuable Tailgator award.:bow: Yeah baby!!!! That's me!!!! I'm better than all you commoners!!!!!!!!!! nanananananana!!!!!!! Just kidding. Thanks a lot 99bison and bisongirl. I showed to anybody and everybody. Good times!:D :D :D :D *

What word, recipient--as in the intended recipient of the pass was interferred with but the ball was uncatchable so the flag should have been waved off? Ya, that was a bad call. Rarely, and I repeat, rarely will officiating result in the team that is clearly the better team losing the game. It's called game adversity that you must and have to overcome.

Otherwise, in the "did you know" category, each game is attended by an official working for either the conference and or NCAA that judges (or officiates it you will) the game officiating crew. This official reviews prior game film of the officials working the game, meets with them before the game to discuss obversation s/he has made from those films, meets with them after the game to discuss calls and observations, then watches the game film and again either meets with the crew or talks with them collectively or individually on the phone after reviewing game. Yes, they are at essentially all games-- kinda like the "air Marshalls" on planes. They are there, but you won't necesarily be able to pick them out of the crowd. So, for those of you who think this crew eff'ed up completely, they have been critiqued, and the league and coaches are privy to the outcome of that critique--maybe you'al can sleep better now--just sayin!

[NDSUstudent]

At least Valley refs aren't this bad...


OGDEN, UTAH (Oct. 27, 2010) - The Big Sky Conference has suspended the referee from the Northern Arizona University-University of Montana football game, league Commissioner Doug Fullerton announced Wednesday.

Jim Lenau has been suspended for one game for misapplication of a rule during the second quarter of Montana’s 24-21 victory over Northern Arizona on Saturday, Oct. 23, in Missoula, Mont.

With the score tied 7-7 and 44 seconds remaining in the first half, Northern Arizona kicked the ball to Montana. The Grizzly player caught the ball and stepped out of the back of the end zone. The play was ruled a safety on the field and two points was awarded to Northern Arizona. The play should have resulted in a touchback for Montana.

http://www.bigskyconf.com/news/2010/10/27/FB_1027103300.aspx

[stevdock]

At least Valley refs aren't this bad...



http://www.bigskyconf.com/news/2010/10/27/FB_1027103300.aspx

Please someone explain to me how another ref wouldn't talk to that ref and get it overruled?? I know all refs have different jobs but you'd think someone would have seen that and asked him what he called and then gotten it right.

[IzzyFlexion]

Please someone explain to me how another ref wouldn't talk to that ref and get it overruled?? I know all refs have different jobs but you'd think someone would have seen that and asked him what he called and then gotten it right.

They all picked Northern Arizona (+4)??
Sorry, Indy. Just kidding.

[KilldeerBison]

[QUOTE]

What word, recipient--as in the intended recipient of the pass was interferred with but the ball was uncatchable so the flag should have been waved off? Ya, that was a bad call. Rarely, and I repeat, rarely will officiating result in the team that is clearly the better team losing the game. It's called game adversity that you must and have to overcome.

Otherwise, in the "did you know" category, each game is attended by an official working for either the conference and or NCAA that judges (or officiates it you will) the game officiating crew. This official reviews prior game film of the officials working the game, meets with them before the game to discuss obversation s/he has made from those films, meets with them after the game to discuss calls and observations, then watches the game film and again either meets with the crew or talks with them collectively or individually on the phone after reviewing game. Yes, they are at essentially all games-- kinda like the "air Marshalls" on planes. They are there, but you won't necesarily be able to pick them out of the crowd. So, for those of you who think this crew eff'ed up completely, they have been critiqued, and the league and coaches are privy to the outcome of that critique--maybe you'al can sleep better now--just sayin!

Was this person wearing a green/yellow boa? Or, maybe a yellow hardhat? Our mission, if we choose to accept it, is to find the secret official at the next game. Really, I did not know they did this, is this an NCAA rule or conference rule?

[BlueBisonRock]

Was this person wearing a green/yellow boa? Or, maybe a yellow hardhat? Our mission, if we choose to accept it, is to find the secret official at the next game. Really, I did not know they did this, is this an NCAA rule or conference rule?

After the descriptions I heard from the gentlemen referenced, I strongly suspect they are not the secret official. However, this person named Lakes just might be your guy.

[missingnumber7]

[QUOTE=CAS4127;419887]

Was this person wearing a green/yellow boa? Or, maybe a yellow hardhat? Our mission, if we choose to accept it, is to find the secret official at the next game. Really, I did not know they did this, is this an NCAA rule or conference rule?

Its an NCAA thing...I believe and Indy can confirm this for me, that this is in place in D2 now as well. Not that it matters because all they are getting is a critque of thier performance. They will not change or correct any calls made on the field...see the UM/NAU game. And the reason no one tried to correct the official was probably because the person that would call the Touchback would be the Referee/White Hat, who tends to be the crew chief.

[CAS4127]

One of "these" officials is a former Bison. Keep your head on a swivel (hopefully Bison LB's read that) and maybe you'll see him in your "zone".

[IndyBison]

[QUOTE=KilldeerBison;420006]

Its an NCAA thing...I believe and Indy can confirm this for me, that this is in place in D2 now as well. Not that it matters because all they are getting is a critque of thier performance. They will not change or correct any calls made on the field...see the UM/NAU game. And the reason no one tried to correct the official was probably because the person that would call the Touchback would be the Referee/White Hat, who tends to be the crew chief.

I believe the level of observation and evaluation varies by conference when you get below the D1 level. I know a few of the MVFC officials and know they get evaluated every week. The evaluator may or may not be at the game but they at least review the video. Every play is reviewed and every official gets graded on every play. Overall scores determine the ability of that official to advance to higher levels or work post season.

In our D3 conference, we often have observers attend that give feedback to the crew after the game and to the supervisor. Our supervisor gets videos of most of the games and he gets to view about half of them so the level of scrutiny is not as high as the D1 conferences. He will also field calls from the coaches about specific plays and review them on video. Issues do get addressed. I would guess the D2 reviews would fall somewhere in between.

As for this play, it sounds like a major error that has been addressed. The description is not full so I have no idea if this was a scrimmage kick or free kick. It also doesn't mention where the ball was caught. If it's a scrimmage kick (i.e. punt), there are 3 deep officials covering the end zone and not the referee. He would only have the end zone on a free kick (i.e. kickoff). Whoever made the call, someone else should have stepped up and corrected it. I don't trust the description of the reporter but this was definitely a big enough error if the league chose to suspend the official. Believe it or not there is plenty of accountability.

[IndyBison]

Please someone explain to me how another ref wouldn't talk to that ref and get it overruled?? I know all refs have different jobs but you'd think someone would have seen that and asked him what he called and then gotten it right.

You are 100% correct. Even if it was the referee who got it wrong, someone else on the crew has to go to him and get it corrected. Just because they wear the white hat doesn't mean they are always right. Even if I didn't see it, there are very few instances on a kicking play where a team will end up with a safety. They have to possess the ball in the field of play and then carry or fumble the ball into the end zone.

Here's a quiz for everyone. Let's say R20 is retreating toward his end zone where he catches the ball at his 3 yard line. His momentum carries him into the end zone where he (a) is tackled or (b) runs around, gets hit, fumbles and the ball goes out the back of the zone?

[99Bison]

You are 100% correct. Even if it was the referee who got it wrong, someone else on the crew has to go to him and get it corrected. Just because they wear the white hat doesn't mean they are always right. Even if I didn't see it, there are very few instances on a kicking play where a team will end up with a safety. They have to possess the ball in the field of play and then carry or fumble the ball into the end zone.

Here's a quiz for everyone. Let's say R20 is retreating toward his end zone where he catches the ball at his 3 yard line. His momentum carries him into the end zone where he (a) is tackled or (b) runs around, gets hit, fumbles and the ball goes out the back of the zone?

Huh, um touchback??

[99Bison]

[QUOTE=CAS4127;419887]

Was this person wearing a green/yellow boa? Or, maybe a yellow hardhat? Our mission, if we choose to accept it, is to find the secret official at the next game. Really, I did not know they did this, is this an NCAA rule or conference rule?

Has to be the hardhat guy, because he certainly wasn't up cheering?!?!!? :D

http://photos.bisonillustrated.com/Bison-Illustrated/Football/NDSU-vs-Indiana-State-2010/14330393_dDHMH#1060946018_Tq7b9

[CAS4127]

You are 100% correct. Even if it was the referee who got it wrong, someone else on the crew has to go to him and get it corrected. Just because they wear the white hat doesn't mean they are always right. Even if I didn't see it, there are very few instances on a kicking play where a team will end up with a safety. They have to possess the ball in the field of play and then carry or fumble the ball into the end zone.

Here's a quiz for everyone. Let's say R20 is retreating toward his end zone where he catches the ball at his 3 yard line. His momentum carries him into the end zone where he (a) is tackled or (b) runs around, gets hit, fumbles and the ball goes out the back of the zone?

(a) touchback - which has happened in a Bison game in the past;
(b) safety - not sure whether this has ever happened in a Bison game in the past;

What do I win?:bow:

Also, I assume this is either a kickoff or an interception. If it is a punt, the R20 should be benched--let the ball go into the endzone and take it on the 20. Better yet, make a fair catch signal, bail on that, and block the closest opponent so he can't prevent the ball from going into the endzone.

[TransAmBison]

This just seems like a trick question. I say both plays result in a safety. Gimme a medal. :D

[99Bison]

(a) touchback - which has happened in a Bison game in the past;
(b) safety - not sure whether this has ever happened in a Bison game in the past;

What do I win?:bow:

Also, I assume this is either a kickoff or an interception. If it is a punt, the R20 should be benched--let the ball go into the endzone and take it on the 20. Better yet, make a fair catch signal, bail on that, and block the closest opponent so he can't prevent the ball from going into the endzone.

Oh, they can be diff answers?

[CAS4127]

This just seems like a trick question. I say both plays result in a safety. Gimme a medal. :D

No, Tranny, I am correct on this one (unless the rules have changed--which is possible because of subjectiveness of the call, much like getting pushed out of bounds on a pass reception is not a judgment call anymore, it's just an incomplete pass)--see my post just prior to yours please. I will educate you further on the intracacies of the game when we next see each other. Til then, get your head away from the computer and into the rule book.:D

[TransAmBison]

No, Tranny, I am correct on this one (unless the rules have changed--which is possible because of subjectiveness of the call, much like getting pushed out of bounds on a pass reception is not a judgment call anymore, it's just an incomplete pass)--see my post just prior to yours please. I will educate you further on the intracacies of the game when we next see each other. Til then, get your head away from the computer and into the rule book.:D
Just seemed like the answers you gave were too easy...why would he ask that simple of a question? If you are indeed right, it will validate my belief that IndyBison is the ref with a whistle.

[CAS4127]

Just seemed like the answers you gave were too easy...why would he ask that simple of a question? If you are indeed right, it will validate my belief that IndyBison is the ref with a whistle.

Like I said, perhaps the rules have changed. If not, I stand by my position and, if so, I want a quote from the new and improved rule book.

[Notorious]

I'll go with touchback on both. AND, I know more than CAS41.

[CAS4127]

I'll go with touchback on both. AND, I know more than CAS41.

Yabut (dictionary please, SD) do you know more than CAS4127?

[EndZoneQB]

Yabut

The rabbit?

Any former Moorhead High auto students here?? Or those that know Mr. Darvin Miller... :hide:

[CAS4127]

No, Tranny, I am correct on this one (unless the rules have changed--which is possible because of subjectiveness of the call, much like getting pushed out of bounds on a pass reception is not a judgment call anymore, it's just an incomplete pass)--see my post just prior to yours please. I will educate you further on the intracacies of the game when we next see each other. Til then, get your head away from the computer and into the rule book.:D

Bump: In fact, I believe the Rule will have within it the word "impetus"--just sayin!

[IndyBison]

(a) touchback - which has happened in a Bison game in the past;
(b) safety - not sure whether this has ever happened in a Bison game in the past;

What do I win?:bow:

Also, I assume this is either a kickoff or an interception. If it is a punt, the R20 should be benched--let the ball go into the endzone and take it on the 20. Better yet, make a fair catch signal, bail on that, and block the closest opponent so he can't prevent the ball from going into the endzone.

You win nothing because both your answers are wrong (as is all the other answers provided). The answer would be the same if it was a kickoff, punt, interception or even fumble recovery.

It falls under the rules of safety/touchback. This is determined by who is responsible for putting the ball into the end zone. Since the player who put the ball in the end zone was going into his end zone and the ball ultimately became dead there in both instances, this would be a safety by rule. But the rules makers in their wisdom felt that would be unfair to someone who made a good play. So there is an exception to the safety rule commonly known as the momentum exception.

If the player gains possession of the ball inside the 5 and their original momentum takes them into the end zone where the ball becomes dead, rather than a safety, they get the ball at the spot of possession. Since this is the description in both instances I provided, the team would get a 1st and 10 at the 3 yard line. If you think that's not fair, realize without the momentum exception, this would be a safety for the team who possessed the ball.

A couple extra thoughts on this though. If the player recovers/catches the ball in this situation inside the 1, you are probably going to rule the ball was not possessed until he was in the end zone and give him a touchback. Don't nit this one. If the player recovers/catches the ball at the 6 the exception doesn't apply because he was not inside the 5. This is a safety. If the player catches the ball at the 3 but his momentum is not taking him into the end zone and he is ultimately tackled in the end zone, it is a safety.

CAS...your suggestion on the punt would actually be a bad one. The fair catch signal not only prevents a kicking team member from contacting the returner, it also prevents the returner from blocking. If he were to do as you say, it would be a 15-yard penalty likely from the spot of the foul or the end of the kick (20 if you have a TB) whichever is worse. I agree he shouldn't be fielding the ball at the 3 if it's a punt though. Let that go in for a TB.

[IndyBison]

There were several other posts after I started typing my answer and you still didn't have it right. I don't think this rule has changed any time recently. It's just not one known or understood by anyone other than officials. It's also something that doesn't happen that often.

The word "impetus" isn't used but the same concept exists (bold section). Here is the exact wording of the rule.


Rule 8-5-1a
It is a safety when the ball becomes dead out of bounds behind a goal line, except from an incomplete forward pass, or becomes dead in the possession of a player on, above or behind his own goal line, or becomes dead by rule, and the defending team is responsible for the ball being there. When in question, it is a touchback, not a safety.

Exception 1
When a Team B player intercepts a forward pass, fumble or backward pass or catches a scrimmage or free kick between his five-yard line and the goal line and the ball carrier’s original momentum carries him into the end zone, where the ball is declared dead in his team’s possession, the ball belongs to Team B at the spot where the pass or fumble was intercepted or the kick was caught.

Exception 2 is the same thing but refers to the "recovery" rather than a "catch". The difference is a recovery occurs after a ball has touched the ground. Exception 2 doesn't mention a forward pass though because a grounded forward pass is a dead ball and can't be "recovered". Exception 3 refers to situations where B gains possession during the down and the same thing happens going into A's end zone.

This is fun! Anybody want any more play situations?

[99Bison]

You win nothing because both your answers are wrong (as is all the other answers provided). The answer would be the same if it was a kickoff, punt, interception or even fumble recovery.

It falls under the rules of safety/touchback. This is determined by who is responsible for putting the ball into the end zone. Since the player who put the ball in the end zone was going into his end zone and the ball ultimately became dead there in both instances, this would be a safety by rule. But the rules makers in their wisdom felt that would be unfair to someone who made a good play. So there is an exception to the safety rule commonly known as the momentum exception.

If the player gains possession of the ball inside the 5 and their original momentum takes them into the end zone where the ball becomes dead, rather than a safety, they get the ball at the spot of possession. Since this is the description in both instances I provided, the team would get a 1st and 10 at the 3 yard line. If you think that's not fair, realize without the momentum exception, this would be a safety for the team who possessed the ball.

A couple extra thoughts on this though. If the player recovers/catches the ball in this situation inside the 1, you are probably going to rule the ball was not possessed until he was in the end zone and give him a touchback. Don't nit this one. If the player recovers/catches the ball at the 6 the exception doesn't apply because he was not inside the 5. This is a safety. If the player catches the ball at the 3 but his momentum is not taking him into the end zone and he is ultimately tackled in the end zone, it is a safety.

CAS...your suggestion on the punt would actually be a bad one. The fair catch signal not only prevents a kicking team member from contacting the returner, it also prevents the returner from blocking. If he were to do as you say, it would be a 15-yard penalty likely from the spot of the foul or the end of the kick (20 if you have a TB) whichever is worse. I agree he shouldn't be fielding the ball at the 3 if it's a punt though. Let that go in for a TB.

Hey, this was what I was going off of based on how the question was asked... nit picker guy.

[IndyBison]

At least Valley refs aren't this bad...

http://www.bigskyconf.com/news/2010/10/27/FB_1027103300.aspx
Our supervisor sent us a note about this play. It was a kickoff and the ball was kicked deep into the end zone. The return guy then stepped out of the end zone. Very easy call for the white hat. Should be a TB. Major brain fart on the official. He is apparently a very competent official who made a fundamental error and is now paying for it with a suspension. I guarantee you he is more critical of himself than anyone else is.

There are 6 other officials (and especially 2 others on the goal line) who should have raised a question. The other 4 officials are downfield and not watching the ball so they have no idea what happened with the ball but they should still ask a question when there is a safety on a kickoff. This error is on everyone on the crew.

[IndyBison]

Hey, this was what I was going off of based on how the question was asked... nit picker guy.

Hard to say possession was not gained until the end zone when he catches it at the 3. That would be very clear on video and the official would be downgraded if he did that.

[99Bison]

Hard to say possession was not gained until the end zone when he catches it at the 3. That would be very clear on video and the official would be downgraded if he did that.

It's just how I interpreted the question...
For example I didn't really care if you said x yard line. In order for momentum to carry the guy into the endzone from the three I am envisioning a guy running full speed toward the endzone attempting to make a fingertip catch or stretching jumping catch or something, getting maybe one foot down while making the catch all as part of the process reaching the endzone (eg. Shiancoe bogus reverse type catch from Sunday night except a foot touches around the 3).

To be clear, at first glance I thought "forward progress" of where he caught it (ie. the 3), but re-reading the question a couple times seemed to imply that possession was not established yet (I didn't take your term catch literal enough due to the rest of the fluff). If you would have worded at the 20 yard line momentum tackled back at the 15 it would have been too easy apparently. :)

Now if we just had video the question would be clear :D.

[IndyBison]

It's just how I interpreted the question...
For example I didn't really care if you said x yard line. In order for momentum to carry the guy into the endzone from the three I am envisioning a guy running full speed toward the endzone attempting to make a fingertip catch or stretching jumping catch or something, getting maybe one foot down while making the catch all as part of the process reaching the endzone (eg. Shiancoe bogus reverse type catch from Sunday night except a foot touches around the 3).

To be clear, at first glance I thought "forward progress" of where he caught it (ie. the 3), but re-reading the question a couple times seemed to imply that possession was not established yet (I didn't take your term catch literal enough due to the rest of the fluff). If you would have worded at the 20 yard line momentum tackled back at the 15 it would have been too easy apparently. :)

Now if we just had video the question would be clear :D.

Good observations. Since I said he caught it at the 3, you can assume that's where he got possession. The deep official (BJ or R depending on kick type) should have a bean bag down at that spot to indicate he has momentum. And this is not a forward progress situation. That only occurs if he is contacted by a defender and pushed back. If he caught it at the 20 and went down at the 15 with no contact, the ball is dead at the 15. By rule the same is true over the goal line which would result in a safety. It's the momentum exception to the safety rule that allows R to get the ball at the 3 instead.

BTW...I thought the Shiancoe call was correct on the field and was surprised it was overturned. I assumed there was some aspect of the NFL rule that made it incomplete. Then I heard the NFL revealed it should not have been overturned. Even the NFL guys make mistakes.

[bisonatrix]

yikes that call was bad in the NAU-Montana game. hard to believe they called it AGAINST the home team. helluva game with a great ending that fortunately made sure the call didnt factor much, but still.

oh, and one other thing I noticed (and posted more on in another forum), anyone see who the NAU QB was? Chasen Stangel. the guy who a few years ago Steve Hallstrom and a bunch of us were salivating over like he was the second coming of John Elway (or at least another Steve Walker) who went to Eastern Kentucky after visiting us. apparently he must have transferred there too. didnt have a bad game, didnt have a great game either. he's actually the backup, their main guy was hurt. and he's a junior now. obviously not as good as advertised if he cant crack the NAU starting lineup. once again, bisonville overhypes some lame D1 transfer....not like that ever happens but once in a blue moon.....

[CAS4127]

You win nothing because both your answers are wrong (as is all the other answers provided). The answer would be the same if it was a kickoff, punt, interception or even fumble recovery.

It falls under the rules of safety/touchback. This is determined by who is responsible for putting the ball into the end zone. Since the player who put the ball in the end zone was going into his end zone and the ball ultimately became dead there in both instances, this would be a safety by rule. But the rules makers in their wisdom felt that would be unfair to someone who made a good play. So there is an exception to the safety rule commonly known as the momentum exception.

If the player gains possession of the ball inside the 5 and their original momentum takes them into the end zone where the ball becomes dead, rather than a safety, they get the ball at the spot of possession. Since this is the description in both instances I provided, the team would get a 1st and 10 at the 3 yard line. If you think that's not fair, realize without the momentum exception, this would be a safety for the team who possessed the ball.

A couple extra thoughts on this though. If the player recovers/catches the ball in this situation inside the 1, you are probably going to rule the ball was not possessed until he was in the end zone and give him a touchback. Don't nit this one. If the player recovers/catches the ball at the 6 the exception doesn't apply because he was not inside the 5. This is a safety. If the player catches the ball at the 3 but his momentum is not taking him into the end zone and he is ultimately tackled in the end zone, it is a safety.

CAS...your suggestion on the punt would actually be a bad one. The fair catch signal not only prevents a kicking team member from contacting the returner, it also prevents the returner from blocking. If he were to do as you say, it would be a 15-yard penalty likely from the spot of the foul or the end of the kick (20 if you have a TB) whichever is worse. I agree he shouldn't be fielding the ball at the 3 if it's a punt though. Let that go in for a TB.


I disagree and am willing to debate this ad nauseum. You are wrong, expecially on question (b).

[bisonhusker]

Good observations. Since I said he caught it at the 3, you can assume that's where he got possession. The deep official (BJ or R depending on kick type) should have a bean bag down at that spot to indicate he has momentum. And this is not a forward progress situation. That only occurs if he is contacted by a defender and pushed back. If he caught it at the 20 and went down at the 15 with no contact, the ball is dead at the 15. By rule the same is true over the goal line which would result in a safety. It's the momentum exception to the safety rule that allows R to get the ball at the 3 instead.

BTW...I thought the Shiancoe call was correct on the field and was surprised it was overturned. I assumed there was some aspect of the NFL rule that made it incomplete. Then I heard the NFL revealed it should not have been overturned. Even the NFL guys make mistakes.

Refs suck. Sick of you defending them. Sick of officials thinking that the crowd is there to watch them.

[IndyBison]

I disagree and am willing to debate this ad nauseum. You are wrong, expecially on question (b).

I hope you are just having fun. The rule is very clear on this. No judgment involved other than where the player possessed the ball. Ball caught between goal line and 5, original momentum carriers player into his own end zone, ball becomes dead in end zone in his team's possession (not player possession): ball goes back to spot of possession in field of play. Throw in a penalty or IW and things change but they weren't a part of this scenario.

[IndyBison]

Refs suck. Sick of you defending them. Sick of officials thinking that the crowd is there to watch them.

Bait identified. Not going for it.

[SDbison]

Refs suck. Sick of you defending them. Sick of officials thinking that the crowd is there to watch them.
So much negative energy.........

[56BISON73]

So much negative energy.........

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[IzzyFlexion]

Indy consistantly conducts himself like a gentlemen and bring a lot of good information to this board. I hope husker's post was in jest?

[IndyBison]

For those of you who say I always support the officials in any call they are ever going to make in a game (especially my good friend Gully), I am here to tell you the officials got one wrong.

I'm sure you have all seen this by now because it has been on our local news, the Today Show, CNN, and several people have posted it on Facebook. It's the middle school play in Texas where the QB pretends like something is wrong (turns out the coach is telling him the officials enforced the encroachment penalty wrong). The snapper picks up the ball and moves it over his shoulder to the QB. He walks between the snapper and guard as if he's marching off the penalty. As soon as he is by the linebackers, he takes off running. Touchdown.

Not so fast my friend. This is an act of deception not allowed by the rules at any level (Texas uses NCAA rules so they would apply here). An act or words intended to make the defense believe something is wrong and the snap is not imminent is unsportsmanlike. This usually gets called correctly but occasionally you have a crew that either doesn't understand this rule or brain farts and the play ends up on YouTube as an awesome trick play. It is not.

If any of you are youth or school coaches, please do not consider a play like this or its close cousins, the "where's the tee?" and "wrong ball". You might have a crew that messes it up and allows you to do it and that only creates headaches for those of us who know the rules.

[clenz]

If your defense is dumb enough to line up, watch the center give the QB the ball, and then watch the QB go right through the defense all while just watching him and not moving your team deserves to give up that touchdown.

First movement of that ball your defensive line should be busting balls to the ball carrier

[missingnumber7]

The 2010 NFHS case book 9.9.1 Situation B comments states: "Football has been and always will be a game of deception and trickery involving multiple shifts, unusual formations and creative plays. However, actions or verbiage designed to confuse the defense into believing there is a problem and a snap is not imminent is beyond the scope of sportsmanship and is illegal."


This is a recent change because of all the stupid antics that had been happening recently.

Here is a video out there were BYU was penalized for deception. Basically footballs version of the guy on all fours barking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhlXQvjuPHA

[gotts]

For those of you who say I always support the officials in any call they are ever going to make in a game (especially my good friend Gully), I am here to tell you the officials got one wrong.

I'm sure you have all seen this by now because it has been on our local news, the Today Show, CNN, and several people have posted it on Facebook. It's the middle school play in Texas where the QB pretends like something is wrong (turns out the coach is telling him the officials enforced the encroachment penalty wrong). The snapper picks up the ball and moves it over his shoulder to the QB. He walks between the snapper and guard as if he's marching off the penalty. As soon as he is by the linebackers, he takes off running. Touchdown.

Not so fast my friend. This is an act of deception not allowed by the rules at any level (Texas uses NCAA rules so they would apply here). An act or words intended to make the defense believe something is wrong and the snap is not imminent is unsportsmanlike. This usually gets called correctly but occasionally you have a crew that either doesn't understand this rule or brain farts and the play ends up on YouTube as an awesome trick play. It is not.

If any of you are youth or school coaches, please do not consider a play like this or its close cousins, the "where's the tee?" and "wrong ball". You might have a crew that messes it up and allows you to do it and that only creates headaches for those of us who know the rules.

Gotta love when THIS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQbAP-K28J8&feature=player_embedded) happens then!

[Gully]

Almost forgot....I think someone mentioned this but I don't know if I've heard anyone give a reasonable explanation.

SIU at NDSU....wide receiver "jumps" before the ball was snapped but then sort of falls into a 3 point stance to avoid the false start. Then the ball was snapped immediatly. Our db sort of paused and pointed to the WR but the play continued and they gained 30 yards, putting them in field goal range.

To me it should be a false start. The only possible explanation I could think of is they said he came back set in a 3 point stance before the ball was snapped. Only problem with that is wouldn't he have to be set for a moment before the ball was snapped to avoid a penalty?

Could this possibly have been a trick play done on purpose? That's maybe a stretch.

Discuss.

[OrygunBison]

For those of you who say I always support the officials in any call they are ever going to make in a game (especially my good friend Gully), I am here to tell you the officials got one wrong.

I'm sure you have all seen this by now because it has been on our local news, the Today Show, CNN, and several people have posted it on Facebook. It's the middle school play in Texas where the QB pretends like something is wrong (turns out the coach is telling him the officials enforced the encroachment penalty wrong). The snapper picks up the ball and moves it over his shoulder to the QB. He walks between the snapper and guard as if he's marching off the penalty. As soon as he is by the linebackers, he takes off running. Touchdown.

Not so fast my friend. This is an act of deception not allowed by the rules at any level (Texas uses NCAA rules so they would apply here). An act or words intended to make the defense believe something is wrong and the snap is not imminent is unsportsmanlike. This usually gets called correctly but occasionally you have a crew that either doesn't understand this rule or brain farts and the play ends up on YouTube as an awesome trick play. It is not.

If any of you are youth or school coaches, please do not consider a play like this or its close cousins, the "where's the tee?" and "wrong ball". You might have a crew that messes it up and allows you to do it and that only creates headaches for those of us who know the rules.

Crap, now I have to get rid of all of those plays for my son's league...

[IndyBison]

Almost forgot....I think someone mentioned this but I don't know if I've heard anyone give a reasonable explanation.

SIU at NDSU....wide receiver "jumps" before the ball was snapped but then sort of falls into a 3 point stance to avoid the false start. Then the ball was snapped immediatly. Our db sort of paused and pointed to the WR but the play continued and they gained 30 yards, putting them in field goal range.

To me it should be a false start. The only possible explanation I could think of is they said he came back set in a 3 point stance before the ball was snapped. Only problem with that is wouldn't he have to be set for a moment before the ball was snapped to avoid a penalty?

Could this possibly have been a trick play done on purpose? That's maybe a stretch.

Discuss.

I'd have to see it but as you describe it that would probably be a false start. It's not a deception issue in this case. He possibly just missed the snap count and recovered before the snap. This is more common with running backs. Officials argue about whether this should always be flagged as a false start or if you should allow them to get set before the snap if they are eligible to shift.

Do you know if he was on or off the line of scrimmage? If nobody else was moving at the time and the official didn't consider it a false start, this would be considered motion rather than shift if he did not get set before the snap. If it was motion and he was off the line of scrimmage, no foul. If it was motion and he was on the line of scrimmage, you have illegal motion because only a back can be in motion at the snap (a receiver is considered a back for rules purposes if he's off the line of scrimmage).

And you all thought this officiating thing was straight forward and simple. Lots of things to consider on an otherwise simple play.

[IndyBison]

Crap, now I have to get rid of all of those plays for my son's league...

I know some officials out in your neck of the woods. I just sent them your name and they will be watching for you. :nod:

[IndyBison]

The 2010 NFHS case book 9.9.1 Situation B comments states: "Football has been and always will be a game of deception and trickery involving multiple shifts, unusual formations and creative plays. However, actions or verbiage designed to confuse the defense into believing there is a problem and a snap is not imminent is beyond the scope of sportsmanship and is illegal."


This is a recent change because of all the stupid antics that had been happening recently.

Here is a video out there were BYU was penalized for deception. Basically footballs version of the guy on all fours barking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhlXQvjuPHA

It's been there as long as I can remember. It's just getting more publicity the last few years thanks to YouTube. Everyone posts these types of videos thinking they've figured out something wonderful.

I can't see your video at work but I'll check it out tonight. Another one that is similar and is sometimes tried as high as the college level is a pretended substitution on a scrimmage kick play. These often involve several substitutions so you may have 9 or 10 players running in and out. Let's say the kicking team runs out 9 new players but 10 old players start running off. There are so many bodies, nobody on the defense realizes there is a difference of one. That extra player stops near the sideline and hopes nobody notices him. Ball is snapped and ball is thrown to this player. This is also an unsportsmanlike conduct foul.

[Gully]

I'd have to see it but as you describe it that would probably be a false start. It's not a deception issue in this case. He possibly just missed the snap count and recovered before the snap. This is more common with running backs. Officials argue about whether this should always be flagged as a false start or if you should allow them to get set before the snap if they are eligible to shift.

Do you know if he was on or off the line of scrimmage? If nobody else was moving at the time and the official didn't consider it a false start, this would be considered motion rather than shift if he did not get set before the snap. If it was motion and he was off the line of scrimmage, no foul. If it was motion and he was on the line of scrimmage, you have illegal motion because only a back can be in motion at the snap (a receiver is considered a back for rules purposes if he's off the line of scrimmage).

And you all thought this officiating thing was straight forward and simple. Lots of things to consider on an otherwise simple play.

I could not tell if he was on or off the line of scrimmage from my angle.

I don't remember anyone else being in motion but even if he was considered "in motion" that can't be moving toward the line of scrimmage when the ball is snapped right? Unless you're in the CFL anyway! They have some really goofy rules up there.

[IndyBison]

I could not tell if he was on or off the line of scrimmage from my angle.

I don't remember anyone else being in motion but even if he was considered "in motion" that can't be moving toward the line of scrimmage when the ball is snapped right? Unless you're in the CFL anyway! They have some really goofy rules up there.

Correct but that terminology is intended to cover the guy in motion who decides to turn up field a little too early or the receiver lined up in the backfield who decides to move up to the line but is still moving at the snap. If you are going to have anything in this play it's likely going to be a false start. If the official didn't feel he simulated the start of the play, he's going to let it go. Or he just missed it. It does happen. I'll watch the Bohl show tomorrow night and see if they show it.