Bad calls...

[IndyBison]

You mention announcers wrongly commenting on penalties during games. Have you watched enough games announced by Herbstreit to know his comments about DPI and the need to turn one's head? If you are familiar with his comments, can you please comment on them?

I'm not familiar with his comments specifically. There is nothing that requires a defender to turn around to avoid DPI, but it's a pretty good indicator. One of the 6 categories for DPI is early contact not playing the ball. If a defender is beat and not playing the ball (impossible without turning to see the ball coming), the threshold for allowable contact is low. Minor contact or hand fighting between both players is likely nothing. Out of he times the contact perfectly is likely nothing.

If he turns his head he's now playing the ball and an long as he doesn't commit one of the other categories (arm grab, arm bar, hook and turn, or cut off route) it's likely nothing.

So not turning isn't automatically DPI and turning doesn't generally absolve you. There are many instances where the announcers are right that a defender wouldn't have been guilty if they were turned and playing the ball.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[KrAzY3]

not playing the ball (impossible without turning to see the ball coming)

That part is a bit fuzzy though, isn't it? I mean watching the Saints last game, a guy tipped the ball with his back to the quarterback, he just saw something to indicate the ball was coming and timed his arm motion, clearly playing the ball without seeing it. I've seen various things about how a defender is watching the receiver's eyes and such when he's defending, so the cut and dry that's impossible type stuff seems a bit extreme. It is possible to play the ball without actually seeing it...

 

[CrimsonForce]

Regarding the general questions about later fumbles on a play and a potential hold earlier away from the runner, that doesn't apply. If the restriction continues after the fumble and the player executing the block isn't trying to get to the ball, you could definitely have a hold for the continuing action. I would definitely have to see the play though.

Generally once the ball is loose it's a free for all and the rules allow any player to push, pull, or grab an opponent in an attempt to get to the ball. If you are just holding someone to prevent them from getting to the ball, that would be a foul.

There are many instances where separate acts during a down aren't related to each other. As you are describing this I would say that applies.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

So a player can hold all he wants as long as it's "away from the runner." That just doesn't make sense. Can you let us know where in the rule book it talks about only applying penalties at the point of attack? I've never heard of that before and you've avoided that specific question several times. I'm genuinely curious because you speak of this as it's common knowledge so it should be in the rule book then, correct?

 

[IndyBison]

So a player can hold all he wants as long as it's "away from the runner." That just doesn't make sense. Can you let us know where in the rule book it talks about only applying penalties at the point of attack? I've never heard of that before and you've avoided that specific question several times. I'm genuinely curious because you speak of this as it's common knowledge so it should be in the rule book then, correct?

You've probably heard the saying there could be holding on every play. That's only if you take the rule very literally. If you don't accept the fact philosophies exist and applied to enforce the rules, you will not agree with much of what I share. But they exist to help provide consistency, game management, and fairness.

These philosophies are documented several different ways. Rogers Redding, former SEC referee, SEC supervisor of officials, and NCAA rules editor, has written a study guide for decades that is usually considered the best resource for explaining rules. There are other publications produced by conferences, Referee magazine, NASO, and others. The CFO produces training videos every year showing correct and incorrect applications of rules philosophies and mechanics. These are reviewed and discussed at clinics, study groups and meetings throughout the year. I hosted a study group meeting last night and about 15 officials met for over 2 hours reviewing ascot 20 plays discussing a variety of things. You don't advance to the FBS level if you aren't actively learning and applying these philosophies. They are fairly standard and universal.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[CrimsonForce]

You've probably heard the saying there could be holding on every play. That's only if you take the rule very literally. If you don't accept the fact philosophies exist and applied to enforce the rules, you will not agree with much of what I share. But they exist to help provide consistency, game management, and fairness.

These philosophies are documented several different ways. Rogers Redding, former SEC referee, SEC supervisor of officials, and NCAA rules editor, has written a study guide for decades that is usually considered the best resource for explaining rules. There are other publications produced by conferences, Referee magazine, NASO, and others. The CFO produces training videos every year showing correct and incorrect applications of rules philosophies and mechanics. These are reviewed and discussed at clinics, study groups and meetings throughout the year. I hosted a study group meeting last night and about 15 officials met for over 2 hours reviewing ascot 20 plays discussing a variety of things. You don't advance to the FBS level if you aren't actively learning and applying these philosophies. They are fairly standard and universal.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Of course they exist I'm just asking where. You've given a few examples but it seems like if these "philosophies" are standards, as you say, that they'd be documented in something other than a study guide or training video. Most would assume the ways the rules are applied would be included in the rulebook not in another medium altogether. One thing that would help tremendously for the general public would be to publish or make these philosophies known outside of conferences for referees. I realize that's beyond your scope but surely you can see where the frustration lies with the average fan..

 

[KrAzY3]

I'd have to agree with CrimsonForce in that if a rule if being enforced a particular way that isn't in the rulebook, then the appropriate course of action would be to change the rulebook. Selective enforcement of rules seems like a dangerous road to go down, one that lets the enforcers of the rules choose what they want to do vs. what they should do. It would also explain how, for example Alabama could be almost last or dead last in opponent penalty yards three out of the past four years. The rules should be as clear cut as possible, with the least amount of room for interpretation possible.

It really shouldn't be ok for the refs to just get together and go, alright we're calling it this way. There's a rules committee for that sort of thing isn't there?

 

[Tidetwin]

I'd have to agree with CrimsonForce in that if a rule if being enforced a particular way that isn't in the rulebook, then the appropriate course of action would be to change the rulebook. Selective enforcement of rules seems like a dangerous road to go down, one that lets the enforcers of the rules choose what they want to do vs. what they should do. It would also explain how, for example Alabama could be almost last or dead last in opponent penalty yards three out of the past four years. The rules should be as clear cut as possible, with the least amount of room for interpretation possible.
It really shouldn't be ok for the refs to just get together and go, alright we're calling it this way. There's a rules committee for that sort of thing isn't there?

But they do it all the time. Our Big 8 crew from last year's title game apparently wasn't going to call the "pick" plays and, if I'm not mistaken, let the coaches know it.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

I teach eighth grade Social Studies, and this reminds me a lot of what I was teaching my students yesterday. I gave them a literacy test used in Louisiana up until the 1960s, and they were incredibly frustrated by the fact that I could arbitrarily call an answer incorrect based on my own prejudices.
This is what this "philosophical" approach sounds like. Of course, we've seen this borne out in the fact that Alabama is consistently ranked at the bottom of FBS schools when it comes to penalties called on its opponents. Thank you for confirming exactly what we have been suspicious of for the last decade or so.

 

[KrAzY3]

But they do it all the time. Our Big 8 crew from last year's title game apparently wasn't going to call the "pick" plays and, if I'm not mistaken, let the coaches know it.

Of course that makes it no less acceptable. Teams practice and gameplan around the rules as they are written. The fact that on some levels teams have turned to scouting officials is very worrisome. The rules don't change from game to game and as such neither should enforcement.

I want to clarify that I'm not trying to blame Indy for explaining this to us, he's not the villain in all of this. He has, however, shown a symptom of the problem. It exists in basketball and baseball as well though. I've seen "superstar" calls in basketball, traveling being ignored (and it's a real easy call, you just need to be able to count), etc... In baseball I've seen the strike zone change over time and from ump to ump, and it's another thing that's really clear cut. The rulebook states exactly where it is, you form a box, if the ball breaks the plane at any point it is a strike. Yet, time and time again that box has been moved all over the place semi-randomly. That's not ok.

To go one step further, there are all these laws on the books in the United States that are rarely, if ever enforced. They shouldn't exist, but they do, and every now and then some poor guy gets an archaic law enforced against him because technically it's still illegal. That's part of the problem here, when you choose to overlook enforcement under some circumstances, that's not going to be 100%. So they can still blow the whistle on it anytime, it's still in the rulebook, but it's just up to them on whether or not they want to. That's probably the biggest problem, letting desire become a factor. If the rule is messed up, the rule needs to be changed, not the enforcement of it.

On all levels, in any walk of life, the rules should be enforced as they are written. If there's something wrong with that, then the rules should be changed (not enforcing the rules makes it easier to leave in bad rules). There simply isn't a place for police, refs, anyone in those sort of positions to end up being the ones that decide the rules. That's not their role, they were not given that responsibility.

 

[IndyBison]

Of course they exist I'm just asking where. You've given a few examples but it seems like if these "philosophies" are standards, as you say, that they'd be documented in something other than a study guide or training video. Most would assume the ways the rules are applied would be included in the rulebook not in another medium altogether. One thing that would help tremendously for the general public would be to publish or make these philosophies known outside of conferences for referees. I realize that's beyond your scope but surely you can see where the frustration lies with the average fan..

The general public doesn't want to read the rule book let alone the study guides, but here is a link to last year's edition if you want to buy and read it.

http://www.penaltycard.com/2017-reddings-study-guide-to-football-ncaa-edition/

Here is a sample of a training video I found on YouTube. You'll especially like Passing Play #6 about 9 minutes in. Another missed pick play against Alabama.

https://youtu.be/bRcLbj8nguQ


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[IndyBison]

I'd have to agree with CrimsonForce in that if a rule if being enforced a particular way that isn't in the rulebook, then the appropriate course of action would be to change the rulebook. Selective enforcement of rules seems like a dangerous road to go down, one that lets the enforcers of the rules choose what they want to do vs. what they should do. It would also explain how, for example Alabama could be almost last or dead last in opponent penalty yards three out of the past four years. The rules should be as clear cut as possible, with the least amount of room for interpretation possible.

It really shouldn't be ok for the refs to just get together and go, alright we're calling it this way. There's a rules committee for that sort of thing isn't there?

The rules committee is made up entirely of coaches and they understand the role of rules and philosophies. You want to keep the rules as simple as possible (and they aren't always simple). The rule book also had approved rulings with are play examples that further explain how the rules should be applied. They don't get into philosophy, but they do clarify the rules and are an official publication of the rules committee.

If you are having a hard time understanding this I'm not sure what else I can tell you. This is how rules have been developed and enforced in all sports at all levels as long as there have been rules. It's not each crew getting together to decide how they are going to enforce rules. It comes down from the highest levels and evaluation and ratings are based on them. The supervisor of the SEC makes sure his officials are as consistent as possible play to play and game to game. Every official is graded on every play and if they receive which downgrades (which could include flagging a backside hold) they will not get as postseason assignment and could eventually get fired.

There will always be gray areas and philosophies help reduce the gray address as much as possible. Holding and pass interference are two great examples. I've provided the categories used and that helps to greatly twice that gray. When we submit our penalty reports after the game we have to include the categories. The coaches usually understand them too. When they ask what their player did for DPI, if we say "hook and turn" he'll understand what was seen. He may not agree, but at least it gives the official a little more credibility. If you can't give the category be ready to take the deserved abuse.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[IndyBison]

I teach eighth grade Social Studies, and this reminds me a lot of what I was teaching my students yesterday. I gave them a literacy test used in Louisiana up until the 1960s, and they were incredibly frustrated by the fact that I could arbitrarily call an answer incorrect based on my own prejudices.
This is what this "philosophical" approach sounds like. Of course, we've seen this borne out in the fact that Alabama is consistently ranked at the bottom of FBS schools when it comes to penalties called on its opponents. Thank you for confirming exactly what we have been suspicious of for the last decade or so.

That was an interesting fact. I'm a data geek so I love seeing thinks like that. I would love to try to figure out any other patterns.

One thing I have seen is generally better teams commit fewer fouls. Alabama generally plays a very good schedule so you are also playing other really good teams. I would expect to be at the bottom of both lists. To be the very bottom that many times in interesting. I can pretty confidently say it's not a coordinated, planned thing, but I think it does raise a very interesting question.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[IndyBison]

Of course that makes it no less acceptable. Teams practice and gameplan around the rules as they are written. The fact that on some levels teams have turned to scouting officials is very worrisome. The rules don't change from game to game and as such neither should enforcement.

I want to clarify that I'm not trying to blame Indy for explaining this to us, he's not the villain in all of this. He has, however, shown a symptom of the problem. It exists in basketball and baseball as well though. I've seen "superstar" calls in basketball, traveling being ignored (and it's a real easy call, you just need to be able to count), etc... In baseball I've seen the strike zone change over time and from ump to ump, and it's another thing that's really clear cut. The rulebook states exactly where it is, you form a box, if the ball breaks the plane at any point it is a strike. Yet, time and time again that box has been moved all over the place semi-randomly. That's not ok.

To go one step further, there are all these laws on the books in the United States that are rarely, if ever enforced. They shouldn't exist, but they do, and every now and then some poor guy gets an archaic law enforced against him because technically it's still illegal. That's part of the problem here, when you choose to overlook enforcement under some circumstances, that's not going to be 100%. So they can still blow the whistle on it anytime, it's still in the rulebook, but it's just up to them on whether or not they want to. That's probably the biggest problem, letting desire become a factor. If the rule is messed up, the rule needs to be changed, not the enforcement of it.

On all levels, in any walk of life, the rules should be enforced as they are written. If there's something wrong with that, then the rules should be changed (not enforcing the rules makes it easier to leave in bad rules). There simply isn't a place for police, refs, anyone in those sort of positions to end up being the ones that decide the rules. That's not their role, they were not given that responsibility.

None of the philosophies have anything to do with the superiority of one team over another or one athlete over another. Generally the lesser athlete may concede to "cheating" to level the playing field (i.e. an overpowered lineman holding because he keeps getting beat).

The traveling comment is another example of misunderstanding of rules by fans. Ask your basketball official buddies to try to explain it. It has nothing to do with steps. The rules language has to do with gathering the ball and establishing a pivot, but if a player is moving it's different, and if they jump and land on both get at the same time or one before the other. And I think the NBA rule is different than the NCAA rule. I'm sue they have philosophies around it too. What I do know though is that I don't know the rule and assume most of the time the covering official is getting it right based on how their level wants the rule applied.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[IndyBison]

I'm sure there are many examples where police enforce laws with done judgement and philosophy. One example would be speed limit. If the speed limit is 55 and you are going 56 are they going to automatically give you a ticket? No. It's very unlikely. But they could. They may not give you a ticket until you reach 60. Why not just change the law so the speed limit is 60. Because then everyone would go 65.

Laws and rules aren't always a great analogy because one is a game and one governs the norms of a functional society. But there are some that do make sense.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Tidewater]

Indy, I appreciate the insights.

I honestly believe that the NCAA has a very serious PR problem.
They publish the rules. Fans can read the rules. The same fans can look at plays like the Ridley touchdown, the same play on which UGA player #45 clearly and deliberately interfered with Bama player #22, and yet no flag was thrown, no foul called.
I've been watching NCAA football for nigh on 40 years and I have never heard of rules "philosophies." I am not saying they do not exist nor am I saying they should not, I have just never heard any NCAA official (on the field or "above") use that term. What I see is a player violating the rules and officials ignoring the violations. This leads to two themes that get repeated ad nauseum: (1) officials are incompetent or (2) worse, officials are on the take. Neither is good for the sport.
The NCAA, I feel needs to tell fans more about how they decide whether particular player behavior is a foul or not (i.e. to explain the use of "philosophies"), because now, in the face of very clear video evidence, officials are not call fouls and the integrity of the sport is brought into question.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Selective enforcement of rules seems like a dangerous road to go down, one that lets the enforcers of the rules choose what they want to do vs. what they should do. It would also explain how, for example Alabama could be almost last or dead last in opponent penalty yards three out of the past four years. The rules should be as clear cut as possible, with the least amount of room for interpretation possible.

Bingo.

 

[crimsonaudio]

One thing I have seen is generally better teams commit fewer fouls. Alabama generally plays a very good schedule so you are also playing other really good teams. I would expect to be at the bottom of both lists. To be the very bottom that many times in interesting. I can pretty confidently say it's not a coordinated, planned thing, but I think it does raise a very interesting question.

Worth noting that teams almost universally commit the fewest called fouls of the season when playing Alabama - a team that generally has more talent at most every position than the team they are facing.

I suppose one can dance around it all day long, but the facts are the facts - teams are called for fewer fouls when playing Alabama. Are they all suddenly executing at a higher level for sixty minutes despite playing Bama's superior athletes? Or is there a bias from the officials?

Occam's Razor leads me to the conclusion that there is referee bias - whether intentional or not...

 

[crimsonaudio]

Indy, I appreciate the insights.

More than anything else I post in this thread, I agree with this. No matter what we all believe, getting this peak 'behind the curtain' is greatly appreciated, and I applaud IndyBison for taking the time to share with us...

 

[colbysullivan]

Traveling has nothing to do with steps?!?!?

Ok, I’m out...

 

[NationalTitles18]

More than anything else I post in this thread, I agree with this. No matter what we all believe, getting this peak 'behind the curtain' is greatly appreciated, and I applaud IndyBison for taking the time to share with us...

I concur.