levelm
I know everyone knows all the rules already, but if there are any questions I thought we could start a new thread instead of brining back the old one.
Quote 1 0
levelm
A coach asked me how the Matthews late hit on Kaepernick would have been enforced differently in NFHS.

We enforce all dead ball penalties in high school, so Matthews' hit would have been enforced half the distance to the goal and a first down (since it was about 4th & 1, not an automatic 1st down) then enforce the SF penalty 15 yards back. So it would have been 1st and 10 from the 17 (or wherever half the distance plus 15 was). Not 1st and goal since it was before the ready.
Quote 0 0
cbjj
Here's a question:

A play happened in a game last Friday that had me confused. It was 4th and goal from about the 8 and the offense threw a pass into the endzone that was incomplete, but the defender had tackled the receiver and a flag was thrown and they called defensive pass interference. I believe last year they would put the ball at the 1 or they would got half the distance, I don't remember which. I actually think it was half the distance, but it has always been an automatic first down. The referee said they changed it and it was just a replay of the previous down. The side judge told me they changed that this year. He said he totally disagreed with the change, but they have to follow the rules. Does anyone know why they changed this? For the life of me, I can't think of a good reason to change this. I'm not saying the refs misinterpreted the rules, I'm just wondering why the change by the WIAA?
Quote 0 0
whistleblower1
Previous to this season, the penalty for Defensive Pass Interference (DPI) was 15 yards from the previous spot and automatic first down. The penalty for Offensive Pass Interference (OPI) was 15 yards from the previous spot and loss of down. As anyone can imagine, 15 and LOD is a drive killer. For the past few years there were proposals to eliminate the loss of down on OPI thinking that the 15 yards was penalty enough. Those proposals fail several times. During this past off-season, it came up again. As a compromise, the loss of down was removed for OPI as was the automatic first down for DPI.

No NFHS rule would ever automatically place the ball at the one yard line. In your situation, the correct enforcement would be half the distance to the goal and replay the down. It would then be 4/goal @ B4.

Personally, I agree with the change. I feel the 15 and LOD is an excessive penalty. Talking with my fellow officials, many of us agreed that if they took out the LOD, it would be fair to remove the automatic first down also. My second choice would have been to make OPI 5 yards and LOD.
Without officials, it would just be recess!
Quote 0 0
mj11
whistleblower1 wrote:
Previous to this season, the penalty for Defensive Pass Interference (DPI) was 15 yards from the previous spot and automatic first down. The penalty for Offensive Pass Interference (OPI) was 15 yards from the previous spot and loss of down. As anyone can imagine, 15 and LOD is a drive killer. For the past few years there were proposals to eliminate the loss of down on OPI thinking that the 15 yards was penalty enough. Those proposals fail several times. During this past off-season, it came up again. As a compromise, the loss of down was removed for OPI as was the automatic first down for DPI.

No NFHS rule would ever automatically place the ball at the one yard line. In your situation, the correct enforcement would be half the distance to the goal and replay the down. It would then be 4/goal @ B4.

Personally, I agree with the change. I feel the 15 and LOD is an excessive penalty. Talking with my fellow officials, many of us agreed that if they took out the LOD, it would be fair to remove the automatic first down also. My second choice would have been to make OPI 5 yards and LOD.


Excellent post WB.

The only thing I would like to add is that many people believe the WIAA is responsible for rule changes. This is not the case. The National Federation of High Schools (NFHS) is responsible. Meaning it is not just Wisconsin that the rule is changed. It is done at a national level.
Quote 0 0
hoopitup7
In a game last week, an official's crew administered an OT starting from the 10 yd line rather than the 25 yard line...I can't believe that there is a crew out there that doesn't know the actual format of OT in HS currently!
Quote 0 0
levelm
Like mj11 said, this was not a WIAA change but an NFHS change, and from what I've heard, whistleblower was exactly right for the reason behind it as a compromise. Personally I think the rule gives an advantage to the defense, just like in the example here, if you are going to get beat for a touchdown, just tackle the recever. But the penalty for offensive pass interference was too harsh the way it was, you could punch a player and not have as severe a penalty for your team.
Quote 0 0
levelm
hoopitup7 wrote:
In a game last week, an official's crew administered an OT starting from the 10 yd line rather than the 25 yard line...I can't believe that there is a crew out there that doesn't know the actual format of OT in HS currently!



The overtime procedure is a WIAA adaptaion to the NFHS rules (like the 35 point running clock) but still a big mistake. It has been from the 25 for at least 4 years now. Didn't the coaches say anything?
Quote 0 0
coach40
whistleblower1 wrote:
Previous to this season, the penalty for Defensive Pass Interference (DPI) was 15 yards from the previous spot and automatic first down. The penalty for Offensive Pass Interference (OPI) was 15 yards from the previous spot and loss of down. As anyone can imagine, 15 and LOD is a drive killer. For the past few years there were proposals to eliminate the loss of down on OPI thinking that the 15 yards was penalty enough. Those proposals fail several times. During this past off-season, it came up again. As a compromise, the loss of down was removed for OPI as was the automatic first down for DPI.

No NFHS rule would ever automatically place the ball at the one yard line. In your situation, the correct enforcement would be half the distance to the goal and replay the down. It would then be 4/goal @ B4.

Personally, I agree with the change. I feel the 15 and LOD is an excessive penalty. Talking with my fellow officials, many of us agreed that if they took out the LOD, it would be fair to remove the automatic first down also. My second choice would have been to make OPI 5 yards and LOD.



It takes out the automatic first down but in all reality unless it is 4th or whatever and 16 or more it will be a first down. Am i correct?
Do or do not---there is no try
Master Yoda
Quote 0 0
whistleblower1
As long as the line-to-gain is less that 15 yards away, you are correct coach.
Without officials, it would just be recess!
Quote 0 0
cbjj
Thank you for your explanation. I didn't dispute the rule I was just wondering why the change. I guess it my eyes it would be better to give the down back on OPI and still allow the automatic first down on DPI, but I see why they wanted to even it out. The goal line situation as it stands right now isn't a good situation because I even heard our teams DC yell out, if you're beat just tackle him. I mean if it's 4th and goal what do you have to loose, only half the distance. I also didn't realize that these rules are changed at a national level. Thank you for correcting me.

Here's another situation: The quarterback is under pressure in the end-zone and heaves the ball down field. I was at a game last night that this happened. It lands about 5 yards away from a receiver. To be honest, the receiver didn't even know it was coming. If he had he probably could have caught it. The ball lands incomplete and the refs get together and say it was intentional grounding on the quarterback in the end zone.....Safety. The offensive team wants an explanation and they are told the quarterback had no idea there was a receiver in the area and just threw it up, and the fact that there was a receiver right there doesn't matter. The quarterback didn't know that there was a reciever there. Is this a correct interpretation of the rule?
Quote 0 0
db11
Are refs in the business of getting inside the mind of a player?

That interpretation seems a little strange.
https://twitter.com/barwickipedia - Follow me. Because we all need a bit of sports snark in our lives.

"Doin' right ain't got no end."
-The Outlaw Josey Wales

"'Allegedly' is right, Mr. Polian. I have a hole in my ear drum, I'd never go for a swim, no matter how drunk me is."
-Pat McAfee
Quote 0 0
billybobble
Hey Mr. Ref; What would the call be if it was late in the game and with the final seconds ticking away and the offense had no time outs left but were obviously going to spike the ball to stop the clock and a real heavy-set defensive player just plops on the ball after the previous play and refuses to get up.

Just deny the offense a chance for the spike and end the game?
Quote 0 0
cbjj
Ill concede that he probably just threw it up, but how does anyone know? The Qb should know the routes his receivers are running and it's possible he threw it where someone should be. The fact the ball landed within 5 yards of a receiver made the call very easy for the referee. All he has to say is there was a receiver right there. Instead I felt he majorly overcomplicated the situation and played mind reader. I thought our HC said it perfectly, he asked if our receiver would have caught the ball would it still be a safety? In this interpretation of the rule the ref would have to again read the Qbs mind and say he didn't know the guy was there and it would be a safety. My thinking always is to keep it simple.
Quote 0 0
levelm
Illegal forward passes include:

e. A pass intentionally thrown to save loss of yardage or conserve time. (Intentional Grounding)

But exactly like db11 said a ref can't know if the QB knew a receiver was there, if there was one in the area it would be extremely unusual for a crew to have a flag. There is a comment in the case book that the official can use several factors to determine whether the pass was thrown to save yardage and they include the skill of the passer and the defensive pressure.

So cbjj do you think the qb in your situation was just trying to save a sack or was he trying to complete the pass?
Quote 0 0
wissportsnet

Boys Basketball Alumni Round-up: February 21st, from @ColtonWilson23 #wisbb -- https://t.co/0K6CZzZWpf https://t.co/715tfpBGVS

wissportsnet

WSN15: Boys Basketball Top Teams #12 -- Two NCAA Division I players at one WIAA Division 4 school = state champions… https://t.co/1MThqzce9L

wissportsnet

Predicting winners of every state wrestling title plus a look By The Numbers, from @Nate_Woelfel -… https://t.co/HgU1bLP7d6

wissportsnet

Join the free Boys Basketball Playoff Pick 'Em Contest; Staff picks coming Tuesday #wisbb -- https://t.co/Y6yTA3OgP8 https://t.co/hA6Uyw9uje