If the Fenwick coaches rightfully award Plainfield the TD on the blown call I will agree with you.
Legal Action
- Thread starter lookoutforliam
- Start date
It's like trying to explain calculus to a fungo bat.
To settle this, it doesn't matter that the player re-established himself. By the letter of the rule, he cannot be the first person to touch the ball. You're arguing a moot point because you don't know the rule. Now, whether he was pushed out by the defense is another argument, and is a judgment call, not a mistaken application of the rule.
If the ref had said he was pushed out, then I would accept that. The tape shows he was not, but I can swallow that.
I'm also concerned about some of the other lapses by this officiating crew. The extra point video is d*mning not because I think it was a missed PAT (I don't). Moreso concerned that the ref barely looked up on a fairly close kick. Also was annoyed when they didn't throw a flag on the illegal touching, but just conferenced instead. And finally, the refs didn't indicate PFN had scored a TD in overtime until well after they had placed the ball for the PAT. The ref then raised his arms before shrugging and making a WTF gesture to the box. Meanwhile all the fans had no idea if the RB had actually scored a TD because no one ever signaled. It may have been obvious from that side of the field, but from the stands and to the press box, it wasn't at all clear with the with sideline being close and the number of bodies.
The point isn't that I disagree with the calls I just listed. They were all most likely the correct judgment calls. But they didn't follow proper procedure, and that's just additional evidence that they didn't know the letter of the rules and they should treat the job with a higher level of respect. I'm sure they're very nice people who think they are dedicated to the game, but their actions are in direct conflict with their intent.
And before anyone bloviates at me about becoming a ref, I've been a player and I've been a coach. Will be looking to get back into coaching when my boys get a little older because that's how I choose to keep involved in the game. My eyesight is not the greatest, so I don't think I would be doing a service. And before anyone calls me out on that being an excuse, I'm not criticizing the refs for their judgment calls. I'm criticizing them for their lack of knowledge about the game.
Incorrect. At the base of all sports we have a rule book. On top of that we have officials who make calls to the best of their ability.
How they assess holding or pass interference is unique to the individual and without robots and sensors all over the player uniforms, we all live with the judgements of these officials on how they envision the rules. There is training to get the best calls made and you get some called your way and you get some that go the other way.
But the base that provides the structure for the game is the rule book that both teams play under. A TD is worth 6pts, a game can't end on a defensive penalty, 12 minutes per quarter for all 4 quarters, clock stops in HS after a first down until the ball is spotted, and the rules regarding the allowance of untimed downs of which intentional grounding is not one.
Now I've come to understand that I've wasted my time typing this because you are either trolling or because you are really that challenged to understand this very big, very clear, extremely simple concept. But I do write this for those that may not know what the big fuss is about 'bad calls' and finally see the difference.
What youre not understanding is that youre wishing to draw the line where you deem it should be, where it is important to you for one reason or another. My point is we can draw that line anywhere based upon anyone's POV. Thus the ONLY correct answer is what the IHSA did and let the refs call stand. Once we start overturning calls in court we have opened pandora's box.
Personally the holding call in the '98 semis vs Providence should be overturned.
Im sure you can think of some.
You're doing the exact same thing. Rules are a collection of lines drawn. They all have to be drawn somewhere. That you don't recognize the hypocrisy of your statements is illuminating.
I think you're kidding on this point. But I just wanted to state that a political catastrophe would ensue if everyone flooded the courts about high school referee errors.
Im saying no reviews. You seem to be saying, "only this one review that is special to me. Anyone else who gets screwed can kick rocks."
I hope you can see which is better.
Again, calculus, fungo bat.
And it's not important to me, at all. I have no ties to either school, and if you're asking me what the outcome should be, PFN should get the nod. It's this weird thing where you can hold opposing thoughts in your head without crapping your pants. Difficult for many.
Does anyone know if Fenwick is still practicing? (Or does the IHSA have a by-law that prohibits practices after the last official game?)
I have no idea if they are practicing, but any team under IHSA bylaws can practice until championship Saturday.
You'd have to show you know calculus. Can't just claim to, have to demonstrate it.
Why don't we start with algebra? Why do you think PFN should get the nod?
I can explain both, but this will require payment of 5-7 beers.
PFN should get the nod because sometimes bad things happen and you have to live with the consequences, whether brought on by yourself or someone else. To change it 4-5 days later is more about the disrespect it would show ESL.
Actually you are quoting a pro rule. In high school if a player leaves the field on his own he cannot participate again in that play. Illegal participation 15 yards from the previous spot rule 6 art 2
They're pretty similar in my book. But what I'm saying is, the IHSA needs to enforce the rules. The game rule is in conflict with their bylaw. They've broken their bylaw before in review. Which rule takes precedence? The conflicting rules necessitate a review and subsequent ruling. We'll see which rule prevails.
Well, it actually further reinforces my point, so I will also thank the ref. Hit the showers Cross Bones, you're done either way lol.
another silly question here... Is Fenwick eligible to practice now or do they have to wait for the court ruling?
Just trying to educate the masses.
If every one listened to announcers no one would know the rules.
I do believe the receiver would become eligible again if the ball is touched by a defensive player or referee, though. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Going to edit here since I'm bumping up on my limits, but it looks like NFHS Rule 7-5 Article 13 states "An ineligible player has illegally touched a forward pass if he bats, muffs or catches a legal forward pass, unless the pass has first been touched by B (defense)"
I'm assuming your rule takes precedence, but the above appears to be the accepted interpretation in college football, where the rules in minutia are largely the same.
Last edited:
In this thread alone I see a few other rules misquoted. although minor by nature.
It's not just a defensive penalty you can't end a quarter, it is ANY ACCEPTED penalty. Offense or defense is not a factor. And this is what may have created the confusion at the end of this game. (We all have brain cramps)
You don't wind the clock after the ball is spotted on an first down, it is when the chains are set.
It's not just a defensive penalty you can't end a quarter, it is ANY ACCEPTED penalty. Offense or defense is not a factor. And this is what may have created the confusion at the end of this game. (We all have brain cramps)
You don't wind the clock after the ball is spotted on an first down, it is when the chains are set.
These are all good arguments, but you're missing the 2 most basic:
1. Never get involved in a land war in Asia
2. Never mess with a Sicilian, when death is on the line
1. Never get involved in a land war in Asia
2. Never mess with a Sicilian, when death is on the line