B1G Coordinator of Officials on Rules Changes

[Enhance]

"Holding - where you can cheat and only get caught a fraction of the time because oh well everybody does it." - NCAA

You wouldn't like the game of football very much if they called holding to the rulebook every time.

Holding is one of the few penalties we all know is happening yet we're a little 'aw shucks' about. It's nothing new, but an interesting dynamic nonetheless. We don't say the same thing with pass interference, face mask or defensive holding, probably because they're more obvious.

Unless the stats have changed, offensive holding is the second most commonly called penalty. I'm just pointing out how I find the narrative surrounding it interesting.

 

[Landlord]

Safety is a concern, But so is unjustly effecting the outcome of a game if you eject a key player.

Safety is more of a concern.

I agree. Any one guilty of targeting should be ejected. Maybe even make it progressive - 1st offense, suspended one half, 2nd offense, suspended one game, etc. Players should not launch themselves at the opponents heads. But the officials have proven over and over again they can't get the call correct consistently, missing obvious targeting and calling imaginary targeting.

The only thing that really sucks is that there is a whole lot of 'judgment call' room as to whether a player is considered defenseless. But most instances of officials getting it wrong are actually officials being able to find a judgment that could go either way, but when in question, it is a penalty.

The rule needs to be reworked, for sure. By the way the rule is written, the Nate Gerry ejections were the proper calls. But they were garbage, so the rule needs to be refined. However, the way it is written currently, the refs do a pretty solid job with.

 

[knapplc]

The way the rule is written, the Gerry ejection from the bowl game was not the correct call. I've seen this argument that the helmets touched, but it's bunk. A "legal" tackle cannot be predicated on the tackler not having a head. Simple physiology dictates that helmets will touch on nearly every tackle. Gerry's ejection from the bowl game was a joke.

 

[Landlord]

The way the rule is written, the Gerry ejection from the bowl game was not the correct call. I've seen this argument that the helmets touched, but it's bunk. A "legal" tackle cannot be predicated on the tackler not having a head. Simple physiology dictates that helmets will touch on nearly every tackle. Gerry's ejection from the bowl game was a joke.

The way I understand it, it was all predicated on the receiver being defenseless. Again, the "when in question it's a penalty" thing is what makes it "not the wrong call", because what is the exact criteria of him being defenseless or not in that scenario?

But. I agree. It was a travesty.

 

[HuskerExpat]

I wish they'd make an emphasis in calling illegal pick pass plays.

(Shout out to Michigan State)

 

[Scratchtown]

I wish they'd make an emphasis in calling illegal pick pass plays.

(Shout out to Michigan State)

If you get called for a pick, you teach bad.

Hook routes = legal pick play. As long as the receiver turns back to the QB looking for the ball that was never going to be thrown there in the first place.

 

[HuskerExpat]

I wish they'd make an emphasis in calling illegal pick pass plays.

(Shout out to Michigan State)

If you get called for a pick, you teach bad.

Hook routes = legal pick play. As long as the receiver turns back to the QB looking for the ball that was never going to be thrown there in the first place.

That's my point. The way it is called now is b.s. I'm not sure how to define the rule to strengthen it, but it needs changed so some teams will stop running plays that are designed to violate the spirit of the rule if not the way it is called.

 

[HuskerExpat]

Like this....trim.76032013-0942-46AA-980C-45F3BDCEA931.MOV

 

[HuskerExpat]

Or this

 

[RunMickeyRun02]

Lot of good points in this thread. Handing out +1 left and right. You guys are making too much logical sense, that doesn't fly with the NCAA when enforcing anything,....ever.

 

[Savage Husker]

Still say if targeting is called during the game assess the 15 yd penalty, but that any suspensions should handed out for the next game after review by one committee to maintain consistent enforcement. Like a previous poster said many hits do involve some helmet contact. Safety is a concern, But so is unjustly effecting the outcome of a game if you eject a key player.

I tend to agree. Like people have said, make it like a red card or yellow card. The there are some blatant targeting instances that are without question ejections, so stick to ejecting them. However, there are plenty of questionable instances that officials defer to "when in doubt, throw them out," mentality. For those iffy ones, give it until Monday or Tuesday to let the conference officials dissect it and make a ruling. During that time, football analysts will have politicked their opinions, raw emotion is removed, and the game can continue at a better pace. A red card is a full game ejection, like the current model. If you get a yellow card and officials determined it should be an ejection, it's for just the first half. If you get two yellows in a game it's an automatic ejection. If you start receiving multiple yellows in subsequent games, there's discipline.

Having been an umpire for 5 years, most officials l don't try to make mistakes, it just happens because you're in bad position - or they do just suck. Adding judgement calls for officials to regulate makes their job more difficult than it already is, and removing that responsibility from them would make the game a lot better.

 

[dvdcrr]

throwing a player out for "targeting" is just radical. I understand NCAA is trying to send a message, social engineering if you will. But it really is unfair for the player who had only fair intentions, who worked hard for weeks. And I agree completely that the targeting ejection is adverse to the time honored mission of the NCAA which is to provide for fairness in competition.

I just went back and watched both of Nate Gerry's hits and neither one warranted an ejection. The UCLA hit was a bad call obviously as now the Conference admits that. When I look at the Iowa hit I dont know how else a safety can play that If they are trying to help their team. Essentially NCAA is saying don't HIT.

 

[dvdcrr]

I think to be fair, If "upon further review" ( man I despise that phrase with my soul) a targeting ejection is overturned during a game, or after a game, the official who made the call should be suspended for one game.

 

[Sargon]

The ref's make lots of bad calls since, forever. It won't get better this year. I'm just hoping that NU is on the good side of the bad luck bad calls lottery.

I'd like to see a 2 min cap on reviewed plays unless they address possession or scores.

I want a replay office handling these so a UT employee can never again barge in on his employee to help him make the wrong call. Heck just post a vine and let the fans vote. 60 second clock...go.

I'd like to see assumption of guilt regarding pick plays. If it looked like one, it was.

I'd like to see it changed to "booth makes the call they believe is correct" and does NOT NOT contain the word irrefutable or anything remotely similar. Grow a pair....make the call without the bs crutch excuse. (hello MNC for NU in 1993, and in 1982. Let's recall some big games from the past and correct the record dammit).

 

[C N Red]

"Holding - where you can cheat and only get caught a fraction of the time because oh well everybody does it." - NCAA

You wouldn't like the game of football very much if they called holding to the rulebook every time.

Your right. You can hold inside the shoulders. I have no problem with that. But, the ones that i see get missed is out on the end where a DL is trying to disengage to chase the ball carrier outside and there is obvious holding of the jersey when player is disengaging. Those are the ones i'd like to see called more. If the Defensive player beats you and gets disengaged you have to just let go.