|
Post by gccwolverine on Nov 21, 2018 10:09:48 GMT -6
1. I think its a terrible rule 2. Idk what else to tell a kid whose giving 80 pounds up to a kid coming to try and knock hi head off and I cant sit there with a straight fface and tell him to take it on standing up and wrong arm it 3. Sometimes its not called So we're going to cut his ass down until the officials actually show us they are willing to make that call. Since you're threatening my player's health, by cutting him when he has no reason to think that he should be cut, I'm teaching my guy to land with his full weight on your guy. Personally, if it was me, I'd land with something sharp, like a knee or elbow but it wouldn't be ethical to teach that. You want to talk about health? How safe is it to tell a 155 LB OSL that he has to stand on his own to feet while a 280 LB guard comes from distance and attempts to run through his face? Missed matched head collisions are 10x more dangerous than a guy getting chopped down. The rule should be changed and I won't change my philosophy on coaching it. "Cut their asses down ….. until we get flagged"
|
|
|
Post by mkuempel on Nov 21, 2018 10:38:47 GMT -6
In my opinion, we all "teach" things that are illegal, IF we feel the reward outweighs the risk. For example, if I tell OL all the time to keep their hands inside the frame of the body and grab the breastplate and it gets called holding, although it is a judgement call, I can't complain about the penalty, I knew it was possible going in. In this situation, there isn't any "judgement" to be made, trying to hide numbers through uniform design. How can an official not call a penalty if this TE catches a pass in the end zone wearing number 55, unless I'm misreading the original post?
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Nov 21, 2018 10:59:34 GMT -6
In my opinion, we all "teach" things that are illegal, IF we feel the reward outweighs the risk. For example, if I tell OL all the time to keep their hands inside the frame of the body and grab the breastplate and it gets called holding, although it is a judgement call, I can't complain about the penalty, I knew it was possible going in. In this situation, there isn't any "judgement" to be made, trying to hide numbers through uniform design. How can an official not call a penalty if this TE catches a pass in the end zone wearing number 55, unless I'm misreading the original post? The OP said his buddy was going to sub out a player wearing an ineligible number with a player wearing an eligible number. So, on that particular play, there would only be 4 players numbered 50-79 on the field. The player who subbed in would be wearing an eligible number but would "hide" by lining up as an offensive lineman. That player would then presumably be sent out on a route to be thrown the ball.
|
|
|
Post by Hitch & Pitch on Nov 21, 2018 11:02:52 GMT -6
The recent surge of RPOs and the resulting illegal man downfield issue is a great example for the OPs initial question; its a very grey area and is honestly, nearly impossible for referees to get right all the time without missing something else. I personally get the sense that those guys who run RPOs and KNOW that the play will probably result in illegal men downfield but say "make them call it" are probably beginning to cross the line from gamesmanship to cheating. They know they are probably doing something against the rules but since there is a penalty associated with it, they want to put the responsibility on the refs to call it rather than on themselves to keep their players within the spirit of sportsmanship themselves. However, there are sometimes when an illegal man downfield is an honest mistake: broken play, bad design, etc. It really comes down to intent, and that really isn't able to be "policed" by the men in stripes. I have seen, Wing T teams that break the huddle, sprint to the line and snap the ball quickly. Get away with throwing a forward pass to a covered up TE. Or they use the ineligible TE to clear out a zone. They work so fast that the referees very rarely catch it.
|
|
|
Post by mkuempel on Nov 21, 2018 11:13:06 GMT -6
In my opinion, we all "teach" things that are illegal, IF we feel the reward outweighs the risk. For example, if I tell OL all the time to keep their hands inside the frame of the body and grab the breastplate and it gets called holding, although it is a judgement call, I can't complain about the penalty, I knew it was possible going in. In this situation, there isn't any "judgement" to be made, trying to hide numbers through uniform design. How can an official not call a penalty if this TE catches a pass in the end zone wearing number 55, unless I'm misreading the original post? The OP said his buddy was going to sub out a player wearing an ineligible number with a player wearing an eligible number. So, on that particular play, there would only be 4 players numbered 50-79 on the field. The player who subbed in would be wearing an eligible number but would "hide" by lining up as an offensive lineman. That player would then presumably be sent out on a route to be thrown the ball. I assumed I was missing something, thanks. Still crosses the line in my opinion, not sure how to stop it depending on how fast the offense is going, but we teach our guys to verbally communicate who is eligible and ineligible in these types of situations and cover those rules, in hopes of pointing it out to the refs as well. Thanks for the clarification.
|
|
|
Post by Hitch & Pitch on Nov 21, 2018 11:15:03 GMT -6
I never saw it in action, but I have heard that Buddy Ryan had a defensive play/scheme, that late in the game if the score and game clock was in his favor he would put a 12th or even 13th player on the field to defend a play.
Thinking that burning time off the clock was more important, than giving up a quick score or the penalty yardage. Trying to get where his defense would only have to defend one play "legally" to win the game.
|
|
coachZL
Sophomore Member
Posts: 150
|
Post by coachZL on Nov 21, 2018 11:17:52 GMT -6
What the OP described is clearly illegal, nobody is debating that. As is the intentional DPI, OL downfield on RPO if thrown, cutting down a pulling blocker, etc. But running on an eligible number for an ineligible number has a certain level of deception that just feels ethically wrong. Just like the intentional holding when running out the clock, to me it that is closer to the level of deception of the TE or OL than the other penalties that were discussed. These just feel like a blatant disregard for the rules.
Everyone has a line that they aren't willing to cross. Some just have it further down the road than others. For me then intentional DPI, RPO, cutting pullers, and grasping the breast plate are all things that I would/do teach. Same as defensive holding. When running twist with the DL I tell the first guy to grab and turn the shoulders to make sure 2 guys are blocking him so the second guy has a free hole to run through. These feel like gamesmanship, natural movements and situations that take place during the course of the game.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Nov 21, 2018 11:20:59 GMT -6
Since you're threatening my player's health, by cutting him when he has no reason to think that he should be cut, I'm teaching my guy to land with his full weight on your guy. Personally, if it was me, I'd land with something sharp, like a knee or elbow but it wouldn't be ethical to teach that. You want to talk about health? How safe is it to tell a 155 LB OSL that he has to stand on his own to feet while a 280 LB guard comes from distance and attempts to run through his face? Missed matched head collisions are 10x more dangerous than a guy getting chopped down. The rule should be changed and I won't change my philosophy on coaching it. "Cut their asses down ….. until we get flagged" Coached DB's for most of my career. Taught them to take on blocks with a hard front leg and inside shoulder and get the back foot off of the ground, ready to bounce if necessary. We'd tell them that if they turn their body perpendicular to the blocker they may as well put on a shirt that says "Phuk me up". Never had a guy get cartwheeled. Never.
|
|
|
Post by coachscdub on Nov 21, 2018 11:21:55 GMT -6
I didn't know that was against the rules. What rule are you defensive players breaking? I'm not being an a$$. I honestly don't know. Cant block below the waist unless both players,and the ball, are still in the Free blocking zone. it's not blocking tho, he's referring to Defense.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Nov 21, 2018 11:22:04 GMT -6
I never saw it in action, but I have heard that Buddy Ryan had a defensive play/scheme, that late in the game if the score and game clock was in his favor he would put a 12th or even 13th player on the field to defend a play. Thinking that burning time off the clock was more important, than giving up a quick score or the penalty yardage. Trying to get where his defense would only have to defend one play "legally" to win the game. Polish Goal-line.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Nov 21, 2018 11:34:43 GMT -6
Cant block below the waist unless both players,and the ball, are still in the Free blocking zone. it's not blocking tho, he's referring to Defense. It is still considered blocking by the defense. I am sure one of the rules wonks can quote chapter/verse on the verbiage
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2018 13:29:17 GMT -6
When it comes to cheating, I think of that less about strategic in-game decisions and more about stuff you do outside of the game to get an advantage when nobody's looking--stuff like illegally recruiting players, playing ineligible players, spraying sticky stuff on WRs gloves, telling your players to try to injure opponents or teaching them illegal techniques that may likely cause an injury, etc. That's where it crosses the line and becomes "cheating" to me.
We have officials for a reason, and they are there to make sure the rules are enforced in-game. If someone gets away with an illegal in-game tactic, that's on them. What your friend was trying to do was cheap and very slapd!ck, but if the officials let him pull that crap that's on them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2018 13:31:22 GMT -6
Intentionally violating the rules is cheating. End of discussion. What about intentionally letting the play clock run out and taking a delay of game penalty? If that is okay, then where do we draw the line? If you're going to call that "cheating," then RPOs are definitely cheating, too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2018 13:39:17 GMT -6
I have seen, Wing T teams that break the huddle, sprint to the line and snap the ball quickly. Get away with throwing a forward pass to a covered up TE. Or they use the ineligible TE to clear out a zone. They work so fast that the referees very rarely catch it. I talked to a coach once who told a story about a team lining up in End Over formations where their #2 receiver was covered up, but they'd send him out on routes anyway. They'd seen it on film and never saw it flagged. Then in the game against them, that ineligible man caught a long TD pass. As you might expect, the coach went ballistic when this happened, so the nearest official called over the line judge and had this conversation in front of the coach: "Hey, was he covered?" "Nope, he was wide open!" They let the TD stand. Coach was pissed. Film confirmed he was right to be.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Nov 21, 2018 13:43:36 GMT -6
I have seen, Wing T teams that break the huddle, sprint to the line and snap the ball quickly. Get away with throwing a forward pass to a covered up TE. Or they use the ineligible TE to clear out a zone. They work so fast that the referees very rarely catch it. I talked to a coach once who told a story about a team lining up in End Over formations where their #2 receiver was covered up, but they'd send him out on routes anyway. They'd seen it on film and never saw it flagged. Then in the game against them, that ineligible man caught a long TD pass. As you might expect, the coach went ballistic when this happened, so the nearest official called over the line judge and had this conversation in front of the coach: "Hey, was he covered?" "Nope, he was wide open!" They let the TD stand. Coach was pissed. Film confirmed he was right to be. Did they tell the official prior to the play? I always taught the defense when they saw that formation to yell out "End over, End over, TE ineligible"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2018 13:44:05 GMT -6
I never saw it in action, but I have heard that Buddy Ryan had a defensive play/scheme, that late in the game if the score and game clock was in his favor he would put a 12th or even 13th player on the field to defend a play. Thinking that burning time off the clock was more important, than giving up a quick score or the penalty yardage. Trying to get where his defense would only have to defend one play "legally" to win the game. That was his "Polish Goal Line" idea, and and it wasn't 12 or 13. He'd run like 16-18 guys out there to make d@mn sure the offense got nothing. The idea was to do this only when the clock was running down in the final seconds and it was a true goal line situation. He'd send all those guys out to play defense, stop the TD, and just take the penalty, knowing the offense would get another down but the penalty would only get them half the distance and they wouldn't get the time back on the clock. The plan was that when it got down to a true last-second situation or an untimed down, he'd go back to playing with 11 and try to win on one play.
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Nov 21, 2018 13:49:33 GMT -6
What about intentionally letting the play clock run out and taking a delay of game penalty? If that is okay, then where do we draw the line? If you're going to call that "cheating," then RPOs are definitely cheating, too. I'm just going by the rule book.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Nov 21, 2018 13:51:09 GMT -6
I have seen, Wing T teams that break the huddle, sprint to the line and snap the ball quickly. Get away with throwing a forward pass to a covered up TE. Or they use the ineligible TE to clear out a zone. They work so fast that the referees very rarely catch it. I talked to a coach once who told a story about a team lining up in End Over formations where their #2 receiver was covered up, but they'd send him out on routes anyway. They'd seen it on film and never saw it flagged. Then in the game against them, that ineligible man caught a long TD pass. As you might expect, the coach went ballistic when this happened, so the nearest official called over the line judge and had this conversation in front of the coach: "Hey, was he covered?" "Nope, he was wide open!" They let the TD stand. Coach was pissed. Film confirmed he was right to be. Wow! I would be livid.
|
|
|
Post by M4 on Nov 21, 2018 13:54:31 GMT -6
I never saw it in action, but I have heard that Buddy Ryan had a defensive play/scheme, that late in the game if the score and game clock was in his favor he would put a 12th or even 13th player on the field to defend a play. Thinking that burning time off the clock was more important, than giving up a quick score or the penalty yardage. Trying to get where his defense would only have to defend one play "legally" to win the game. Buddy Ryans Polish Defense smartfootball.com/defense/buddy-ryans-polish-goalline-tactic
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Nov 21, 2018 14:09:35 GMT -6
I never saw it in action, but I have heard that Buddy Ryan had a defensive play/scheme, that late in the game if the score and game clock was in his favor he would put a 12th or even 13th player on the field to defend a play. Thinking that burning time off the clock was more important, than giving up a quick score or the penalty yardage. Trying to get where his defense would only have to defend one play "legally" to win the game. Buddy Ryans Polish Defense smartfootball.com/defense/buddy-ryans-polish-goalline-tacticI think a fun intellectual study is to study all the different times this would be useful to employ (ignoring the implications of blatant cheating that may get you in hot water). If I was up 10 with less than 2 minutes left and the opponent had the ball inside my 5 I could see us just sitting in this. Of course I'd hope the opponent would be smart enough to take quick knees and getting the ball down to the 6 inch line without wasting much time. It reminds me of the incident a few years back where Team A was losing with under a minute and Team B had the ball. Team A just kept swiping at the ball before the center snapped it. They kept taking the offside penalty, until the one time they timed it better and caused a fumble-recovered- won the game. Although I think that technically should have been an illegal snap.
|
|
|
Post by bignose on Nov 21, 2018 14:09:41 GMT -6
I have seen, Wing T teams that break the huddle, sprint to the line and snap the ball quickly. Get away with throwing a forward pass to a covered up TE. Or they use the ineligible TE to clear out a zone. They work so fast that the referees very rarely catch it. We had that exact situation happen to us in 1997 in the State Semi Final game. We played a team that was much better than we were. The offense broke the huddle with a TE lined up where the weak side tackle would normally line up. The split end was off of the LOS so the TE was uncovered, but the offense didn't have enough men on the LOS. It was pouring, 35 degrees, and the officials missed it. The pass was incomplete. At half time, as I was taking a leak, I noticed an official at the urinal next to me in the locker room. Talk about a "captive audience." I mentioned this violation to him and asked him to look out for it in the second half. Sure enough, our opponent tried this again, I hollered down from the press box over the headsets, and the official flagged them for an illegal formation. The kid who went out for the pass said something: 15 more yards for unsportsmanlike conduct. Then their bench went apeshit and there were two more consecutive unsportsmanlike conduct penalties called. I have never seen, before or after this, 50 yards of penalties walked off on one play. Did I mention that it was pouring? Field position in this game was paramount. We won 3-0 Lesson: sometimes when ya cheat ya get caught. Live with the consequences.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Nov 21, 2018 14:58:35 GMT -6
HS athletics are supposed to be educational, an extension of the school experience.
How can you justify teaching kids to intentionally violate the rules of the game and be an educator?
If you disagree with or don't like rules, work to get them changed.
Not cheat.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Nov 21, 2018 15:30:39 GMT -6
HS athletics are supposed to be educational, an extension of the school experience, How can you justify teaching kids to intentionally violate the rules of the game and be an educator? If you don't like or disagree with rules, work to get them changed. Not cheat. If I'm particularly sensitive about that cutting thing, that's why. We've had guys get hurt by getting illegally cut.
|
|
|
Post by morris on Nov 21, 2018 18:00:03 GMT -6
Do you think basketball coaches get this worked up over intentionally breaking the rules or coaching their players to break the rules? No one calls anyone into question when the other team fouls on purpose to lengthen the game or foul so the other team gets two free throws instead of the chance to shoot a three. Basketball players being taught how to hook a defender to be able to get around them.
To me taking a PI or grasping the chest plate are in the same categories as the basketball examples. They are all kind of accepted norms of the game.
Intentionally attempting to deceive the officials and practing that deception is different. I view that like when a basketball coaching knowingly sends the wrong kid to the free throw line to take the shots.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Nov 21, 2018 19:46:31 GMT -6
There is a penalty too if you have a player run in off the sideline after the snap to catch a pass behind the defense. There is a penalty too if you intentionally hold while your punter runs out the clock. And I imagine there is a penalty for violating rule 7-2-5 which states "On the first three downs, you can only have one interior lineman, the long snapper, wear an eligible jersey number. At least four others must wear ineligible numbers. " This was the one I mentioned initially. I think the difference with the Defensive PI is that you’re essentially trading one consequence for another rather than trying to get one by the refs in hopes of not receiving any consequences at all. But what if you succeed? Do you commit an obvious foul on the next down to deliberately get penalized?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2018 19:59:34 GMT -6
Do you think basketball coaches get this worked up over intentionally breaking the rules or coaching their players to break the rules? No one calls anyone into question when the other team fouls on purpose to lengthen the game or foul so the other team gets two free throws instead of the chance to shoot a three. Basketball players being taught how to hook a defender to be able to get around them. To me taking a PI or grasping the chest plate are in the same categories as the basketball examples. They are all kind of accepted norms of the game. Intentionally attempting to deceive the officials and practing that deception is different. I view that like when a basketball coaching knowingly sends the wrong kid to the free throw line to take the shots. This. If it can be addressed with a yellow flag and a few yards on the field, it's just a part of the game. If it's something that may hurt another player or get someone suspended or worse, or if it's just a bush league tactic (like in youth basketball when I saw a coach teach his entire team to guard man-to-man, get in the ball handler's face, and just scream as loud as they could)... that's where the line needs to be drawn, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Nov 21, 2018 20:10:24 GMT -6
HS athletics are supposed to be educational, an extension of the school experience. How can you justify teaching kids to intentionally violate the rules of the game and be an educator? If they do and succeed, that is an education, isn't it? Truth is often unpleasant, even downright mean.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2018 21:30:20 GMT -6
HS athletics are supposed to be educational, an extension of the school experience. How can you justify teaching kids to intentionally violate the rules of the game and be an educator? If you disagree with or don't like rules, work to get them changed. Not cheat. This reminds me of a disappointing literature review I did for an adolescent psych class as part of my teacher certification program a few years ago. I was looking at actual, peer-reviewed studies showing that HS athletes, particularly football players, had better outcomes in life than non-athletes--that playing sports actually had the long-term benefits that we claim. I went in very excited about it and found as many studies on this as I could. Unfortunately, all the stuff I read said that, overall, there weren't many long-term benefits that were objectively proven by research. One of the things they did find was that HS athletes were more prone to try to "bend the rules" in life and had a very legalistic view of right and wrong--basically if they didn't get caught or weren't punished, they didn't see a problem with cheating or doing something immoral. It was hypothesized they'd learned this from their coaches and from playing pickup games where they needed to police themselves. Overall, the review said that there was neither a lifelong net benefit or a net detriment to playing sports in HS, including football. Successful athletes reported higher social status and confidence while they were in school, but afterwards... not so much. Oh, and HS football players were found to do about twice as much underage drinking as other kids, including other athletes. The exception was black athletes in majority black schools. That population showed a decent effect size between playing sports, especially being successful in sports, and staying out of jail, going to college, landing a job, marrying and having kids, and generally having better outcomes that followed them throughout life.
|
|