ADVERTISEMENT

2 Ref Questions: York v Willowbrook

tmjgrady

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2015
423
416
63
Hello All - 2 REF/Rules Questions:
1. York ball at W20: A pass was completed to the York WR - he caught the ball running laterally along the 5 yard line - after successfully tip-toeing the sidelines he turns downfield for the final 5 yards but dropped the ball en route - either 1 inch before or 1 inch after crossing the end line - he then proceeded to pickup the loose ball but when he did he has one foot out of bounds. Here is my question:
A. IF deemed he lost ball after crossing the end line, then obviously it = TD
B. IF deemed he lost ball before the ball reached the end line, I believe it would = Touchback, ball over to Willowbrook at the 20 since the ball was picked up while out of bounds, therefore it is if the ball went through the end zone.
I am correct on B?
BTW, Official Ruling = Incomplete Pass with no clear explanation (York settles for FG)
Go to YouTube and watch the play at the 2:16 mark - the telecast started with our Senior Night intros, that is why this 3rd Q play is past 2 hours into broadcast.
2. York ball near midfield (same 3Q) - Wide Receiver screen, Luke is the intended receiver - excellent defensive play by Brook - the DB crushed Luke at same time the ball arrived (clean play) - but the ball popped up in the air and was caught by another York receiver - he then gained about 12 yards. Problem is as the ball was in the air, the official inadvertently blew his whistle. Now I get it that nothing can be done at that point to reverse anything - I have seen many inadvertent whistles in my day and it should be ball dead at spot - right? But in this case, the ball was in the AIR - so do we say the ball comes down at that point and since there is no clear change in possession, York retains ball and as the result of the play, it is a loss of 2 yards and therefore now 2nd down and 12? That's my take - I am correct?
BTW, Official Ruling = A Re-do, we go back to York Ball 1st and 10 - I have never seen a football "Mulligan" !!
Actually I have Question #3: Same 3Q - a York kickoff is squibbed and rolled and bounced and was near the 3 yard line toward the sideline when I saw the Brook player touch it before the ball went out of bounds (I think you can see it on film as well - close but you can see the direction of the ball change after touching both hands). The Ref spotted the ball at the Brook 20; 1st & Ten. Now does the kicking team get to kick the official in the nuts once or twice?

Strangely officiated game - I normally do not like to badmouth the refs so I will leave it at that - but this game had some of the oddest calls and sleepiest officials - on 3 FG attempts, play was halted because the side official on the York side kept forgetting to position himself under the goal post upright -you could tell the Ref was visibly upset with his crew.
But great game and good outcome - after getting shutout in 2 straight games v Hinsdale Central & Glenbard West, York responds with a 25-23 WIN. Brook is a very good teamand they have a RB that was and is a BEAST!
 
I’ll try and answer as best I can.

for question 1. My take is if he had possession of the ball it’s all about where the ball was when he crossed the line. If the ball was not across the line then it should be a fumble. I’ll have to look at the video and see if it’s clarified.

question 2, my crew had a very similar play last night. Because it would be ruled an inadvertent whistle, there are two options. The ball would go back to the original spot and replay the down, or at the time of the whistle if clear possession was established then the team with the possession would be able to choose the spot of the play. Confusing I know but it comes down to possession at time of the whistle.

Good case plays
 
I’ll try and answer as best I can.

for question 1. My take is if he had possession of the ball it’s all about where the ball was when he crossed the line. If the ball was not across the line then it should be a fumble. I’ll have to look at the video and see if it’s clarified.

question 2, my crew had a very similar play last night. Because it would be ruled an inadvertent whistle, there are two options. The ball would go back to the original spot and replay the down, or at the time of the whistle if clear possession was established then the team with the possession would be able to choose the spot of the play. Confusing I know but it comes down to possession at time of the whistle.

Good case plays
Thanks Newt - so I guess #2 could be a re-do after all - good to know but never seen it before; on #2, I get that it could be ruled a fumble - question comes in on the recovery as one foot is out of bounds when picked up again by the same York receiver - so if deemed a fumble, I can't imagine a TD being ruled since he gained re-possesion Out of Bounds
 
Yes, fumble by A into endzone where ball becomes dead without player possession would be a touchback. No idea from looking at video where ball was when he dropped it though. Hard to see how it would be an incomplete after watching video.

Inadvertent whistle on loose ball play usually results in replay of down. Team in possession would have option of replay or result of play. In what you described, sounds like ball was loose when whistle blew.

On the kickoff, I would be hesitant to swear he touched it (even though KR acts as if he did) but enforcement appeared correct if they didn't see it touched. WB to get ball on 35 yard line.
 
Yes, fumble by A into endzone where ball becomes dead without player possession would be a touchback. No idea from looking at video where ball was when he dropped it though. Hard to see how it would be an incomplete after watching video.

Inadvertent whistle on loose ball play usually results in replay of down. Team in possession would have option of replay or result of play. In what you described, sounds like ball was loose when whistle blew.

On the kickoff, I would be hesitant to swear he touched it (even though KR acts as if he did) but enforcement appeared correct if they didn't see it touched. WB to get ball on 35 yard line.
Thanks for the verification on question #1 - too hard to see without a sideline camera if fumble occurred just prior or after the end line but my concern still is just how they the refs handled the call. I doubt they even saw recovery occur Out of Bounds - I could have accepted ball over on touchback vs incomplete pass - even if would hurt us
For #2, makes sense tho I am typically used to seeing ball marked dead at spot - maybe because the result of the play is beneficial to the offense, thus they elect spot of ball upon whistle. For #3 of course I am looking at it from a homer's POV and would like to say with certainty that the returner touched it but of course could have gone 50/50 - thanks again for your input
 
#3. I didn’t watch but where did the ball go out? Even if the receivers touch it in play and it goes out in the end zone, or even crosses the goal line after being touched, it is a touchback automatically. Now if it goes out after he touches but before crossing the GL it should be placed at that point. If it went out before the GL but deemed not to be touched now we’re taking about a kick out of bounds in which case unless there was a dead ball foul should not end up at the 20
 
Hello All - 2 REF/Rules Questions:
1. York ball at W20: A pass was completed to the York WR - he caught the ball running laterally along the 5 yard line - after successfully tip-toeing the sidelines he turns downfield for the final 5 yards but dropped the ball en route - either 1 inch before or 1 inch after crossing the end line - he then proceeded to pickup the loose ball but when he did he has one foot out of bounds. Here is my question:
A. IF deemed he lost ball after crossing the end line, then obviously it = TD
B. IF deemed he lost ball before the ball reached the end line, I believe it would = Touchback, ball over to Willowbrook at the 20 since the ball was picked up while out of bounds, therefore it is if the ball went through the end zone.
I am correct on B?
BTW, Official Ruling = Incomplete Pass with no clear explanation (York settles for FG)
Go to YouTube and watch the play at the 2:16 mark - the telecast started with our Senior Night intros, that is why this 3rd Q play is past 2 hours into broadcast.
2. York ball near midfield (same 3Q) - Wide Receiver screen, Luke is the intended receiver - excellent defensive play by Brook - the DB crushed Luke at same time the ball arrived (clean play) - but the ball popped up in the air and was caught by another York receiver - he then gained about 12 yards. Problem is as the ball was in the air, the official inadvertently blew his whistle. Now I get it that nothing can be done at that point to reverse anything - I have seen many inadvertent whistles in my day and it should be ball dead at spot - right? But in this case, the ball was in the AIR - so do we say the ball comes down at that point and since there is no clear change in possession, York retains ball and as the result of the play, it is a loss of 2 yards and therefore now 2nd down and 12? That's my take - I am correct?
BTW, Official Ruling = A Re-do, we go back to York Ball 1st and 10 - I have never seen a football "Mulligan" !!
Actually I have Question #3: Same 3Q - a York kickoff is squibbed and rolled and bounced and was near the 3 yard line toward the sideline when I saw the Brook player touch it before the ball went out of bounds (I think you can see it on film as well - close but you can see the direction of the ball change after touching both hands). The Ref spotted the ball at the Brook 20; 1st & Ten. Now does the kicking team get to kick the official in the nuts once or twice?

Strangely officiated game - I normally do not like to badmouth the refs so I will leave it at that - but this game had some of the oddest calls and sleepiest officials - on 3 FG attempts, play was halted because the side official on the York side kept forgetting to position himself under the goal post upright -you could tell the Ref was visibly upset with his crew.
But great game and good outcome - after getting shutout in 2 straight games v Hinsdale Central & Glenbard West, York responds with a 25-23 WIN. Brook is a very good teamand they have a RB that was and is a BEAST!
From a decidedly WB point of view:

#1 -From my focal point looking down the south goal line outside the east side fence of the stadium (pylon camera view if-you-will; as away fan couldn’t get in) the receiver caught the pass (a GREAT catch as the WB corner flashed in front of the ball and missed it by a hair) at the 5 turned up the sideline and fumbled about 12” short of the goal line into the end zone. My view did allow me to 100% know/see his feet as being one in and one out of bounds so I will take your word that he was positioned like this. But our combined knowledge, as the referees should have done in that huddle, should have proved out as a touchback.
#2 - to me an the others in our area it looked like an incomplete pass as the ball hit the ground and bounced into the air. To re-iterate the point, the line judge on the sideline who blew the play dead was also making the incomplete mechanic with his arms. During this of multiple referee huddles during this horribly officiated game, the the influence of the York sideline and the crowd (yes, a crowd, more on that later) won the day and the do-over is granted. The ensuing plays lead to a pivotal score. If a inadvertent whistle was ruled the play should have been dead at the time of the whistle despite the disposition of the ball. In the air, on the ground, in players hands, in the horn of a tuba, it doesn’t matter; whistle kills the play at that point. I cite a similar play in WB’s playoff game against Hononegah in 2012 as precedent as well as dozens of witnessed calls through the years. Ball is dead. It should have been incomplete and second down.
#3 - the official had it right. He was about 8 yards away from the player and the kid did the old alligator arms on it, but did not touch it. Had a good point of view for this one as well. Ball was spotted at the 35.

Calling this crew sleepy is a kindness. Their positioning was atrocious throughout the game and led to, in my opinion, a lot of missed calls on both sides of the ball that were bordering on endangering the kids. There was a very scary horse collar on Kastner by a WB player that looked very ugly. Right in the middle of the field. Right in front of the white hat. Un-called. I don’t feel good about it, but this crew did have an effect on the outcome. Call me bitter, and I accept that, it pains me to write it.

Hats off to York and it’s players.

Witnessed: York student section of 150-plus grouped together in the stands alá 2019, in no way, shape, or form of social distance. WSC and York administration, this is acceptable? I don’t blame the kids. My kids would do the same. But are not being allowed to. Within the guidelines established (won’t debate the merits of the guidelines, or lack of them, here), this shouldn’t be happening.
 
From a decidedly WB point of view:

#1 -From my focal point looking down the south goal line outside the east side fence of the stadium (pylon camera view if-you-will; as away fan couldn’t get in) the receiver caught the pass (a GREAT catch as the WB corner flashed in front of the ball and missed it by a hair) at the 5 turned up the sideline and fumbled about 12” short of the goal line into the end zone. My view did allow me to 100% know/see his feet as being one in and one out of bounds so I will take your word that he was positioned like this. But our combined knowledge, as the referees should have done in that huddle, should have proved out as a touchback.
#2 - to me an the others in our area it looked like an incomplete pass as the ball hit the ground and bounced into the air. To re-iterate the point, the line judge on the sideline who blew the play dead was also making the incomplete mechanic with his arms. During this of multiple referee huddles during this horribly officiated game, the the influence of the York sideline and the crowd (yes, a crowd, more on that later) won the day and the do-over is granted. The ensuing plays lead to a pivotal score. If a inadvertent whistle was ruled the play should have been dead at the time of the whistle despite the disposition of the ball. In the air, on the ground, in players hands, in the horn of a tuba, it doesn’t matter; whistle kills the play at that point. I cite a similar play in WB’s playoff game against Hononegah in 2012 as precedent as well as dozens of witnessed calls through the years. Ball is dead. It should have been incomplete and second down.
#3 - the official had it right. He was about 8 yards away from the player and the kid did the old alligator arms on it, but did not touch it. Had a good point of view for this one as well. Ball was spotted at the 35.

Calling this crew sleepy is a kindness. Their positioning was atrocious throughout the game and led to, in my opinion, a lot of missed calls on both sides of the ball that were bordering on endangering the kids. There was a very scary horse collar on Kastner by a WB player that looked very ugly. Right in the middle of the field. Right in front of the white hat. Un-called. I don’t feel good about it, but this crew did have an effect on the outcome. Call me bitter, and I accept that, it pains me to write it.

Hats off to York and it’s players.

Witnessed: York student section of 150-plus grouped together in the stands alá 2019, in no way, shape, or form of social distance. WSC and York administration, this is acceptable? I don’t blame the kids. My kids would do the same. But are not being allowed to. Within the guidelines established (won’t debate the merits of the guidelines, or lack of them, here), this shouldn’t be happening.
Please watch replay of #2 on You Tube. It is 10000% evident the ball was caught mid air and never came close to touching the ground Also clear that kick returner touched ball inbounds at the 3 but ref marked it at 35. Also on the big play I think 45% ball crossed end line so TD and 55% chance of a touchback so maybe 3 points to York is cutting the difference. And yes Patrick was horse collard but no call. Missed calls both sides. We got away with 2 obvious holding calls. Exciting game and yes it was too good of a crowd. Good luck to the Warriors rest of way. Glad Tumulty graduated
 
From a decidedly WB point of view:

#1 -From my focal point looking down the south goal line outside the east side fence of the stadium (pylon camera view if-you-will; as away fan couldn’t get in) the receiver caught the pass (a GREAT catch as the WB corner flashed in front of the ball and missed it by a hair) at the 5 turned up the sideline and fumbled about 12” short of the goal line into the end zone. My view did allow me to 100% know/see his feet as being one in and one out of bounds so I will take your word that he was positioned like this. But our combined knowledge, as the referees should have done in that huddle, should have proved out as a touchback.
#2 - to me an the others in our area it looked like an incomplete pass as the ball hit the ground and bounced into the air. To re-iterate the point, the line judge on the sideline who blew the play dead was also making the incomplete mechanic with his arms. During this of multiple referee huddles during this horribly officiated game, the the influence of the York sideline and the crowd (yes, a crowd, more on that later) won the day and the do-over is granted. The ensuing plays lead to a pivotal score. If a inadvertent whistle was ruled the play should have been dead at the time of the whistle despite the disposition of the ball. In the air, on the ground, in players hands, in the horn of a tuba, it doesn’t matter; whistle kills the play at that point. I cite a similar play in WB’s playoff game against Hononegah in 2012 as precedent as well as dozens of witnessed calls through the years. Ball is dead. It should have been incomplete and second down.
#3 - the official had it right. He was about 8 yards away from the player and the kid did the old alligator arms on it, but did not touch it. Had a good point of view for this one as well. Ball was spotted at the 35.

Calling this crew sleepy is a kindness. Their positioning was atrocious throughout the game and led to, in my opinion, a lot of missed calls on both sides of the ball that were bordering on endangering the kids. There was a very scary horse collar on Kastner by a WB player that looked very ugly. Right in the middle of the field. Right in front of the white hat. Un-called. I don’t feel good about it, but this crew did have an effect on the outcome. Call me bitter, and I accept that, it pains me to write it.

Hats off to York and it’s players.

Witnessed: York student section of 150-plus grouped together in the stands alá 2019, in no way, shape, or form of social distance. WSC and York administration, this is acceptable? I don’t blame the kids. My kids would do the same. But are not being allowed to. Within the guidelines established (won’t debate the merits of the guidelines, or lack of them, here), this shouldn’t be happening.
Can I ask what your suggestion is to keep kids apart? They don’t stay apart outside of school, how can schools be expected to monitor this when kids do not Social distance at all when they’re not in school?
 
12-2-1989_1.05.30.00.jpg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Gene K.
Can I ask what your suggestion is to keep kids apart? They don’t stay apart outside of school, how can schools be expected to monitor this when kids do not Social distance at all when they’re not in school?
Simply put, they are at a school event. The administration has plenty of school personnel there working as monitors. Direct the kids to spread out over the entirety of the stands.

Agreed that outside of school they can, and do, do what they will. This isn’t outside of school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brucealmighy
Agreed. The school made the decision to allow spectators so they should manage them. Facts are the kids are unlikely to get gravely ill but the politicians clearly do not care about that. They will use the positive tests to continue the restrictions to everything. It’s not that hard to manage the crowd if you put some effort into it. Whether you think the restrictions are justified or not, the politicians have made it clear they aren’t going away if the numbers keep going up.
 
Or, schools may realize the restrictions aren't going away whether the numbers go up or down (still haven't seen any glimmer that anything is changing for the next few years). Heck, the seeds are being planted that even with mass vaccinations, it won't be "enough" to stop the pandemic. So let the kids be kids and be normal. They are 3 feet or closer in the school building now, they can be 3 feet or closer in the stands. As long as the masks are on it shouldn't matter right? You have school personnel constantly harping on kids at a football game to stay apart, well then you won't be having much of a student section coming out to any games. Makes it unbearable. I hope all schools just use common sense and let the kids be kids.
 
District 205 (York) is doing weekly saliva tests on all in-person students and anyone doing athletics (even if remote learning). Last week results were 2,046 tests, 3 potential positives (0.15%). Let's relax on ripping kids for having fun.
 
ADVERTISEMENT