** One (not Two) game ruined for me by the refs **

[kbjoe1]

the refs at the ira rankin game were good... they let the kids play and questionable calls were discussed by the group didnt agree with all but they did a very good job.....


but it doesnt mean i dont think we should always expect the best,,,, or question unreasonable calls

 

[rickref72]

Based on pages 42-43 of this manual, it indicates that there should only be one (L) under the posts when using a 4 man crew.

http://www.intra-focus.com/taso/docs/2011TASO4OfficialMechanicsManual 06_11.pdf

Check out page 59 - it applies to six man only. Six man always has two under the goalposts, unless they don't have a clue what they are doing.

Also, page 60 says that the Line Judge should give no signal if the kick is good, but I can't say I've seen anyone do that.

You might want to get the 2012 Mechanics manual as well. But that's the gist of it.

2012 was the first time the book officially allowed 2 back for a 4 man crew. U/J and the Linejudge go back.

Here are those mechanics.

R A. On a try or field goal, R's position is a yard or so to the rear and several yards to the side of the potential kicker, (favoring the L sideline), facing the kicker where R can see the ball when spotted for the kick. Covers as usual if a run or pass. Assist in sideline coverage if run develops to L's vacated side. Signal score after being positive that requirements are met. Rule on roughing or running into the kicker and/or holder.
U/J B. Responsible for your upright goal post and rule if ball hits cross bar on kick. If run develops, move to goal line to assist in ruling. If a field goal attempt is short and ball remains alive, officiate as a scrimmage kick. The ball becomes dead on a try when it is obvious that the kick has failed. Sound whistle when ball becomes dead on attempted field goals and kick tries.
H C. Responsible for legality of snap, entire line of scrimmage and ensuring one second delay observed by the defense before contacting the snapper. Quickly move to goal line if run develops.
D. If the kick is short or partially blocked, know if it crossed the neutral zone.
L E. Take position on end line at inbounds line extended. Responsible to rule on success or failure of field goal attempt passing over crossbar (only; R rules on ball passing between uprights). If kick is successful, give no signal. If kick fails to pass over crossbar and becomes dead immediately by rule, look to R and give “no score” signal (#10). If attempt is short and ball remains alive, give no signal, officiate as a scrimmage kick. Sound whistle when ball becomes dead on attempted field goals.
F. If run develops to your vacated side, quickly move along back line to back pylon to rule on the sideline. Next move is toward goal line to assist. If run situations develop to your side, you have primary sideline responsibility with R's assistance.
U/J, L G. When the field goal or try attempt narrowly passes outside an upright, the official nearer the ball may give a sweeping motion with both arms away from the upright.

 

[rickref72]

I really hope I am misunderstanding this.

4 or 5 man crews have two under the post. They should never give only nods to the R for good or bad. The have the entire thing and signal good or no good. The mechanic you sugest sounds a lot like indoor football PAT and field goal mechanics. If R is looking for nods who the heqq is watching the kicker and holder?

This year I have seen 4 man crews with one under the post and I have seen 4 man crews with two under the post. I work the chains and so I have asked how they determine whether there is one under or two. The response I received was that it was the white hat's decision. So are there clear-cut guidelines about the proper mechanics for extra points? Or is it left to the white hat's discretion?

Based on pages 42-43 of this manual, it indicates that there should only be one (L) under the posts when using a 4 man crew.

http://www.intra-focus.com/taso/docs/2011TASO4OfficialMechanicsManual 06_11.pdf

Hello, I listed the more recent mechanics. Typically they should be followed. When I first started there was a lot of white hat and crew discretion on 6 man coverage and mechanics. I would give you an updated link but all of mine are behind my secured log in. I can get you a copy and email it to you perhaps. Just PM me if you want it.

 

[Howdy_85]

Let's talk just a minute about crew selection.

During the regular season, you are more likely to get a crew of younger, less experienced officials because those are the guys available - the "experienced" crews will likely be working upper level 11-man games. Most 6-man coaches have very little say about who call's their regular season games. That's just the way it works. Those experienced crews will usually be assigned one or two 6-man games during the season to make them eligible for playoffs.

In the playoffs, coaches usually have a say in the choice of crews to work their games. Those coaches will generally be encouraged by the chapter secretary to choose a more experienced crew. That doesn't mean that that crew has a lot of recent experience (or physical ability) to call a 6-man game. The alternative is less appealing - the split crew, where you have 2-3 guys from one chapter and 2-3 guys from another. That work fine or be absolutely awful. The third alternative is to allow the UIL to assign a crew. In that case, you might end up with a really good crew from Austin or San Antonio who haven't seen a 6-man game in their lives. Coaches need to stand up to the assigning secretary and get who they want to call their games. A 5th year guy with a ton of 6-man games is much more appealing and likely to understand the intricacies of the game than a 20-year guy who can't hold up to a track meet on grass.

Just my opinion...

 

[CRSARM]

Sometimes it is better to not question the ref:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/ju ... a.football

Referee shoots dead football coach who queried his decision

Rory Carroll in Johannesburg
The Guardian, Monday 26 July 2004 08.28 EDT

A South African referee dispelled any doubt that football is more important than life and death over the weekend when he shot dead a coach and wounded two players who challenged a decision.
A yellow card awarded to a player during a match between two local teams in Kenton-on-Sea in Eastern Cape province prompted protests from the coach and team. That is a common enough occurence at matches but in this case the argument turned into a fight which the referee settled with a bullet.

The coach of Marcelle club was hit in the chest and died on the pitch and two players were hit in their hands by the same bullet, according to the South African Press Association.

"There was an altercation and the referee became threatened when the other team approached him because they were angry," said Inspector Mali Govender of Grahamstown police. "So he pulled out a gun and killed the coach of the visiting team."

The unnamed referee fled the scene but police were confident he would be soon caught and face one charge of murder and two cases of attempted murder. The dead man's name would be released after relatives were notified.

Since winning the right to host the 2010 World Cup South African football has been plagued by a match fixing scandal in which a cartel of crooked referees are accused of taking bribes.

It was a Scot, football legend Bill Shankly, who joked about football's importance transcending mortality - but it has become a truism.

Across the world referees have been set upon by furious fans and in Latin America two nations went to war over a football match. But usually referees are the attacked, not the attackers. South Africa's widespread gun ownership has changed that.

 

[RoscoeSparks11]

Sometimes it is better to not question the ref:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/ju ... a.football

Referee shoots dead football coach who queried his decision

Rory Carroll in Johannesburg
The Guardian, Monday 26 July 2004 08.28 EDT

A South African referee dispelled any doubt that football is more important than life and death over the weekend when he shot dead a coach and wounded two players who challenged a decision.
quote]

They got this article all wrong!! Don't they know REAL football is only played with six players on each team, and on an 80 yrd field. What they were talking about is futbol. You know, one of those other roundball games.

 

[oldergoat]

KBJOE1 – Let me start by saying I was at the game and no I do not support either team, just there to watch a good 6-man game. No the officials were not “good” in the Ira/Rankin game. They were just a little above very bad. On the Kick off at lease the other 3 officials knew where to be, the White Hat not so much. He should have been in the middle of the field at the Goal Line. Instead he was on the side line and could not possibly cover the other side line on a call of Out of bounds or touchback.

Now as for as discussing the “calls”. Yes they did have many discussions it’s just too bad they got most of them wrong.

Example #1 was the Pass Interference in the EZ against Ira. Yes it was PI not doubt and a good play by the DB. He was beat on the play and was trying to save a sure TD. The bad
news was that the enforcement was so wrong. The play started well outside the 20 yard line so the enforcement should have been 15 yards and 1st down (probably around the 10 yard line). Not these guys, they put the ball at the 2 yard line because the PI was in the EZ. That is only correct if the play starts at or inside the 17 yard line. (mistake # 1 and a really big mistake).

Example # 2 was the Pass Interference against Rankin. This flag was waived off by the White Hat, ruling that the pass was uncatchable. Let me describe the play. Ira receiver was breaking clear and “may” have been able to make the play and “may” have scored, don’t know. However the Rankin player tackled the receiver thereby making sure that the ball was uncatchable. This would have been a judgment call for PI and I can see waiving that call off, however since the receiver was “held” beyond the NZ and the pass was beyond the NZ at a minimum this should have been defensive holding and a 1st down for Ira.

So no I really don’t think these officials did a very good job at all.

For all you officials that keep trying to “make excuses” for the bad officials in the 6-man playoffs and stating that the ‘Chapter” assigns the best or allows the coach to request officials this is for you. The chapter that called this game was given a list of officials by one of the coaches. The four individuals that were requested all have at least 10 years experience with 2 of the 4 having 15+ years. All have called 6-man games throughout their career. The assigning sec. chose not to put any of the 4 in this game. Why? Knowing a little about that chapter, the 4 requested are not “in the group” so to speak. Yes I was an official, retired now due to health reasons, but saw this happen every year. It is not the “best” officials being assigned to 6-man playoffs, it is most often done on the buddy system.

 

[rickref72]

"The assigning sec. chose not to put any of the 4 in this game. Why? Knowing a little about that chapter, the 4 requested are not “in the group” so to speak. Yes I was an official, retired now due to health reasons, but saw this happen every year. It is not the “best” officials being assigned to 6-man playoffs, it is most often done on the buddy system." - oldergoat


If true this is garbage. 1st thing that needs to happen is these coaches should never use said chapter again in playoffs as long as assiging guy is still there. The only reasons the 4 requested should not be used is if they already had an assignment, were ineligible for playoffs, or the other coach did not want them. The officials wronged here should bring it to the local board. If that does not resolve itself there then go to TASO head. This again assumes all of your statement is fact and not other circumstances like I mentioned are at play.

You and I both know then based on experience example 1 and 2 can get jacked up by guys based on this factor. They sound like newer official mistakes. Example two sounds like someone came in and said ball was uncatcahble yet the rest of the factors were not considered during the discussion. I have seen this before as well with guys who have been around.

I have stated how our assignments work. They are documented at every step and made available at request by any member. If coaches have a group they want and they are available and eligible they are in. If not and they want a list of officials to choose from they are given that list. If we are told to assign the best available then it becomes all up to the assigining secretary. When this happens do guys maybe help their friends. Yes. That is pretty typical anywhere. Our guy does a good job when things like this are open and putting a proper crew in the right game situation.

 

[Howdy_85]

rickref,

Say what you want, but if you don't realize that there is an "in" crowd in our chapter, you are either blind or part of it. I have seen many times that a really good but younger official and/or crew is passed over in favor of someone in the "in" crowd. I have also seen some very experienced guys in that crowd really screw up a 6-man game. I will say that for the most part, if a coach requests a crew, they get the game. However, if it is an assignment, those typically come from a very small pool of crews.

 

[rickref72]

rickref,

Say what you want, but if you don't realize that there is an "in" crowd in our chapter, you are either blind or part of it. I have seen many times that a really good but younger official and/or crew is passed over in favor of someone in the "in" crowd. I have also seen some very experienced guys in that crowd really screw up a 6-man game. I will say that for the most part, if a coach requests a crew, they get the game. However, if it is an assignment, those typically come from a very small pool of crews.

I never denied this is possible. It happens everywhere. That is what my last paragraph post addressed and a good reason why all steps on assignments should be documennted and handled and made available.

A good friend of mine was requested one year by a coach here. He was available. The secretary told him he was not avaialbe and inserted himself in the game. My friend went to watch the same game he had no idea he was requested for and the coach told him at the game when he saw him. But my friend made a mistake of not pursueing it.