I noticed the other one has been removed. Maybe we can get this one pinned.

Good idea to clean house and start fresh for the year anyway, I think. One of you fellas posted the NFHS rule changes for this year earlier. Could you throw that back out? Which changes do you think will give you the biggest headaches?

here ya go cross:

INDIANAPOLIS, IN (February 9, 2012) — High school football players must sit out one play next year if their helmet comes off while the ball is live.

In cases where the helmet comes completely off without it being directly attributable to a foul by the opponent, the player will have to leave the game for at least one down.

This addition to Rule 3-5-10 was one of eight rules changes approved by the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) Football Rules Committee at its January 20-22 meeting in Indianapolis. All rules changes were subsequently approved by the NFHS Board of Directors.

“The committee made this rules change after reviewing data from multiple states regarding the frequency of helmets coming off during live-ball play,” said Julian Tackett, chair of the Football Rules Committee and commissioner of the Kentucky High School Athletic Association. “It is the committee’s hope that this serves notice for schools to properly fit players with helmets to reduce the incidence of these situations and remind the players not to take steps that alter the fit.”

Another significant change next season will be a new interpretation of a legal catch. A receiver now will be required to establish possession of the ball and contact the ground inbounds while maintaining possession – regardless of the opponent’s action.

“In previous years, the covering official could have ruled that an airborne player attempting to catch the ball would have come down inbounds, but was prevented from doing so because of contact by the opponent,” said Bob Colgate, NFHS director of sports and sports medicine and liaison to the Football Rules Committee. “Now, the player must establish possession and contact the ground inbounds for a legal catch.”

The Football Rules Committee also cleared the way for state associations and their member schools to place corporate advertising and/or commercial markings on the field of play. These types of markings previously were only allowed in the end zones and outside the field.

Rule 1-2-3l will state that while corporate advertising and/or commercial markings will be allowed, the markings may not obstruct the yard lines, hash marks or nine-yard marks.

A risk-minimization change was made to Rule 2-3-7 that changes an interpretation for blocking below the waist.

“The previous interpretation was that it was not a foul for a player to block below the waist if the hand(s) of the opponent was first contacted below the waist,” Colgate said. “This revision changes that interpretation and stipulates that such action is a foul.”

After experimentation in Minnesota and Iowa, the committee revised Rule 9-3-8 to prohibit members of the kicking team from initiating contact (blocking) against members of the receiving team until the ball has broken the plane of the receiving team’s restraining line, or until the kicking team is eligible to recover the free kick.

The other three rules changes approved by the committee include Rule 1-5-3c(8), which expands the list of illegal equipment to include play cards that are not worn on the wrist or arm, as well as Rule 9-4-3h, which now states that grasping the tooth and mouth protector, as well as the face mask, is a foul. Also, to provide guidance to game officials, the committee clarified Rule 9-4-3k by adding the direction in which the opponent was pulled during a horse-collar.

Finally, the NFHS decided to extend the effective date of its new glove rule from 2012 to 2013. During the 2012 season, both gloves meeting the current standard and gloves meeting the new standard will be legal for play.

“The game of football at the high school level is in great shape, and the committee continues to review all available data to minimize the risk to participants,” Tackett said. “A hallmark to the NFHS playing rules is the constant emphasis on risk minimization, as well as historic tenets regarding the balance between offense and defense and making the rules appropriate for the levels of the coaches, players and officials.”

Football is the No. 1 participatory sport for boys at the high school level with 1,134,377 participants in the 2010-11 school year, according to the High School Athletics Participation Survey conducted by the NFHS through its member state associations. In addition, the survey indicated there were 1,561 girls who played football in 2010-11.
12-13 Football.

This needs to be pinned.

Cannoneer wrote: This needs to be pinned.

Geez! Gimme some time!  I was gonna start this thread back up...but since I didn't, I pinned it for ya!

So guys, how many of these rule changes do you think are gonna result in us getting an earful this year?

I think a Point of Emphasis will generate some high blood pressure.

You will likely see a lot more illegal shifts called next year.  Some of the critcism we refs will get will be valid, some not.  As usual, the consistency of enforcement is a big deal.

I also think the enforcement of the coaches/players in the restricted zone will get better.  Some coaches still haven't embraced the rule but officials I have talked with plan to enforce what they have been letting slide.  It needs to be enforced across the Board.  Coaches can still direct out of the resticted zone. It is a saftey issue.

I love what i heard a coach say the other night at the Spring game i did - "Back up guys, you can see just as well from back there as you can from up here." I don't know what it is about wanting to stand right next to the sideline, but there is something alluring to being as close as you can. I just wish the real season would hurry up and get here!!!!!!!

IMO, the hardest thing for me will be the new interpretation on blocking below the waist. Ever since I have been officiating, it has not been a foul if the "blockee" (for lack of a better term) put his hands on the blocker, and I'm afraid i won't be able to throw the flag when/if that happens.

1

Just wonder why you think there will be more illegal shifts called next year?

cristal clear wrote: I think a Point of Emphasis will generate some high blood pressure.

You will likely see a lot more illegal shifts called next year.  Some of the critcism we refs will get will be valid, some not.  As usual, the consistency of enforcement is a big deal.

I also think the enforcement of the coaches/players in the restricted zone will get better.  Some coaches still haven't embraced the rule but officials I have talked with plan to enforce what they have been letting slide.  It needs to be enforced across the Board.  Coaches can still direct out of the resticted zone. It is a saftey issue.

LJ-  We have some teams around here who have the QB stand and then quickly bend over center and receive the snap.  Okay as long as there isn't a man in motion, then we have the illegal shift as the QB will need to be set for a count.

Same deal when a QB picks up the leg to signal the flanker to go in motion.  The QB will need to wait a count before the snap.  Maybe y'all have been calling this, I admit we haven't.

Gotcha - Yeah, we've been calling both for years.

For non-officials, you may be scratching your head over the exchange the LJ and I just had.  Actually LJ and I communicate both on the board and by PM.  We have a lot of respect for each other, yet this exchange displays why "points of emphasis" are important.  These POEs clarify "judgement".  Judgement dictates we enforce those items that have an effect on the play with the understanding that safety fouls should always be enforced.  In our district, most crews would have said these illegal shifts didn't have an effect on the play and thus they were not flagged.  In LJ's area, they did hold these illegal shifts should be enforced.  The POEs sharpen judgement to make the officiating more consistent from crew to crew, district to district, and state to state.

We cover a variety of matters in the summer meetings; POEs, rule changes, and changes in mechanics.  Hopefully, all officials take these matters seriously.

cristal clear wrote: For non-officials, you may be scratching your head over the exchange the LJ and I just had.  Actually LJ and I communicate both on the board and by PM.  We have a lot of respect for each other, yet this exchange displays why "points of emphasis" are important.  These POEs clarify "judgement".  Judgement dictates we enforce those items that have an effect on the play with the understanding that safety fouls should always be enforced.  In our district, most crews would have said these illegal shifts didn't have an effect on the play and thus they were not flagged.  In LJ's area, they did hold these illegal shifts should be enforced.  The POEs sharpen judgement to make the officiating more consistent from crew to crew, district to district, and state to state.

We cover a variety of matters in the summer meetings; POEs, rule changes, and changes in mechanics.  Hopefully, all officials take these matters seriously.

Thanks for the clarification, but understand as fans, you just pointed out why people question calls on a regular basis.  If one crew has been making the call for years and the other is going to be looking for it this season, that can't be considered consistent from crew to crew, district to district.  Then you get in the play offs with out of district officials and end up with fans on here complaining about someone getting homecooking. 

Maybe I'm wrong.... 

No, you are exactly right, and in my opinion, the problem results mainly because there is no unifying evaluation and accountability oversight for officials. what we have are individual associations directed by well-meaning assigning secretaries who are driven by what they feel is the most important rules to be enforced. The SEC, on the other hand, has a team of evaluators who, when they go and evaluate the crews, are all looking at the same things, making sure everything is done the same way throughout the conference. But still, when you get to the next level, you have the same problem to a lesser extent. They call the game differently in the Northwest than in the Southeast. Bowl games are a perfect example. I've seen many bowl games called by out of conference officials who did things differently than a normal SEC crew would. 

CalhounLJ wrote: No, you are exactly right, and in my opinion, the problem results mainly because there is no unifying evaluation and accountability oversight for officials. what we have are individual associations directed by well-meaning assigning secretaries who are driven by what they feel is the most important rules to be enforced. The SEC, on the other hand, has a team of evaluators who, when they go and evaluate the crews, are all looking at the same things, making sure everything is done the same way throughout the conference. But still, when you get to the next level, you have the same problem to a lesser extent. They call the game differently in the Northwest than in the Southeast. Bowl games are a perfect example. I've seen many bowl games called by out of conference officials who did things differently than a normal SEC crew would. 

+1

Consistency has always been a problem. But it can also be boiled down to the individual official. For those of us who post regularly here, and I am going out on a limb, but most of us here try to do the right thing. We strive to be better, and we strive to be consistent. We participate in this game because we love it, and enjoy the interaction with the players and coaches. But as we all know, there are those who do not, and unfortunately, are the ones who are noticed the most. How many time have we read here that a good crew or team of officials are hardly noticed? That is so true. I appreciate the fact that we have guys here who are open and honest. These are the ones who have no ego to bruise. That is the kind of official I want to be.

Hopefully we refs are focusing on the issues that have a material effect on the play.   Otherwise you have a ton of penalties called.  There are 22 guys running around and there are all kind of penalties that could be called.  There was a very high profile game a few years ago (I'll not name it) where 500 yards in penalties were called.  This happens when refs call everything.

Safety fouls should be called, penalties affecting plays should be called, otherwise preventive officiating should rule.  We tell the player what he did wrong and to stop.  I had a good coach chew me out for not flagging an infraction that had zero affect on the play.  When the ball changed hands, his player did the same thing.  I turned, looked at the coach, and he said, "Okay, I see what you are doing."

When fans see something that could be called and isn't, their perspective is jaded by if the call is for them or against them.  

There are some gray areas and the Points of Emphasis seek to sharpen those.  Anyone is welcome to find a link that disputes me, but I can't remember a big stink discussion on this Board over illegal shifts.  I still don't think any real advantage is gained, but I will call the infraction this year.  

A good thread would be for refs to post what rules they think are bad but we have to enforce.

Some call it "no harm, no foul." We call it "advantage/disadvantage." if a foul is not a safety foul, and does not give advantage to one team, or a disadvantage, then we "don't see it."