Jambun82
-
Posts
1,312 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
25
Posts posted by Jambun82
-
-
9 hours ago, nolebull813 said:
The Hastings Spudsters went back to back in the early 70’s!!!
The Hastings Spudsters? I heard that they used to really "potato" the competition.
-
On 10/12/2019 at 11:24 AM, FL_HS_football said:
I always hated going to Plant City in the 80's when they were in Manatee's District, for the very same reason.....the home cooking was terrible..............particularly if the score was close.
FL-HS_football, could you provide some examples of the "home cooking" that Manatee experienced in the 1980's in Plant City?
-
On 10/12/2019 at 8:30 AM, Legion37 said:
Lakeland which did not have Bowman or two other starters playing, only put 27 on Durant, of course they were fighting the Hillsborough refs as they always have to do.
So its at Bloomingdale this week. The final "challenge" before the playoffs. Kathleen isn't as good as last year.
Bowman is expected to play as are the two walking wounded.
Always have to factor in the refs when going to the Plant City area schools.
Any thoughts, other than recruiting of course.
Legion37, what have been some of the issues with the officials when Lakeland has to play in the Plant City area?
-
21 hours ago, Cat_Scratch said:
Actually I root for all Bevard teams. BUT...
I went to Cocoa for 2 years, and Graduated from Rockledge when the schools split in 1971. I lived in Rockledge and was zoned for Rockledge High. My son played football for Cocoa so there is that. I do root for both teams and when they play each other, I can not lose because one of my teams will win... lol. I've been invited to coach the Dive team at Cocoa next year as part of the swim team since they didn't have a coach this year and I dove for Cocoa way back when. Also I mentor for the robotics team at Cocoa this year, though I admit I haven't really done much so far.
Have 3 letters from Cocoa and 2 from Rockledge.
The Dive Team? It is to bad that Rodney Dangerfield is not still alive. He could enroll back in High School, and become your top diver. Then, after you win the big meet, you could have a big party with curvy women in bikinis who like poetry. The women who like poetry can help you with your "Longfellow". You can get Oingo Biongo to perform, while the police supply you with beer, and you break the old crusty teachers car window!
-
10 hours ago, Cat_Scratch said:
I had to pick the Rock. It's where I graduated from. You don't pick against your school. Cost me 2 picks so far.
Cat Scratch, you graduated from Rockledge, but now root for Cocoa? Isn't that against some unwritten rule? lol
- KeemD321 and DisabledAccount
-
2
-
-
18 minutes ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:
In terms of judgement how often do we see PI calls away from the play that late in the game? I would have to think most officials will let the game play out and avoid throwing a flag on a PI call in that situation if it has no impact on the play
Not very often. Yes, I would agree.
- Hwy17 and DisabledAccount
-
2
-
5 minutes ago, Hwy17 said:
What if the penalty is away from the play? Just curious. We missed a tackle on the next play which is how they scored the game winning touchdown. We got the ball back with 6 seconds and tried the hook and lateral but it didn't work. But it was a big confidence boost in that we out played Lake Gibson most of the game.
Hwy17, if a pass interference foul is away from the play, it might be a personal foul but is usually not pass interference. Again, it depends on the judgment of the official.
-
10 hours ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:
@Jambun82 Ik your the resident official here so you probably know the mindset of an official more than I would but personally I would feel if it's a play that would potentially decide who wins/losses the game that most officials would tend to let any judgement call go by unless the penalty altered the result of the play (ik player safety calls are a different story)
Meaning that if something like holding or PI happened away from the play and had no effect on it then it would be a call the officials would usually ignore which makes sense
Then again different crews will call the same things differently but maybe you can explain what the officials and taught or encouraged to do in those situations
Purple and Gold Tiger Stripes man, I would agree with your statement. The non-player safety foul away from the point-of-attack would not be ignored, but that foul would probably not be penalized either. Possibly, a warning to the player committing the foul to be careful.
-
11 hours ago, Perspective said:
For what it's worth, it is my understanding that the "ball was uncatchable" is a determination that precludes a pass interference call at the college and pro level, but not at the high school level. In high school, even if the ball is thrown 50 feet over the receiver's head, if there is contact by the defender when the ball is in the air, it's still considered pass interference.
Jambun, correct me if I'm wrong.
Perspective, no need to correct you. You are right.
-
11 hours ago, Hwy17 said:
That's the feeling we had! From my view point, the ball was uncatchable. Anyway Lake Gibson was supposed to be a hugh favorite that we didn't stand a chance against and Hardee nearly pulled an upset save for a penalty. Just like the North Marion game. I'd like to see the stats for this game as much of Lake Gibson's offense is likely attributed to one play in the 2nd quarter.
Hwy17, uncatchable is NOT a factor when determining a pass-interference foul in NFHS rules.
-
7 hours ago, gatorman-uf said:
Thank you both for answering. It was near the end of the playclock so I thought it have been a delay of game penalty, but it was a false start call. I am just surprised that is the rule, seems as some people have suggested it could lead to abuse.Gatorman-uf, that is why the rule provision granting the referee the authority to start or stop the clock as he/she sees fit is in the rule book. As well as the recent rule change granting the offended team after an accepted foul to have the clock start on the snap in the last two minutes of the second and fourth quarters.
-
11 hours ago, Perspective said:
Jambun, I read this in the rules. How is this interpreted? How does a team "consume (or conserve) time illegally?" Is the white hat supposed to read the coaches mind and make a determination whether a coach has told a play to take an intentional false start penalty or feign an injury?
Have you ever seen an official make this determination in a game (i.e., that one team or the other was trying to consume or conserve time illegally)?
I'm just trying to get a feel for how officials make such a subjective determination.
Thanks.
Perspective, the referee just has to use his/her best judgment. It is usually very obvious anyway, when a team is attempting to consume or conserve time. I could count the number of times on one hand that the referee has had to actually enforce this rule, it is very rare. A big part of being a game official is using the best judgment, and trying to apply common-sense, logical reasoning to any decision. I am sure that your father, the basketball official, would agree.
-
15 hours ago, Hwy17 said:
Hardee stopped Lake Gibson on 4th down but got called for pass interference and that set up their game winning score.
Did you think that it was a foul?
-
14 hours ago, Cat_Scratch said:
Pretty sure you can not end a game on a penalty. Also, I think the clock stops when the flag is tossed. If the flag is tossed before time expires then I'm fairly certain time is put back on the clock to the point of the flag. The ref that tosses the flag should also note the time on the clock. The white hat is watching the play clock not the game clock, so if the white hat tossed the flag then it's up to the game time clock manager to notice the time. If it's a running clock then I believe the game is over.
Cat Scratch, the game cannot end on an accepted defensive penalty. If time runs out during a play that has an accepted defensive penalty, an untimed down is played. The time is NOT put back on the clock.
-
On 10/5/2019 at 7:11 PM, badbird said:
Clock runs on a false start on the offense. If the refs feel the team is doing it on purpose to run clock they can stop it. It is a good way to eat clock if the other team is out of timeouts.
The offended team has the right in the last two minutes of the second and fourth quarters to have the clock start on the snap after a foul. Badbird is correct however, the referee has the authority to order the clock stopped or started if he/she feels that a team is trying to consume or conserve time illegally.
-
On 10/5/2019 at 6:37 PM, gatorman-uf said:
4 minutes left in 4th and Team A is trying to run the clock. Team A is on offense runs the clock down to a couple of seconds on playclock. Team A gets a false start, clock stops, ball is reset. Once ball is reset, clock starts running again. Am I wrong to believe that the clock should not have begun again after the false start?
I am not sure if Team B noticed (They were home team) so i am unsure if coach was protesting it.
Gatorman-uf, it is correct to start the clock on the referee's ready for play whistle after a false start foul. Only after a delay of game foul does the clock start on the snap.
-
8 hours ago, Hwy17 said:
Lake Gibson was lucky last night.
What happened?
-
12 hours ago, Perspective said:
Jambun, we'll just have to agree to disagree on the first point. If the coach is not monitoring (i.e., observing) the officials, how can he be expected to raise a valid rule interpretation question or judgment call? Similarly, I'm pretty darn sure that given the choice between having a 17-year old kid yell out that he's being held every play or the coach discretely getting the refs attention and asking him to keep an eye on the right guard for possible holding, 9 refs out of 10 would prefer the latter. And the tenth ref would be the one who lost his hearing five years ago.
As for the second bolded point, I'm well aware of this. My father refereed high school (as well as junior college and college) basketball for over 25 years. When I didn't have to get up early for school the next day, or didn't have a game or practice of my own, I would go with him to his games. I learned the rules of the games but, more importantly, I learned how and how not to interact with officials.
The biggest difference between football and basketball when it comes to interacting with the refs is the distance. On the basketball court, the refs are constantly walking by the team benches or approaching the scorer's table, but even when they're not, they can only be so far away. In football, even when the line of scrimmage is right in front of a team's bench, the white hat can be 30 or more yards away from a coach, in which case the only way to get the refs attention is to yell loudly. In my view, that's not being disrespectful; it's simply taking into account the laws of science.
Perspective, believe it or not, most officials would possibly prefer to have a 17 year old child asking them about a rule than an out-of-control coach. That 17 year old child would not be yelling that he is being held or about anything, because that player would be watching from the sidelines if he did. Trust me on that. Most coaches, in my experience, do not know the rules well enough to be evaluating officials, although some do, and are widely respected. There will always be coaches who have the complete respect and deference of most officials. However, there a lot of coaches who one sometimes wonder how they got these jobs, and whose opinion officials don't care about one bit. That is a fact. Also, basketball, in my view, is a lot harder to officiate than football for many reasons. If your father was a good basketball official, he would have been a good football official, if he liked the sport enough. Yelling in itself is not really an issue for the reasons that you stated. It is the tone of voice of the coach, and the language being used.
-
2 hours ago, Cat_Scratch said:
Heck, but for a called back TD on Cocoa, and a Bishop Gorman Hail Mary, Cocoa goes in at half time leading the nation champs 14 - 12. Yes, Cocoa ran out of gas at the end of the 3rd but we were asked more than once by the home team fans, "Cocoa is a small public school". Believe me when I say that the BG fans were worried when Cocoa scored an a 35 yard pass play where the ref tossed the flag for the receiver stepping on the white line, that was a questioned flag, and would have put Cocoa up 13-12. In stead Cocoa kicks a FG making it 12-10 BG. BG fans were very worried until the Hail Mary gave them the lead going in at half time.
That's why you take the challenge. You never really know who is going to win until the game is played.
Did Cocoa have a chance, maybe? A slim one if they go in 14 - 12 at the half but probably not. Would it have shocked the HS nation if Cocoa won, probably way more than not, but Cocoa did it before to Abilene when they were #1. Of course there were tons of excuses why Abilene lost but the real one was because Cocoa was better that night.
So you never really know.
Cat Scratch, if the receiver was the first player to touch the ball after stepping out-of-bounds, and coming back in-bounds, that is an illegal touching foul.
-
8 hours ago, Perspective said:
I have not seen the video. But, I have seen a number of coaches call timeout and walk out onto the field to talk to the white hat. Candidly, I think the white hats actually prefer this, as it gets the conversation away from the bench of the coach's team and it gets the conversation away from the fans. And it allows the conversation to take place on more of a one-on-one basis. Now, if the white hat had previously said something to the coach about coming out onto the field (even after calling a time out) or if the white hat put his hand up and gave the coach the proverbial "stop sign," and the coach continued walking out on to the field (especially if the coach is yelling as he's walking out and/or walking out in an aggressive manner), that would be different.
Again, I haven't seen the video. But if the coach simply came out onto the field to discuss something (player safety, uncalled penalty, etc.) I might be able to accept an ejection, but I'm having a hard time accepting this would be worth a suspension for the rest of the year (unless the coach has a history and was on double-secret probation).
Perspective, that is my point. We don't know if this coach has any history, or something previous. Also, we don't know if this was his second UNC foul, which is an automatic ejection. The FHSAA would NOT suspend a coach or player for this amount of time unless something very egregious happened. The FHSAA does not want to hand out this type of punishment, but there might have been no choice.
-
8 hours ago, Perspective said:
I'll avoid the sarcasm and simply suggest that this is an analogy. Attorneys are typically the mouthpieces for their clients. In other words, attorneys speak for their clients, whether it be in court or outside of court. I think what the coach was saying, is that it is his job to speak for his players. No coach worth his salt wants his players bitching at the refs. Over the years, most of the coaches I've played for or seen on the sidelines tell their players not to say anything to the refs, but instead come to them if there is a problem and they (the coach) will speak to the refs.
And, with all due respect, one of the head coach's duties and responsibilities is to monitor what the officials are doing. Officials are humans they do make mistakes sometimes (some of which can be fixed on the spot; some of which cannot). Are you suggesting that if the ref incorrectly signals it to be "3rd down" (perhaps because he forgot that the penalty on the offense was declined instead of accepted), the coach shouldn't worry about it? If it were me on the sideline, I'd be yelling my butt off so that the mistake could immediately be corrected. Isn't that what a good official would want -- to "get it right?"
The Head Coaches role is NOT to moniter what the officials are doing, and speak on behalf of his players. It is to coach his team, and his players. The Coach may have questions about certain rules interpretations or even judgment calls, and as long as the coach calls time-out, and requests an explanation, he is due those questions to be answered. A Coach may ask about a down, how many time-outs are left, etc, and I would believe that most decent officials would answer as long as the question-concerns were delivered in a respectful way. Perspective, you are correct, officials are human beings too. They like to be treated like human beings, and not like a piece of garbage. The NFHS rules are very clear about how coaches and players are to address officials. .
-
23 hours ago, badbird said:
White hat (referee). no worries on the name calling except now columbiafan will use birdbrain instead of badbirdy. Thanks a lot
As I re-read your first post it seems you were more questioning. Hard to take what someones intents are when they write it instead of say it. Seemed like you were taking the officials side without seeing the video or knowing the facts also. I do believe both sides could have probably handled it better and I don't feel a 3 month suspension is appropriate.
I was at a pop warner game today where a head coach wanted to pull his kids off the field because he felt the ref made a bad call. The team was losing big and the coach was venting and trying to blame the officials for the beat down he was taking. I went to the commisioner and told him what was going on and he went off on the head coach. Why are we quitting? Teach these kids a lesson not to quit and to overcome adversity because when they become older they are going to just quit. As a head coach I never allowed my kids to complain about calls or use it as an excuse. However I would advocate for my kids.
Thank you badbird. A War and Peace sized book could be written about Pop Warner coaches. lol
-
22 hours ago, gatorman-uf said:
Jambun,
In the Sun-sentinel video, he seems to call time out at the beginning as indicted by the sideline judge. His team was on the field, so even if he was directing comments towards official at that moment doesnt it mean he can be on field and thus not penalized. .
GatormanUF, during an authorized conference, one coach, and three trainers may walk out onto the middle of the field of play, and talk with his eleven players. The coach may NOT speak with an official during this conference. Most officials will answer a coach's question if the coach asks in a respectful way. However, the proper procedure for when a coach has a rule or judgment question, and calls a time-out for this question, is for the referee (white hat), and one or more other official to walk to the coaches sideline and answer the coach's question. The NFHS is very clear on this point. Any official is well within his right to have an UNC foul when a coach walks on the field of play, and confronts an official in a threatening manner. Threatening is in the eye of the official. The NFHS is very clear in this as well.
Lake Mary at Apopka - Final Apopka 45-11
in The Huddle
Posted
DarterBlue2, I understand that an Apopka starter suffered some sort of leg injury on the sideline rug at Evans Thursday night. Do you know anything about this player's status going forward?