Cocoa Appeal Officially Denied

[DarterBlue2]

1 hour ago, KeemD321 said:

They both go to the same QB trainer. Same one who trained Blake Boda. Also believe his son is the QB for Bartram Trail or their atleast related.

They are probably related. The QB trainer you reference graduated high school in 2009 or 2010. He initially played at Boone but transferred to Oak Ridge his senior year to be assured he would be the starter. 

[Perspective]

Google search "idioms examples"

Find:  "Pot calling the kettle black."

Example:  Venice high school football coach complaining about calls favoring the home team after one of their two road games. 

[Perspective]

14 hours ago, nolebull813 said:

@FHSAA 

Here is your evidence to tell Cocoa sorry 

https://m.facebook.com/maxpreps/videos/lineman-strips-qb-in-victory-formation-and-wins-game-on-next-play/740977942907947/

The final sentence of that article tells you why Cocoa is f*cked:  "Now their fate will be in the hands of the FHSAA."

[Perspective]

14 hours ago, nolebull813 said:

@FHSAA 

Here is your evidence to tell Cocoa sorry 

https://m.facebook.com/maxpreps/videos/lineman-strips-qb-in-victory-formation-and-wins-game-on-next-play/740977942907947/

Nolebull, you make a valid point.   The only thing that someone could argue in response is that Cocoa ran the "kneel down" play successfully two more times, so you really don't have to play the "what if" game.   We know what happened. 

[Perspective]

Apparently, someone had one of those TV satellite dish microphones on the sidelines and picked up this conversation between the referee, the side judge and the back judge immediately after the Cocoa punt:

Ref (looking at the Back Judge):  "OK, whatcha got?"

Back Judge:  "I got 12 men on the field against the defense."

Side Judge:   "Well, I was standing over on the Aquinas sideline and I think Number 16 got off the field just before the snap."

Back Judge:  "Well, I counted 12 guys in blue even if Number 16 got off in time."

Side Judge:  "I just don't know about that.  Are you sure?"

Back Judge:  "Um, yeah, I can count to 12."

Ref:  "Who's signing our checks for this game?" 

***crickets***

Ref picks up the yellow flag and waves off the penalty. 

 

[The previous account is a work of fiction and any resemblance to any persons or events is purely coincidental.]

[Perspective]

So, a handful of questions/observations for those who know (or think they know) the answers:

1.  Based on my time down on the field and up in the pressbox, the clock operator takes his cues/instructions from the game officials down on the field.  In other words, the clock operator starts the clock when he's told and stops the clock when he's told.  It is my understanding that any one of the officials can "stop" the clock (technically, signal to the clock operator to stop the clock) by waving/crossing their arms over their head.  Is this correct?

2.  Once the clock has been stopped, who signals that the game clock should begin running again?  The referee?  The official who marks the ball ready to play?  I believe the signal is one arm up in the air and then rotating the arm in a circle.  When I watched the ten-minute video of the last 2 minutes of the game, I'm not sure I ever saw any of the officials do this.  I'm not defending the clock operator, but if he's never instructed to start the clock, perhaps it's not his fault that the clock didn't start when it should have?

3. On/after the second down kneel down play, a flag is thrown.  Apparently, the flag was against STA (presumably, a dead ball personal foul), but I never saw the white hat signal the penalty.  Did I just miss that?  In any event, my understanding is that penalty does not result in an automatic first down. 

4.  After the officials mark off the penalty against STA, you can see one of the Cocoa coaches say something to the guy holding the down marker (I'm guessing he said something to the effect of "hey, that's an automatic first down"), so the guy holding the down marker switched the down from "3" to "1."   But, just before the play is run, the side judge turns her (I think it is a 'she') head and tells the guy holding the down marker to change it back to third down, which he does just before the ball is snapped.   

5.  After the second down play, and after the penalty was assessed against STA, shouldn't the clock have been running?  Yeah, I know this is one of Cocoa's main complaints.  Simple question:  after a running play (when the clock would normally continue to run) and after a dead ball penalty against the defense, the clock should stop to enforce the penalty, right?  But, once, the ball is marked ready to play, shouldn't the clock start running again?  Or to be more precise, shouldn't one of the officials on the field signal that the clock should start running again?  If there was confusion on this issue, the officials should have gotten together and discussed it.  The clock was already stopped, so neither team would have been disadvantaged by a quick conference and then re-spotting the ball for play. 

6.  General observation:  you can never rely on the scoreboard to reflect the correct number of timeouts that a team has left.  I have seen too many people misinterpret a mandatory water break for a timeout and erroneously make the change on the scoreboard.  That said, as a coach, you should absolutely be able to rely upon what an official tells you.  The fact that the scoreboard shows one or more timeouts left is irrelevant, but if a ref tells you that your team or the other team has a certain number of timeouts remaining, you should be able to take that to the bank. 

[Jambun82]

1 hour ago, Perspective said:

The final sentence of that article tells you why Cocoa is f*cked:  "Now their fate will be in the hands of the FHSAA."

The FHSAA does not have the authority to overturn the final results of a high school football game per NFHS rules. How many times do I have to type this before it gets though? 

[Jambun82]

1 hour ago, Perspective said:

Apparently, someone had one of those TV satellite dish microphones on the sidelines and picked up this conversation between the referee, the side judge and the back judge immediately after the Cocoa punt:

Ref (looking at the Back Judge):  "OK, whatcha got?"

Back Judge:  "I got 12 men on the field against the defense."

Side Judge:   "Well, I was standing over on the Aquinas sideline and I think Number 16 got off the field just before the snap."

Back Judge:  "Well, I counted 12 guys in blue even if Number 16 got off in time."

Side Judge:  "I just don't know about that.  Are you sure?"

Back Judge:  "Um, yeah, I can count to 12."

Ref:  "Who's signing our checks for this game?" 

***crickets***

Ref picks up the yellow flag and waves off the penalty. 

 

[The previous account is a work of fiction and any resemblance to any persons or events is purely coincidental.]

Your whole message board posting career is a work of fiction. 

[Jambun82]

12 hours ago, VeniceIndianFan said:

Ok, thank you. My education continues and I appreciate your lessons and teaching. 

You are very welcome! I appreciate the gratitude that you show to the Education, lessons, and teaching that you, and every other message board poster, receives from me. 

[Ray Icaza]

4 hours ago, Perspective said:

Nolebull, you make a valid point.   The only thing that someone could argue in response is that Cocoa ran the "kneel down" play successfully two more times, so you really don't have to play the "what if" game.   We know what happened. 

Seems like a solid legal argument.  The defense rest its case. 

[KeemD321]

5 hours ago, DarterBlue2 said:

They are probably related. The QB trainer you reference graduated high school in 2009 or 2010. He initially played at Boone but transferred to Oak Ridge his senior year to be assured he would be the starter. 

He's definitely training the top QBs in Central and North Florida. Even trains UCF QB

[DarterBlue2]

8 minutes ago, KeemD321 said:

He's definitely training the top QBs in Central and North Florida. Even trains UCF QB

He's a good salesman and has a solid knowledge of the mechanics of playing the position. The fact he's relatively young probably helps, too. 

[KeemD321]

1 hour ago, DarterBlue2 said:

He's a good salesman and has a solid knowledge of the mechanics of playing the position. The fact he's relatively young probably helps, too. 

Most definitely and he's player and all levels besides NFL but has played Arena

[KeemD321]

 

[DarterBlue2]

1 hour ago, KeemD321 said:

 

Based on the rulebook as posted in this thread, their hands were tied even if they were sympathetic to Cocoa's situation. 

[DarterBlue2]

The rule needs to be changed. It is totally undemocratic. 

[Airek]

7 hours ago, Perspective said:

So, a handful of questions/observations for those who know (or think they know) the answers:

1.  Based on my time down on the field and up in the pressbox, the clock operator takes his cues/instructions from the game officials down on the field.  In other words, the clock operator starts the clock when he's told and stops the clock when he's told.  It is my understanding that any one of the officials can "stop" the clock (technically, signal to the clock operator to stop the clock) by waving/crossing their arms over their head.  Is this correct?

2.  Once the clock has been stopped, who signals that the game clock should begin running again?  The referee?  The official who marks the ball ready to play?  I believe the signal is one arm up in the air and then rotating the arm in a circle.  When I watched the ten-minute video of the last 2 minutes of the game, I'm not sure I ever saw any of the officials do this.  I'm not defending the clock operator, but if he's never instructed to start the clock, perhaps it's not his fault that the clock didn't start when it should have?

3. On/after the second down kneel down play, a flag is thrown.  Apparently, the flag was against STA (presumably, a dead ball personal foul), but I never saw the white hat signal the penalty.  Did I just miss that?  In any event, my understanding is that penalty does not result in an automatic first down. 

4.  After the officials mark off the penalty against STA, you can see one of the Cocoa coaches say something to the guy holding the down marker (I'm guessing he said something to the effect of "hey, that's an automatic first down"), so the guy holding the down marker switched the down from "3" to "1."   But, just before the play is run, the side judge turns her (I think it is a 'she') head and tells the guy holding the down marker to change it back to third down, which he does just before the ball is snapped.   

5.  After the second down play, and after the penalty was assessed against STA, shouldn't the clock have been running?  Yeah, I know this is one of Cocoa's main complaints.  Simple question:  after a running play (when the clock would normally continue to run) and after a dead ball penalty against the defense, the clock should stop to enforce the penalty, right?  But, once, the ball is marked ready to play, shouldn't the clock start running again?  Or to be more precise, shouldn't one of the officials on the field signal that the clock should start running again?  If there was confusion on this issue, the officials should have gotten together and discussed it.  The clock was already stopped, so neither team would have been disadvantaged by a quick conference and then re-spotting the ball for play. 

6.  General observation:  you can never rely on the scoreboard to reflect the correct number of timeouts that a team has left.  I have seen too many people misinterpret a mandatory water break for a timeout and erroneously make the change on the scoreboard.  That said, as a coach, you should absolutely be able to rely upon what an official tells you.  The fact that the scoreboard shows one or more timeouts left is irrelevant, but if a ref tells you that your team or the other team has a certain number of timeouts remaining, you should be able to take that to the bank. 

1)  Clock operator does not act independently, only with direction from on-field officials.  They're looking for exactly what you described, the 'stop clock' signal or 'wind clock' symbol.

2) For a dead ball, the white hat signals the restart of the clock.  They'll do this as part of the ready for play signal or when appropriate.

3) I think most clips skipped the signal, but either way, it would be a 15-yard dead ball penalty.  Not an automatic first down or enough yardage for a first down.  I have a feeling there was a communication breakdown with the down marker, but nothing 'wrong' there.

4) See above.  Remember the chain gang are home team volunteers and could have been getting conflicting info from a variety of sources.  It is officials job to ensure it is correct.

5) 100% the clock should have been running.  In the Cocoa/STA game, if you look on that second down play, the referee signals ready for play, but never continues the action to start the clock.  That was VERY wrong.  Clock should have been started before the ready for play actually.  If you don't do that, then every defense will just go headhunting for a penalty.  The normal you'll see is signaling the penalty and then winding the clock right then, followed by shortly after giving the 'ready for play' signal which starts the play clock.  They gave an advantage and incentive to the defense to get a penalty, which paid off with an undeserved victory.  It is 100% officials job to ensure this DOESN'T happen and they didn't.  When I've seen similar in nearly same situations, ref wound the clock after announcing penalty, which hurt defense further, as it should, because otherwise you encourage dangerous, penalty-seeking play.

6) Never trust anything on the scoreboard besides the clock.  Everything else on the scoreboard is optional to put in, and often is done by a home-team volunteer, a.k.a. unofficial.  When you want to know timeouts, ask the official, they will tell you.  I can guarantee someone on Cocoa sideline looked at scoreboard, but I can also guarantee you someone asked the official.  Either way, the timeout shouldn't have mattered and was factored into the kneel-down decision.

Also, the 12 men on the field... STA lined up with 14, one ran off quickly, the 13th was possibly off, but real close and I doubt there's a definitive view of on/off out there, but the 12... GOOD LORD.  They did the whole play with 12, not one running off and close but literally 12 on the field.  You can watch the replay of that and Cocoa HC twitter shot to see it clear as day.  That's illegal participation, which while it wouldn't have been a first down, it would have been a replay of 4th with a winding clock, therefore Cocoa win.

 

In the end, where this really comes into play is the final rankings and what seeding Cocoa gets in the playoffs.  Will they miss a home playoff game or two because of this?  That's money for the program/school, prestige, community, etc. that they could miss out on when they earned the win.  No matter what FHSAA says, Cocoa won that fair & square and should be counted as having the win.  At the end of the season, we may revisit this depending on seeding.  I hope Cocoa isn't hurt by this and it just motivates them further.

[Ray Icaza]

5 hours ago, DarterBlue2 said:

He's a good salesman and has a solid knowledge of the mechanics of playing the position. The fact he's relatively young probably helps, too. 

Even for an ole soul, that doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement. 

[KeemD321]

2 hours ago, Airek said:

1)  Clock operator does not act independently, only with direction from on-field officials.  They're looking for exactly what you described, the 'stop clock' signal or 'wind clock' symbol.

2) For a dead ball, the white hat signals the restart of the clock.  They'll do this as part of the ready for play signal or when appropriate.

3) I think most clips skipped the signal, but either way, it would be a 15-yard dead ball penalty.  Not an automatic first down or enough yardage for a first down.  I have a feeling there was a communication breakdown with the down marker, but nothing 'wrong' there.

4) See above.  Remember the chain gang are home team volunteers and could have been getting conflicting info from a variety of sources.  It is officials job to ensure it is correct.

5) 100% the clock should have been running.  In the Cocoa/STA game, if you look on that second down play, the referee signals ready for play, but never continues the action to start the clock.  That was VERY wrong.  Clock should have been started before the ready for play actually.  If you don't do that, then every defense will just go headhunting for a penalty.  The normal you'll see is signaling the penalty and then winding the clock right then, followed by shortly after giving the 'ready for play' signal which starts the play clock.  They gave an advantage and incentive to the defense to get a penalty, which paid off with an undeserved victory.  It is 100% officials job to ensure this DOESN'T happen and they didn't.  When I've seen similar in nearly same situations, ref wound the clock after announcing penalty, which hurt defense further, as it should, because otherwise you encourage dangerous, penalty-seeking play.

6) Never trust anything on the scoreboard besides the clock.  Everything else on the scoreboard is optional to put in, and often is done by a home-team volunteer, a.k.a. unofficial.  When you want to know timeouts, ask the official, they will tell you.  I can guarantee someone on Cocoa sideline looked at scoreboard, but I can also guarantee you someone asked the official.  Either way, the timeout shouldn't have mattered and was factored into the kneel-down decision.

Also, the 12 men on the field... STA lined up with 14, one ran off quickly, the 13th was possibly off, but real close and I doubt there's a definitive view of on/off out there, but the 12... GOOD LORD.  They did the whole play with 12, not one running off and close but literally 12 on the field.  You can watch the replay of that and Cocoa HC twitter shot to see it clear as day.  That's illegal participation, which while it wouldn't have been a first down, it would have been a replay of 4th with a winding clock, therefore Cocoa win.

 

In the end, where this really comes into play is the final rankings and what seeding Cocoa gets in the playoffs.  Will they miss a home playoff game or two because of this?  That's money for the program/school, prestige, community, etc. that they could miss out on when they earned the win.  No matter what FHSAA says, Cocoa won that fair & square and should be counted as having the win.  At the end of the season, we may revisit this depending on seeding.  I hope Cocoa isn't hurt by this and it just motivates them further.

More than likely if bradford and south Sumter goes undefeated again Cocoa will end up 2nd or 3rd again in the playoff rankings like last season and will have to travel for the regional final and semifinals again

[Jambun82]

5 hours ago, DarterBlue2 said:

The rule needs to be changed. It is totally undemocratic. 

What do you feel in the rule book needs to be changed? 

[Jambun82]

5 hours ago, Airek said:

1)  Clock operator does not act independently, only with direction from on-field officials.  They're looking for exactly what you described, the 'stop clock' signal or 'wind clock' symbol.

2) For a dead ball, the white hat signals the restart of the clock.  They'll do this as part of the ready for play signal or when appropriate.

3) I think most clips skipped the signal, but either way, it would be a 15-yard dead ball penalty.  Not an automatic first down or enough yardage for a first down.  I have a feeling there was a communication breakdown with the down marker, but nothing 'wrong' there.

4) See above.  Remember the chain gang are home team volunteers and could have been getting conflicting info from a variety of sources.  It is officials job to ensure it is correct.

5) 100% the clock should have been running.  In the Cocoa/STA game, if you look on that second down play, the referee signals ready for play, but never continues the action to start the clock.  That was VERY wrong.  Clock should have been started before the ready for play actually.  If you don't do that, then every defense will just go headhunting for a penalty.  The normal you'll see is signaling the penalty and then winding the clock right then, followed by shortly after giving the 'ready for play' signal which starts the play clock.  They gave an advantage and incentive to the defense to get a penalty, which paid off with an undeserved victory.  It is 100% officials job to ensure this DOESN'T happen and they didn't.  When I've seen similar in nearly same situations, ref wound the clock after announcing penalty, which hurt defense further, as it should, because otherwise you encourage dangerous, penalty-seeking play.

6) Never trust anything on the scoreboard besides the clock.  Everything else on the scoreboard is optional to put in, and often is done by a home-team volunteer, a.k.a. unofficial.  When you want to know timeouts, ask the official, they will tell you.  I can guarantee someone on Cocoa sideline looked at scoreboard, but I can also guarantee you someone asked the official.  Either way, the timeout shouldn't have mattered and was factored into the kneel-down decision.

Also, the 12 men on the field... STA lined up with 14, one ran off quickly, the 13th was possibly off, but real close and I doubt there's a definitive view of on/off out there, but the 12... GOOD LORD.  They did the whole play with 12, not one running off and close but literally 12 on the field.  You can watch the replay of that and Cocoa HC twitter shot to see it clear as day.  That's illegal participation, which while it wouldn't have been a first down, it would have been a replay of 4th with a winding clock, therefore Cocoa win.

 

In the end, where this really comes into play is the final rankings and what seeding Cocoa gets in the playoffs.  Will they miss a home playoff game or two because of this?  That's money for the program/school, prestige, community, etc. that they could miss out on when they earned the win.  No matter what FHSAA says, Cocoa won that fair & square and should be counted as having the win.  At the end of the season, we may revisit this depending on seeding.  I hope Cocoa isn't hurt by this and it just motivates them further.

Thank you for posting this, and all of your valid points. I have a feeling that you are a member of a certain elite "fraternity" that many posters to this message board know nothing about and are not qualified to comment on.  

[DarterBlue2]

1 minute ago, Jambun82 said:

What do you feel in the rule book needs to be changed? 

The inability, as reflected in the rules, to appeal flagrant mistakes made by an officiating crew, as cited earlier in this thread. Obviously, overturning the results of a game should only occur in very rare circumstances. And, and a rule allowing  for an appeal could be couched in language reflecting the fact that frivolous appeals shall result in some kind of meaningful penalty on the appellant.  However, to have no right at all to appeal, smacks of the days of Kings and Emperors.

You may feel comfortable in that kind of society. But I don't.

[Jambun82]

1 minute ago, DarterBlue2 said:

The inability, as reflected in the rules, to appeal flagrant mistakes made by an officiating crew, as cited earlier in this thread. Obviously, overturning the results of a game should only occur in very rare circumstances. And, and a rule allowing  for an appeal could be couched in language reflecting the fact that frivolous appeals shall result in some kind of meaningful penalty on the appellant.  However, to have no right at all to appeal, smacks of the days of Kings and Emperors.

You may feel comfortable in that kind of society. But I don't.

Well, you better find some kind of comfort because there is no chance of that rule and standard ever being changed. 

[DarterBlue2]

17 minutes ago, Jambun82 said:

Well, you better find some kind of comfort because there is no chance of that rule and standard ever being changed. 

I will never find comfort in a dictatorship spearheaded by @Jambun82

[Jambun82]

11 hours ago, DarterBlue2 said:

I will never find comfort in a dictatorship spearheaded by @Jambun82

I wouldn't find comfort in a Dictatorship spearheaded by anybody.