This scramble marked the end of the second period of a semi-finals match between two wrestlers ranked in the top 10 nationally by InterMat Wrestling.

Bryce Brill (Mt. Carmel – Chicago, IL) takes a bad shot from left field on Jake Short (Simley, MN) and appears to give up a takedown at the end of the second period of this Cheesehead Wrestling tournament semi-final match.

However, when the dust settled, no points were awarded.

While I believe this match was well officiated from start to finish, I believe an error was made when it comes to this non-call at the end of the second period.  Once Short was able to work back on top and control Brill’s hips prior to the buzzer, a takedown should have been awarded.  The fact that Brill was still attempting to counter, first with the body lock then with a body whizzer/knee block, is of no consequence. There are three different illustrations in the 2011-2012 NFHS Rule Book that illustrate this point:

In my opinion there is not much difference between any of the illustrations above and the position that Brill and Short ended up in at the buzzer. I seems to be a pretty clear takedown to me. Let’s look at the rule referenced in all of the illustrations above:

I believe all of the criteria laid out in 5-25-1 have been met.

Brill and Short started in the neutral position at the beginning of the scramble.  Short ultimately gained control over Brill’s down on the mat.  The supporting points of at least one wrestler were inbounds when control was gained.

That said, reasonable people can disagree on a call this close.

Since there is no way to codify what constitutes “control” in all positions and situations, often times control must be “felt” by the calling official. The NFHS Wrestling publications state several times that “control is felt rather than observed”. In scramble situations such as these it can be difficult to get a feel for when control has been obtained.  I’m sure that’s what lead to a no-call in this case.

The 2011-2012 NFHS Wrestling Manual also attempts to highlight how important “feel” is when it comes to the awarding of points.  It also offers some guidelines to assist in making determinations of whether or not control has been obtained/maintained:

The second paragraph contains a hidden gem that when applied to this scramble would have helped the official to get to what I believe would have been the correct call: ”(i)n a double leg, when the countering wrestler is seated on the mat, a takedown can be awarded as soon as this wrestler is no longer able to use the legs as a means of support”.

If you haven’t already, check out the full match.

It’s a treat. You’ll see two of the nations top young wrestlers going at it in a well officiated match at one of the top prep tournaments in the country.

Quite a bit going on during this play (courtesy of some ill-advised Tim Tebow improvisation). Best wishes for a speedy recovery, Danny McCray.

The officials did a great job of staying on top of the action and flagging the infractions that needed to be flagged according to NFL rules. In no particular order, the fouls by offense were an illegal forward pass (0:17), an ineligible receiver down field (0:17) and an illegal block in the back (0:19).

Terry McAulay did a good job of announcing the fouls with the help of his off-camera crew mates (young officials take note).

Plays like this can unfortunately give lower level officials fits. Those fits will have nothing to do with covering the action, though. This play does a great job of highlighting a couple of the rule differences between the National Football League (NFL) and National Federation of State High School Association (NFHS) rule sets.

If this play were to occur on any given Friday night in a high school game played under NFHS rules, there is a high probability that there will only be 5 guys in the stadium that know the differences between the codes and how to properly apply them. However, people in attendance will be convinced that the officials don’t know what they’re doing when the dust settles and there is (hopefully) only one flag on the ground. There will be cries of “homerism”, incompetence, and much much worse.

There’s no escaping the uninformed, though; ignoring them is just part of the job.

So without further ado, let’s dissect the various fouls that were called on this play and discuss the NFHS rules apply to the action on the field.

Illegal Forward Pass

Surprisingly, Tim Tebow’s (#15) pass would have been a legal forward pass according the NFHS rules.  NFHS Rule 7-5-1 defines a legal forward pass:

It is a legal forward pass, if during a scrimmage down and before team possession has changed, a player of A throws the ball with both feet of the passer in or behind the neutral zone when the ball is released. Only one forward pass may be thrown during a down.

Under NFHS rules, the only restriction is that the passers feet must both be in or behind the neutral zone when the ball is released.  There is no restriction on crossing the neutral zone and returning behind it to throw a legal forward pass.

Ineligible Downfield

If this game were being played under NFHS rules, Manny Rameriez (#65) would have been legally downfield.  NFHS Rule 7-5-12 discusses ineligible players illegally down field:

Ineligible A players may not advance beyond the expanded neutral zone on a legal forward pass play before a legal forward pass that crosses the neutral zone is in flight.

While this was a legal forward pass under NFHS rules, it did not cross the neutral zone in flight.  The ball was snapped at the 14 and the receiver caught the ball two yards behind the line of scrimmage at the 16.  In this case, there simply would not have been any restrictions on team A’s ineligibles.

Illegal Block in the Back

The block by Julius Thomas (#80) was simply illegal in all rule sets.  Rule 9-3-5 discusses clipping and illegal blocking in the back:

A player shall not clip or block an opponent in the back except:

a. In the free blocking zone when the contact meets the requirements of 2-17
b. Using hands and arms to contact an opponent above the waist in warding off a blocker, or when attempting to reach a runner, or catch or recover a loose ball which he may legally touch or possess.
c. To tackle a runner of player

This call was a “no brainer” at any level.  Mr. Thomas should know better.

I have a feeling that this would have been called a third way in a National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) game, but don’t presently have time to parse that rule set.  We’ll leave that analysis for another day.

It seems the slam call at about 1:10 of the video above has a few of the fine citizens of Kansas in a tizzy. A sampling of the comments on the Kansas Wrestling talk forums includes the following gems: “what a joke”, “(t)hat was embarrassing” and “(f)urther evidence of the pussification of America“.  The last one is my personal favorite, but I digress. The discourse goes downhill from there.  There’s talk of “no accountability”, “circling in the wagons” and other nonsense.  I love the mob mentality of most internet message boards.

Personally, I think the slam call was a no brainer.

I haven’t found a single official that disagrees with the call.  The closest I’ve gotten is a single official that isn’t sure that he would have called it, but thinks he probably would have.  The officials on the NFHS wrestling forum are unanimous (which almost never happens) with comments like: “(h)eck yeah, “(a)bsolutely”, “without question” and “for sure”.

While the high amplitude mule kick prior to the lift would have piqued my interest, it was not a component in arriving at the slam call.  The key component of that part of the action is that the offensive wrestler did, in fact, lift his opponent.  The potential for a slam call exists.

Did he return his opponent with unnecessary force?

Of course, he did. The wrestler left his feet adding to the downward force of his opponent and then positioned himself to drive his shoulder through his opponents check upon impact.

Had he kept his left foot on the ground… it would probably have been a different story.

I couldn’t be happier with the change.

While some may disagree, I believe the old signal chart was simply over-communication.

If people are watching the game, shouldn’t they already know that a direct free kick was awarded for tripping rather than pushing? That an indirect free kick was awarded for offsides rather than dangerous play? Is it really a big deal if someone doesn’t know whether a direct free kick was awarded for pushing or striking? Was there some sort of confusion as to when the ball was dead?

For those keeping track, here are the old signal charts:

It took all of 30 seconds on YouTube to find the following video (45 second mark):

While this particular video was posted last year, I still see wrestlers doing this every week.

The offensive wrestler in the video sets his knee and foot, places his head on his opponent’s back, reaches around his opponent’s belly and attempts to place his hand over his opponent’s navel, places the near hand on his opponent’s elbow, becomes stationary, and waits for the whistle.  Instead of waiting for the whistle, he should have been receiving his first caution.

The starting sequence found in 5-20-5 NOTE can be summed up as follows: knees, navel, head, elbow, pause, whistle.

1. set the knee(s) and feet;
2. place the palm of one hand on the opponent’s navel;
3. place the head on or above the mid-line of the opponent’s back;
4. place the palm of the other hand on or over the back of the opponent’s near elbow;
5. both wrestlers shall become stationary; and
6. the referee shall pause momentarily before starting wrestling.

I know that we all make decisions every match about what to caution and what to correct on restarts.  After all, we could be there all night. In the aforementioned video without looking too closely, there could have been at least three cautions on the first restart. While I’m not advocating nitpicking, I don’t think it’s too much to ask that we all know the rule.

Unfortunately, that’s not been my experience.

While I wasn’t present, the above clip was taken at a Bill George Youth Football game in my area and is indicative of something you will see on a youth field that I can’t imagine seeing at the high school level.  It probably seemed like a good idea at the time it was drawn up, but it is simply illegal under NFHS rules.

Rule 9-4-3 (e) states, “No player or nonplayer shall position himself on the shoulders or body of a teammate or opponent to gain an advantage.” While case 9.4.3 SITUATION E (b) does not describe the action completely, it does provide the guidance needed to determine that a foul occurred on this play.  It states that if  ”B1 steps on the back of snapper A1 immediately after the snap as he propels himself into the air to block a punt” a personal foul has been committed.

The rule lists that no player shall position himself on the body of a teammate or opponent.  The case play could just as easily read, “B1 steps on the back of B2 immediately after the snap as he propels himself over the offensive line to make a tackle in the backfield”.

To answer the question in the YouTube posters video title…

No, it’s not legal.

Does anyone see the second foul that occurred as a result of the 9-4-3 (e) violation?

If you have not yet had the chance, you should check out the following article in GQ magazine (October 2009):  Game Brain.  It is a thought provoking piece written by Jeanne Marie Laskas that takes a look at chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) in primarily ex-NFL players. The article begins with the following excerpt:

Let’s say you run a multibillion-dollar football league. And let’s say the scientific community—starting with one young pathologist in Pittsburgh and growing into a chorus of neuroscientists across the country—comes to you and says concussions are making your players crazy, crazy enough to kill themselves, and here, in these slices of brain tissue, is the proof. Do you join these scientists and try to solve the problem, or do you use your power to discredit them?

Former Pittsburgh Steelers great Mike Webster died at the age of fifty and ended up on the slab of a young Nigerian born forensic pathologist/neuropathologist named Bennet Omalu.  Dr. Omalu became obsessed with how this Pittsburgh hero went from a larger than life athlete to a man whose very sanity was questioned.  Omalu theorized dementia pugilistica and set out to prove his findings. He began to run special tests which resulted in microscopic analysis of  Mike Webster’s brain tissue.  Dr. Omalu began processing slide of brain tissue after slide of brain tissue; so many, in fact, that he had to start paying for the tests out of his own pocket.

The breakthrough came when he got a set of slides back and found large accumulations of tau proteins all over the place. The tau proteins were responsible for killing brain cells in the regions of the brain responsible for mood, emotions, and executive functioning.   Dr. Omalu published his findings thinking that the doctors of the NFL would look at this scientific evidence that repeated blows to the head (like those sustained in a football game) could cause severe brain damage.  What happened turned out to be very different.  The NFL set out to discredit the young scientist and his findings.

While the NFL was attempting to discredit Dr. Omalu and his findings, ex-NFL players kept ending up on Dr. Omalu’s slab.  Ex-players with advanced CTE:

• Former Pittsburgh Steelers guard Terry Long dead at 45 after drinking antifreeze.
• Former Philadelphia Eagles safety Andre Waters dead at 44 after shooting himself in the mouth.
• Former Pittsburgh Steelers offensive linemen Justin Strzelczyk dead at 36 after crashing his car into a tanker carrying corrosive acid during a police chase.
• Former Tampa Bay Buccaneers offensive linemen Tom McHale dead at 45 after a lethal combination of oxycodone and cocaine.
• Former Miami Dolphins cornerback Gerald Small found dead at 52.
• Former San Diego Charger center Curtis Whitley found dead at 39.

At the time the article went to press Dr. Omalu had found 17 confirmed cases of dead ex-players with advanced CTE. Unfortunately, this phenomenon is not limited to professional athletes.  I was rather shocked to find the following comments in a follow up Q & A Jeanne Marie Laskas had with Julian Bailes – chairman of the department of neurosurgery at the West Virginia University School of Medicine:

Q. We’re not just talking about NFL players. The congressional hearings are possibly looking into the effects of head trauma on college and high school players, too.

Shockingly, we have found this even at the high school level. Bennet Omalu has examined the brains of three high school players who died as a result of injuries they sustained from playing football. In the brain of one of the players, he found incipient CTE, chronic traumatic encephalopathy.

Q. CTE in a high school football player—the same sort of brain damage that led to the downfall of Mike Webster, Terry Long, Andre Waters, and so many others?

Right. In a high school player. It gets back to the point you made in the GQ article: What is the NFL’s responsibility for the greater good? The greater good, meaning all the young men and women who desire to participate in football and other contact sports, the ones who aspire at a young age to emulate the NFL and their players and are fueled by their advertising and the incessant bombardment of our society. What is their responsibility to the greater good? I don’t know. They’re going to have to answer that.

Repetitive brain injuries are no laughing matter. They are simply a matter of life and death. Football is an extremely violent game. We can try to minimize risk by enforcing rules that prohibit the most violent types of contact (e.g. illegal helmet contact). Sadly, we simply cannot prevent all traumatic brain injuries. However, it is incumbent on players, coaches, officials, and administrators to know the signs of concussion and be vigilant about checking players for signs of loss of consciousness.  Fortunately, the NFHS gives us guidance in things to look for when making the determination of whether or not a player has lost consciousness.

3.5.10 SITUATION D:

What guidelines should the officials follow in determining if a player is apparently unconscious?

RULING: Some obvious guides would be that the player is unable to receive information and/or unable to respond to questions or the player’s responses are inappropriate. The observation of the player will normally be made by more than one official, and in some cases may involve the entire crew. If the officials determine a player appears to be unconscious, he must leave and may not return to the game without the written authorization of a physician (MD/DO).

Additional common symptoms include:

• Unusually long headaches
• Memory impairment
• Difficulty concentrating
• Ringing in the ears
• Persistent neck pain
• Fatigue, lack of motivation, reduced energy
• Light/noise sensitivity
• Disruption of normal sleep schedule
• Nausea/vomiting
• Vision problems

The vast majority of coaches properly place the safety and welfare of their players ahead of winning a contest.  They also recognize the dangers that traumatic brain injuries pose to their scholar athletes.  I have, however, personally observed what I would assume to be temporary lapses in judgment by coaches in the heat of the moment.  These coaches have attempted to send in players that had gone out earlier in the game after displaying signs of loss of consciousness.

In such cases we, as officials, are the last line of defense. Don’t let a coach’s momentary lapse in judgment jeopardize the future of their scholastic athlete. Call an officials time out and invoke 3-5-10 d.

The NFHS defines three types of illegal helmet contact: spearing, butt blocking, and face tackling. Spearing is an act by an offensive or defensive player who initiates contact against any opponent with the top of his helmet (2-20-1 [c]). Butt blocking is an act by an offensive or defensive player who initiates contact against an opponent who is not the ball carrier with the front of his helmet (2-20-1 [a]). Face tackling is an act by a defensive player who initiates contact with a ball carrier with the front of his helmet (2-20-1 [b]).

Talk to a group of 100 high school football officials and you are likely to get 100 different points of view when it comes to calling illegal helmet contact. Some believe it’s no big deal and simply will not call it. Some believe it should be called any time you suspect you may have seen it regardless of whether or not it actually took place. However, most fall somewhere in the middle.

The majority of officials, coaches, players, and fans recognize that a significant danger exists when a player leads with his head and makes initial contact with the helmet. There is, however, a misconception as to whom is at most risk. While many think that the illegal helmet contact rules were put in place to protect the player being hit, it is actually the player delivering the blow that is most at risk of catastrophic injury. Illegal helmet contact is the only foul where a player is penalized for his own safety.

Despite the risks, illegal helmet contact is not called nearly enough – at any level.

In 2005, the NATA/AFCA task force conducted a survey of NCAA officials on the existing helmet contact rule. More than 200 officials from the Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big 10, Big 12, Pac-10 and Southeastern conferences responded. In the 2005 season, those officials called 2,027 games with the average of 9.9 games each. When questioned regarding how many helmet contact penalties they had called over the past year, 80 percent said they had not called a helmet contact penalty the entire season. Sixteen percent had called one, two percent had called two and two percent had called three. No official called more than three of those penalties.

NCAA Football 2007 • A supplement to the NCAA Football Rules • Prepared by the editors of Referee magazine

“Make sure you are calling what you see and pass on any foul you are not sure of” could be the mantra of football clinicians.

Unfortunately, illegal helmet contact is simply a hard foul to call. It’s difficult to see in the best of cases – the head is normally lowered or lunged forward a fraction of a second before contact. Blink and you miss it. It’s not an impossible foul to call, though. I’ve made it a personal point of emphasis this year.

Working semi-pro games over the summer, I’ve noticed that – like all other things in the game – illegal helmet contact slows down after you’ve gone out of your way to see it a few times. While difficult, it’s not impossible to see and call.

We can do better. We must do better.

Or the next kid that leaves the field on a backboard is on all of us.

Is this play a touchdown or an interception? Did the crew get it right?

The correct answer, of course, is… it depends.

This play highlights one of the areas where the NFHS (high school) and NCAA (college) rule sets differ.

Under NFHS rules, “a forward pass, legal or illegal, is complete and may be advanced when caught by any player A or B. If a forward pass is caught simultaneously by two opponents, the ball becomes dead and belongs to the passing team. (7-5-4)”. Since possession of a live ball in the opponents end zone is always a touchdown (8-2-1), this play would result in a touchdown under Federation rules.

Under NCAA rules, the legal forward pass is considered completed or intercepted by the player who first returns to the ground in bounds when joint possession is established with both players in the air (AR 7-3-6 II). In this case since the defensive player returned to the ground on the field of play first, the play would result in an interception. Since the ball became dead in possession of a player behind the goal line and the offense was responsible for the ball being there (8-6-1 [a]), the play results in a touchback under NCAA rules.

This is a high school game played under NFHS rules between the Blackhawk Cougars and Montour Spartans in Pennsylvania.

The side judge was in perfect position and ruled correctly, touchdown!

Who am I?

My name is Brett Anderson. I currently reside in Grayslake, IL with my wife and twin children. Since 2006 I have been a licensed official with the Illinois High School Association (IHSA). I am currently licensed in six sports: football, soccer, wrestling, basketball, baseball, & softball. My officiating career got off to an auspicious start in November of my first year when I tore an ACL and shredded a medial meniscus officiating my first contest. The rehab process was significantly slowed due to the fact that I had one month old twins (Owen & Marlo) at home at the time, so I was unable to take the field, court, mat, or diamond until the following August.

Undeterred by my initial experience and with the help of a wonderful extended family, I began to officiate games the following fall at the pace of 300 – 400 per year. I’ve developed a true passion for the avocation of officiating and the perpetual quest for the perfect game.

Professionally, I spend my days working as a software engineer. Since 2003, I have been employed byFry, Inc working out of our office in Westmont, IL.

Why bother with blogging?

Mostly for selfish reasons. I’ve found that to truly master a craft you have to be capable of instruct others in the various aspects of that craft. I spend a significant amount of time working to improve as an official and I believe this to be an extension of that work. I am hoping that people will find these blog posts factually correct, informative, useful, and/or interesting. I believe that blogs of this nature work better as conversations, so please feel free to leave on topic comments or send me an email message.

Isn’t this a bit presumptuous at this point in your officiating career?

Possibly.

However, I’m looking at this as simply an exercise where I can organize my thoughts on various aspects of officiating. Nothing more. Nothing less. Posting my thoughts publicly not only invites feedback that I might not be able to receive via other various channels, but allows for the possibility that others can benefit from my work.

The thoughts expressed here are mine and not representative of my employer, any association of which I am a member, or the IHSA.

How can I contact you?

Email | Facebook | Twitter