I read where L C Bird passed on the last three PAT's last night. Is there a rule that permits this? In case a reader does not know, the final score was 82-0, and could have been far worse.
PAT attempt
- Thread starter DinwiddieProud
- Start date
That must have been an interesting situation.
By rule, the PAT must be attempted although I can see where a coach doesn't want the points so he says there's no point in just taking a knee on a PAT, just go on to the kickoff.
On the other hand, if a coach doesn't want the points, how did his team make it into the endzone? I've been on games that were so ridiculous everyone was embarrassing to all involved and a coach tells his team not to score. I even had a coach ask me to flag his team if it looked like they might score.
By rule, the PAT must be attempted although I can see where a coach doesn't want the points so he says there's no point in just taking a knee on a PAT, just go on to the kickoff.
On the other hand, if a coach doesn't want the points, how did his team make it into the endzone? I've been on games that were so ridiculous everyone was embarrassing to all involved and a coach tells his team not to score. I even had a coach ask me to flag his team if it looked like they might score.
I'm guessing that Coach had his youngest, most inexperienced players in, and called the most conservative play possible. But, I guess the players on the opposing team were so beaten down that they had basically given up except for a token effort. Even though there must not be a provision in the rules to forgo the PAT, I commend the Head official for using good judgement, giving the circumstances.
Two points to ponder here. One, I don't think you ever tell even the last string subs to not try.
The other point, which it have made several times in the past, is it is time to get away from district scheduling. This game should have never been scheduled. And the only reason it was is because of district affiliation. There is absolutely nothing positive about a matchup that pits these two teams against each other. With rule after rule to protect our kids, this matchup is just plain stupid.
Two points to ponder here. One, I don't think you ever tell even the last string subs to not try.
The other point, which it have made several times in the past, is it is time to get away from district scheduling. This game should have never been scheduled. And the only reason it was is because of district affiliation. There is absolutely nothing positive about a matchup that pits these two teams against each other. With rule after rule to protect our kids, this matchup is just plain stupid.
Agree with Dinwiddie here. When you have the 2nd team and JV kids in the game, they need the experience. I have a problem with telling them not to score. Calling conservative plays ok. Taking a knee when the clock is about to expire also ok. But if you can't defend against the JV's, the winning team isn't running up the score. I've also heard that the losing team sometimes doesn't want the charity. They need the game experience too. The running clock solves some of this. The game moves pretty fast when the clock doesn't stop.
I understand the frustration for all involved. I've had games that were blowouts and in the 4th quarter the winning team had everyone from the waterboy, cheerleaders and trumpet player in there and the losing team was still just laying down. Not really much to do there but keep it running. I've had games where the second half took 25 minutes. 12 to play each quarter and abotu a minute to change ends.
As for a rule that says you don't have to play everyone in your district, this seems to make perfect sense, but I have a friend who played at Martinsville when they were a powerhouse and the VHSL allowed each team to opt out of scheduling one district opponent. Every team in their district opted out of scheduling Martinsville, leaving them with no district games. They were immediately ineligible for the playoffs because they had no district wins.
I agree that there should be ways to avoid games that serve no purpose in being played because they do nothing to advance the game of football, but any solution would have to be carefully considered because unintended consequences are always out there.
As for a rule that says you don't have to play everyone in your district, this seems to make perfect sense, but I have a friend who played at Martinsville when they were a powerhouse and the VHSL allowed each team to opt out of scheduling one district opponent. Every team in their district opted out of scheduling Martinsville, leaving them with no district games. They were immediately ineligible for the playoffs because they had no district wins.
I agree that there should be ways to avoid games that serve no purpose in being played because they do nothing to advance the game of football, but any solution would have to be carefully considered because unintended consequences are always out there.
They probably took the snap and kneed it like they have done in the past last year the final score was 77-0
I do not like running clocks. It prevents the backups from getting snaps/experience. I have seen games where a team only had 1 or 2 possessions the 2nd half................not good
Two things about this notion that running clocks prevent backups from having playing time.
1. The VHSL made this decision and it's run by principals who take their opinions on this matter from their coaches. Every coach I know involved in a blow out wants to get out of there as quickly as possible.
2. If a team is 35 points better than their opponent, they can start getting those subs in a lot earlier without any real fear of losing. If playing time and experience for backups means anything, there's still time in a blowout to get it done. And then maybe they're only up by 34, and the clock runs like normal. Several years ago I worked a team HR6 is very familiar with and by the 4th quarter they were ahead by about 50 points. The players on the field had very dirty uniforms and the sidelines was full of kids with clean one. So whose fault is that?
This post was edited on 10/4 9:15 PM by White hat
1. The VHSL made this decision and it's run by principals who take their opinions on this matter from their coaches. Every coach I know involved in a blow out wants to get out of there as quickly as possible.
2. If a team is 35 points better than their opponent, they can start getting those subs in a lot earlier without any real fear of losing. If playing time and experience for backups means anything, there's still time in a blowout to get it done. And then maybe they're only up by 34, and the clock runs like normal. Several years ago I worked a team HR6 is very familiar with and by the 4th quarter they were ahead by about 50 points. The players on the field had very dirty uniforms and the sidelines was full of kids with clean one. So whose fault is that?
This post was edited on 10/4 9:15 PM by White hat
I seem to recall a game in 2004 when a team was ahead by 35 .............................. and lost.
In 2008, Gretna had a 38-3 lead on a team and won 41-38 if my memory is correct. Gretna pulled starters and backups could not tackle. First team was put back in after a few minutes on the bench, they could not tackle then. Almost lost.
I understand purpose of running clock, but it should be left up to coaches when score gets to 35 ahead, not the clock. Granted some coaches will not do it properly, but most will.
In 2008, Gretna had a 38-3 lead on a team and won 41-38 if my memory is correct. Gretna pulled starters and backups could not tackle. First team was put back in after a few minutes on the bench, they could not tackle then. Almost lost.
I understand purpose of running clock, but it should be left up to coaches when score gets to 35 ahead, not the clock. Granted some coaches will not do it properly, but most will.
As soon as the margin is less than 35, the running clock rule is off. So in that 2004 game where a team scored 38 unanswered points to win, undoubtedly the first points must have come pretty quick after that margin was established so the running clock probably didn't last long at all and would have had no effect in that game.
A running clock does not thwart a comeback because once the comeback starts, the clock is kept as normal.
A running clock does not thwart a comeback because once the comeback starts, the clock is kept as normal.
FBRef, not for injury on the field, or change of possession? Someone can answer this for me, but isn't that the case here in VA?
This post was edited on 10/7 9:04 AM by DinwiddieProud
This post was edited on 10/7 9:04 AM by DinwiddieProud
Even with running clock, I believe there are times it should be stopped. I saw a game recently where RC was if effect, and ref started clock at beginning of 4th quarter before the first snap. I think this was incorrect. He should have waited for snap.
The actual rule set down by the VHSL is so ridiculous that it's ignored almost as much as a hold by the losing team.
The rule says if the game is in the second half that one team is leading by 35 or more points, the clock should continue to run when the play ends out of bounds or with an incomplete pass.
That's it.
So, by that line, the clock should stop to reset the chains on first downs. REALLY??
Most referees use either the SIT or SPIT grouping of situations to stop the clock.
Scores
Injuries
Time-outs
and, depending on the situation, Penalties.
This post was edited on 10/8 1:00 AM by White hat
The rule says if the game is in the second half that one team is leading by 35 or more points, the clock should continue to run when the play ends out of bounds or with an incomplete pass.
That's it.
So, by that line, the clock should stop to reset the chains on first downs. REALLY??
Most referees use either the SIT or SPIT grouping of situations to stop the clock.
Scores
Injuries
Time-outs
and, depending on the situation, Penalties.
This post was edited on 10/8 1:00 AM by White hat
If rule was applied IAW way it is written, it would be better than way it's done now by most.
I have seen it used in first half of game several times.
If I were a Head Coach I'd use all my TOs every time there's a running clock, whether I winning or losing. That would be my way of protesting a bad rule that's not properly enforced.
I have seen it used in first half of game several times.
If I were a Head Coach I'd use all my TOs every time there's a running clock, whether I winning or losing. That would be my way of protesting a bad rule that's not properly enforced.
