Folks – note the “buzz up” button – on the top right. If you have a min. click on it and submit it. So that we can “buzz” this article up in Yahoo’s distribution platform and get more eyeballs on it. We need to get the word out on SPTRs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYyUAaqBvxk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z59Fdco4Yuo

I get the PTR part, but what is the “S” for? Shitty? Sub-par?

This is precisely what I was thinking when I heard about this complete debacle last night after my plane landed back in KC.

The Huskies were treated extremely unfairly on this call, period. Whether they would have won the game or not is irrelevant to me. They were cheated out of a real and valid opportunity.

I decidedly despise the “excessive celebration” rule and wonder at the mindset that wants to prevent celebration by young athletes. Frankly, I think we all know what “excessive” looks like on the field: it is that which smacks of poor sportsmanship.

On the other hand, I am a firm believer that every single face mask touch should be called and enforced—the risks are too high, IMO, not to do so.

It truly is a matter of good judgment…wait! Isn’t that what these refs are out there to do? How embarrassing and disheartening this is.

Love My Bruins

It is almost impossible to find a rule, in sports, law or life, that does not require both interpretation and good judgment in determining when and how it is to be applied. Said another way, those who enforce rules are given discretion. In return, we expect them to exercise good judgment.

This was a judgment call and bad judgment was used in applying the rule. I’ll not repeat the analysis I did above. But, when you read the rules, in context, the purposes are to avoid delay or taunting.

Here’s the rule:

“2. After a score or any other play, the player in possession immediately
must return the ball to an official or leave it near the dead-ball spot.
This prohibits:
(a) Kicking, throwing, spinning or carrying (including off of the
field) the ball any distance that requires an official to retrieve it.
(b) Spiking the ball to the ground [Exception: A forward pass to
conserve time (Rule 7-3-2-d)].
© Throwing the ball high into the air.
(d) Any other unsportsmanlike act or actions that delay the game.”

First, the rule, like many, is internally inconsistent. If this were to be a hard and fast rule that the ball must either be handed to an official OR placed on the dead spot, why would they include the “explanations”? The ball is either placed in the officials hands or it isn’t. But, what about the “dead spot”? Where is it? How large is it? How do we know if the ball was placed near it? What does “near” mean?

And, why would they even mention throwing the ball “high” into the air. It is either in the hands or near the spot.

The rule, itself, allows a player to throw the ball into the air. So the real question is what does “high” mean. Instead of giving us a specific number — 15 feet, they tell us what they are trying to avoid, a delay. Locker’s actions did not cause a delay. A few quick hugs and they were ready to play. Hugs like that are given on many plays — without regard to where the ball is or was.

We allow officials to use judgment to decide these things, knowing the purpose of the rule and the context in which it must be applied.

If Rhapsode is right, this penalty would be called several times a game. Does anyone really believe that after every touchdown the player hands the ball to an official or puts it on the dead spot — whatever it is?

Consistency of application is the touchstone of fairness. Do officials call this penalty EVERY time a ball is not given or placed correctly? Every time it goes into the air?

Probably not. Because most officials use good judgment to determine whether what was done with the ball led to a delay in the game. And, thinks like what happened yesterday don’t.

How do we know that the official didn’t understand the purpose of the rule and apply it correctly? Because he told us so. His entire justification was that the ball was thrown too high. Not that it wasn’t put in his hands. Not that it wasn’t put in the dead zone. Not that it caused a delay. But, that it was too high. That’s the best evidence that he did not understand the rule he was applying.

And, therein lies the problem. Those who we entrust to apply rules must understand those rules and what we are trying to accomplish by creating them.

This call is but one of many that make many of us question whether the Pac 10 is doing a good job in making sure that the ref’s understand the purpose of the rules as well as the words.

Over and over the SPTR’s show us that they are poorly trained and lack judgment. This is but another example of a problem that will continue until the Pac 10 makes quality officiating a priority.

sjh

BTW — Rye, there is a rule about chest thumping.

“(g) Punching one’s own chest or crossing one’s arms in front of the
chest while standing over a prone player.”

Think that one is iron clad? Nope. Discretion there, too. What does “standing over a prone player mean”? Does the attitude of the puncher matter? What if he is looking upward and clearly making a religious gesture while tapping his heart — sort of thank you Divine power, you are in my heart?

If the intent is to stop taunting, is giving praise to a deity by tapping one’s chest a violation?

Here’s an article from Fox Sports. Someone commented below the article that if the refs were so concerned with a delay of game, then why didn’t they penalize the BYU bench for running onto the field. I seem to remember they did. Does anyone remember? Certainly that took up more time than Locker’s celebration.

When a new rule is implemented, does the NCAA check to see if any rules are made obsolete? Most delaying the game violations should now be taken care by the new play clock. The offense has 40 seconds to run the next play. As far as I can tell, it only makes sense that the defense can be penalized for delaying the start of the next play.

That Havner play haunts me! We should have beaten them that year! Absolutely no question that bush fumbled…

I’ve been laughing about this thread for a day or two. I realize that I approached this like a problem I would have taught first year students during the first week of law school.

If you are a first year student, read the entire thread. There’s a lot here, from all who posted, to give you a real head start in learning how we give meaning to and apply the law.

Best to all.

sjh

Thanks, Fox. I’m just embarrassed because I really try to be very careful about spelling, especially legal terms. Oh, well.

One of my current pet peeves is “harassment”—that extra “r” really lobbies hard to get in there most of the time, and people use the word to describe, well, just everything.

Don’t even get me started on apostrophes, though, because I had a little brawl with Adam Rose about that very subject—he’s an expert, you know. ;)

I always thought the food I was ordering belonged to someone named Taco or Nacho and, therefore, it was Nacho’s or Taco’s. I though Nacho and Taco were very generous to share, but I could never understand Nacho’s attachment to Velveeta type cheese.

I was surprised by the penalty call when it happened, but on the replay it was clear that the rule had been violated. Unfortunately for a hard luck Washington team the call was made. And it was correct. The rule specifically prohibits high tosses, and that ball was up there for quite a while. The ref didn’t have the discretion not to call it since it was expressly prohibited. So, while most of you want “judgment” applied, the “judgment” was already made — by the rulemakers.

Now, the fact that “excessive celebration” sometimes is not called is something else again. But I do not know of any situation where it was not called when the ball was thrown high in the air as Locker did.

I just hope the penalty and subsequent PAT block will make BYU a little cocky and ripe for a pickpocketing. I suspect that Neu’s generals have a few things cooked up for the game.