You're welcome, feel free to use any of our stuff as you see fit. There's an excellent video put together by the EFOA Association on the changes to rule 10. I highly recommend it czcams.com/video/teUTjbfQ4_U/video.html
The still screen at 3:51 literally shows the defenders arms wrapped around the receiver. He doesn't complete the tackling motion, but there is absolutely an attempt to wrap arms here.
great video! It really helps to see the action and talk it through. I would like to see a video on a runner initiating contact with his helmet. Lots of complaints about illegal contact being initiated by the offense.
You're going to get me in hot water if I do that. I've seen a couple of plays where the runner clearly initiated contact but it's such a difficult call because it's natural for a player to compress when he's about to be hit. A lot of officials simply will not make that call. If you've got some good examples, let me know.
On the last play, the defender did indeed leads with his hands, which his right hand was on the ball. I can see why the stayed off his one, good football play
When I pause the video at 8:29, It seems contact was initiated with the shoulders and head, with a push-off after the contact which is when I see the hands / arms coming out. I don't see the hands ahead of the head and shoulder as the initial point of impact
Thanks Charles, this new CZcams notification policy is making it really difficult to get the word out. It will really help if you and others spread the word.
Hi, great video. If the receiver jumps to catch the ball, there is contact of the ball with the players hands even if he doesn't catch it, and then the defensive player wraps makes a tackle attempt below the hips. Would this be a penalty?
Thanks for the feedback. Please feel free to spread the link around. This new CZcams notification policy is making it really difficult to get the word out. It will really help if you and others spread the word.
Steve, I really appreciate that. Feel free to contact me here ocfoa.org/contact-us/ with any questions or concerns. That contact us information comes directly to me.
Imma DB and I can strip the ball out of someone’s hands and run the other way with it while the wideout is catching the ball. If your brian can’t comprehend player safety, then maybe you shouldn’t be coaching football.
Good vid. Not sure I agree with the first clip being an illegal hit. No helmet to helmet. No hit above the shoulders. Defender could have wrapped up but because he didn't, he did not drive player into the ground. Where is excessive force? Not the best example, in my opinion.
Are you talking the play where the receiver get sandwiched between two defenders? Let's break down your comment. The new rule 2-32-16d states "A defenseless player is a player who, because of his physical position and focus of concentration, is especially vulnerable to injury. A player who initiates contact against a defenseless player is responsible for making legal contact. When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include, but are not limited to: d. A receiver in (b) and (c) above, including the person intercepting the pass, who is forcefully contacted by an opponent and that contact is not: 1. Incidental contact as a result of making a play on the ball; 2. Initiated with open hands; or 3. An attempt to tackle by wrapping arm(s) around the receiver. Notice there is no stipulation for helmet contact in order for this to be a foul, nor is there a stipulation for a hit above the shoulders. You may be confusing the foul for "Excessive Contact to a Defenseless Player" with "Targeting" There is also no stipulation that the player be driven into the ground for this contact to be a foul. There is no stipulation for Excessive Force just forcefully contacted, there's a difference. If you determine that the contact was forceful and most contact is and you determine the receiver was defenseless when the forceful contact occurred, then there are only 3 legal ways to forcefully contact him and they are listed above. If the contact does not fit one of those 3 criteria, it is a personal foul. Certainly the forceful contact in the first play does not fit one of those 3 criteria. This is definitely a foul under the new rule. It's actually a foul under the old rules.
Except you can clearly see that that defender did make an attempt to wrap up the reciever. It's very clear on camera that he defenders arms go around the reciever when contact is made. That is legal contact, and it looks like you blew that call even with video evidence.
Play 2, Why does or should the Umpire be looking to the flat on a pass play? Shouldn't the umpire stay with the engaged linemen at the A42 when player A57 drives his opponent into the ground and there is still enough there to possibly have a UNR or UNS? The Umpire should have no opinion on that pass into the flat because by the mechanics manual, they need to stay with the linemen and their contact. Also, if we are going to say the H is too close to the play, we need to say what and/or where the HL should do instead. IMO the only thing the H could have done better was move straight back and not get "Happy Feet". Otherwise, in 5-man mechanics it's just one of those plays. Play 3, Even though this is a video about illegal contact, the hold is there once he is beaten and the QB is in the pocket. If we are saying a receiver has the time and awareness to coil for the contact, how can he/she also fall under the defenseless definition because they have now eliminated both the "focus and concentration" and "physical position" part of the definition, correct? If we want to evaluate the contact of the defender, the ONLY question there is if we have illegal helmet contact by the defender (which I would support). Otherwise the play is legal and by definition we do not have a hit on a defenseless receiver. Can we have some examples of LEGAL contact on defenseless Receivers?
I'm not sure what Mechanics Manual you are looking at, but it is not the current OCFOA manual. Section 15: Forward Passes, Umpire d. After observing the play of linemen and their contact with up blocking backs, pivot to assist on low trajectory and short passes. Regardless, the action you are concerned with is the responsibility of the flank on that side with a possible assist from the R. You couldn't be more incorrect when you state "The Umpire should have no opinion on that pass into the flat" We need the Umpire to have an opinion, particularly on catch/no catch. He's also got coverage in the halo around the runner for illegal actions by both the offense and the defense. Play 3, you completely missed the point of including that play in the video. We used that play and I state in the video that some officials may believe that because the receiver had time to coil he was not defenseless. The CIF "Standard" (we are trying to get away from the term "philosophy") is based on Rule 2-32-16 which includes the verbiage "When in question, a player is defenseless." This play is an example of a situation when the player may or may not be defenseless. Based on the standard, he is defenseless. The contact was forceful and the contact did not fall into one of the 3 legal types of contact on a defenseless receiver, therefore, targeting or not, it is a foul.
So it is your opinion that "observe" means to watch and then leave to cover something else despite their being 2 linemen engaged and a possible takedown and UNS? On this play, The U is looking through 2 players for possible help on a pass near the LOS outside the numbers despite having 2 players engaged in contact, with one overpowering the other and a possible reaction / 2nd act. IMO, that should have remained the focus of the U because of the higher level of threat. If those 2 players get into something beyond or the player on the ground reacts to being "sat on", who is better positioned to handle that situation? On this play, the QB is rolling out to the HL side and the R is responsible for the QB (Grounding, late hits, pass / fumble, etc) according to Mechanics Manual Section 15-1 a-d. So how, when, and why would the R even come back to that action? As you stated in the video, the R can't help. Again, the receiver in play 3 has eliminated 2 conditions of being defenseless. As you state, both his ability to focus and concentrate on the defender and his ability to adjust his body position remove those two factors in the "Defenseless" definition (2-32-16). That doesn't mean the hit is necessary legal, and in this case, I would support a foul for illegal helmet contact. However, based on your comments he can not be defenseless by definition. I think the language in the video contradicts the rule book and could lead to confusion. Yes, when in question a player is defenseless, however based on your statements, the question no longer exists when he is actually able to defend himself. My comments are not intended to aggravate, but rather question some of the information where confusion is created. The title also mentions "Legal" vs Illegal contact on defenseless receivers but fails to show both.
@@jasonboykin1114 The correct mechanic for the umpire on this type of play is to let himself be turned by the ball and help with subsequent action and catch/no catch rulings. The manual does not say to stay with action at the line. You state " If those 2 players get into something beyond or the player on the ground reacts to being "sat on", who is better positioned to handle that situation?" That's the job of the opposite flank. You are correct, in this situation the R cannot help. Play 3 I'm not sure where you are getting these conditions you are quoting, it's certainly not the rule book. There is nothing in the rule book that states the player is no longer defenseless when he has the ability to focus on the defender or adjust his body position, you're making stuff up. It does give examples of a defenseless player and one is "A receiver attempting to catch a pass who has not had time to clearly become a runner; " In my opinion the receiver has not "clearly become a runner". That's also the opinion of the state rules interpreter. When in question the player is defenseless. It's a rule, not an opinion.
@@MarkAndrewsOCFOA Also, there is some confusion regarding the CFOA Mechanics Manual and the OCFOA Mechanics. Specifically in Section 15, II Umpire letter d. The language in the OCFOA Manual seems to match the CFOA Manual. Except in the CFOA Manual, it states "After observing play of linemen and their contact with up blocking backs, pivot to assist on low trajectory and short passes over the center of the line.". Is the OCFOA doing a CFOA mechanic here or doing a SDCFOA mechanic, based on the deletion of "....over the center of the line" regarding pivoting and assisting on passes? If it is a SDCFOA mechanic, that should be italicized for clarity. I think officials would benefit from some clarity regarding this change / omission.
Thanks for sharing. There are going to be some ticked off coaches in Mississippi. Safety first.
Thanks for putting this together. Very helpful. Going to use it tonight at our first full membership meeting.
You're welcome, feel free to use any of our stuff as you see fit. There's an excellent video put together by the EFOA Association on the changes to rule 10. I highly recommend it czcams.com/video/teUTjbfQ4_U/video.html
The still screen at 3:51 literally shows the defenders arms wrapped around the receiver. He doesn't complete the tackling motion, but there is absolutely an attempt to wrap arms here.
great video! It really helps to see the action and talk it through. I would like to see a video on a runner initiating contact with his helmet. Lots of complaints about illegal contact being initiated by the offense.
You're going to get me in hot water if I do that. I've seen a couple of plays where the runner clearly initiated contact but it's such a difficult call because it's natural for a player to compress when he's about to be hit. A lot of officials simply will not make that call. If you've got some good examples, let me know.
Welcome back, Mark. Thanks for the video.
Excellent video and rule interpretation. Keep the videos coming.
On the last play, the defender did indeed leads with his hands, which his right hand was on the ball. I can see why the stayed off his one, good football play
Hope I don’t have to say this every time I disagree but great video work, love it not trying to be disrespectful just to get us talking
When I pause the video at 8:29, It seems contact was initiated with the shoulders and head, with a push-off after the contact which is when I see the hands / arms coming out.
I don't see the hands ahead of the head and shoulder as the initial point of impact
Great video, Mark - thank you!
Commenting for the engagement algorithm.
Well done,
Great info, Mark 👍
I will share....
Thanks Charles, this new CZcams notification policy is making it really difficult to get the word out. It will really help if you and others spread the word.
Hi, great video. If the receiver jumps to catch the ball, there is contact of the ball with the players hands even if he doesn't catch it, and then the defensive player wraps makes a tackle attempt below the hips. Would this be a penalty?
Great video! Thanks
Thanks for the feedback. Please feel free to spread the link around. This new CZcams notification policy is making it really difficult to get the word out. It will really help if you and others spread the word.
MARK? THANKS AGAIN BUDDY FOR ALL OF YOUR HELP!
sharing with my association
Steve, I really appreciate that. Feel free to contact me here ocfoa.org/contact-us/ with any questions or concerns. That contact us information comes directly to me.
They have pads my guy how they defenesless there leading too far with rules on offense what am I supposed to do as db
Imma DB and I can strip the ball out of someone’s hands and run the other way with it while the wideout is catching the ball.
If your brian can’t comprehend player safety, then maybe you shouldn’t be coaching football.
Good vid. Not sure I agree with the first clip being an illegal hit. No helmet to helmet. No hit above the shoulders. Defender could have wrapped up but because he didn't, he did not drive player into the ground. Where is excessive force? Not the best example, in my opinion.
Are you talking the play where the receiver get sandwiched between two defenders?
Let's break down your comment. The new rule 2-32-16d states "A defenseless player is a player who, because of his physical position and focus of concentration, is especially vulnerable to injury. A player who initiates contact against a defenseless player is responsible for making legal contact. When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include, but are not limited to:
d. A receiver in (b) and (c) above, including the person intercepting the pass, who is forcefully contacted by an opponent and that contact is not:
1. Incidental contact as a result of making a play on the ball;
2. Initiated with open hands; or
3. An attempt to tackle by wrapping arm(s) around the receiver.
Notice there is no stipulation for helmet contact in order for this to be a foul, nor is there a stipulation for a hit above the shoulders. You may be confusing the foul for "Excessive Contact to a Defenseless Player" with "Targeting" There is also no stipulation that the player be driven into the ground for this contact to be a foul. There is no stipulation for Excessive Force just forcefully contacted, there's a difference.
If you determine that the contact was forceful and most contact is and you determine the receiver was defenseless when the forceful contact occurred, then there are only 3 legal ways to forcefully contact him and they are listed above. If the contact does not fit one of those 3 criteria, it is a personal foul.
Certainly the forceful contact in the first play does not fit one of those 3 criteria. This is definitely a foul under the new rule. It's actually a foul under the old rules.
Except you can clearly see that that defender did make an attempt to wrap up the reciever. It's very clear on camera that he defenders arms go around the reciever when contact is made. That is legal contact, and it looks like you blew that call even with video evidence.
Play 2, Why does or should the Umpire be looking to the flat on a pass play? Shouldn't the umpire stay with the engaged linemen at the A42 when player A57 drives his opponent into the ground and there is still enough there to possibly have a UNR or UNS? The Umpire should have no opinion on that pass into the flat because by the mechanics manual, they need to stay with the linemen and their contact. Also, if we are going to say the H is too close to the play, we need to say what and/or where the HL should do instead. IMO the only thing the H could have done better was move straight back and not get "Happy Feet". Otherwise, in 5-man mechanics it's just one of those plays.
Play 3, Even though this is a video about illegal contact, the hold is there once he is beaten and the QB is in the pocket. If we are saying a receiver has the time and awareness to coil for the contact, how can he/she also fall under the defenseless definition because they have now eliminated both the "focus and concentration" and "physical position" part of the definition, correct? If we want to evaluate the contact of the defender, the ONLY question there is if we have illegal helmet contact by the defender (which I would support). Otherwise the play is legal and by definition we do not have a hit on a defenseless receiver.
Can we have some examples of LEGAL contact on defenseless Receivers?
I'm not sure what Mechanics Manual you are looking at, but it is not the current OCFOA manual. Section 15: Forward Passes, Umpire d. After observing the play of linemen and their contact with up blocking backs, pivot to assist on low trajectory and short passes. Regardless, the action you are concerned with is the responsibility of the flank on that side with a possible assist from the R. You couldn't be more incorrect when you state "The Umpire should have no opinion on that pass into the flat" We need the Umpire to have an opinion, particularly on catch/no catch. He's also got coverage in the halo around the runner for illegal actions by both the offense and the defense.
Play 3, you completely missed the point of including that play in the video. We used that play and I state in the video that some officials may believe that because the receiver had time to coil he was not defenseless. The CIF "Standard" (we are trying to get away from the term "philosophy") is based on Rule 2-32-16 which includes the verbiage "When in question, a player is defenseless." This play is an example of a situation when the player may or may not be defenseless. Based on the standard, he is defenseless. The contact was forceful and the contact did not fall into one of the 3 legal types of contact on a defenseless receiver, therefore, targeting or not, it is a foul.
So it is your opinion that "observe" means to watch and then leave to cover something else despite their being 2 linemen engaged and a possible takedown and UNS? On this play, The U is looking through 2 players for possible help on a pass near the LOS outside the numbers despite having 2 players engaged in contact, with one overpowering the other and a possible reaction / 2nd act. IMO, that should have remained the focus of the U because of the higher level of threat. If those 2 players get into something beyond or the player on the ground reacts to being "sat on", who is better positioned to handle that situation? On this play, the QB is rolling out to the HL side and the R is responsible for the QB (Grounding, late hits, pass / fumble, etc) according to Mechanics Manual Section 15-1 a-d. So how, when, and why would the R even come back to that action? As you stated in the video, the R can't help.
Again, the receiver in play 3 has eliminated 2 conditions of being defenseless. As you state, both his ability to focus and concentrate on the defender and his ability to adjust his body position remove those two factors in the "Defenseless" definition (2-32-16). That doesn't mean the hit is necessary legal, and in this case, I would support a foul for illegal helmet contact. However, based on your comments he can not be defenseless by definition. I think the language in the video contradicts the rule book and could lead to confusion. Yes, when in question a player is defenseless, however based on your statements, the question no longer exists when he is actually able to defend himself.
My comments are not intended to aggravate, but rather question some of the information where confusion is created. The title also mentions "Legal" vs Illegal contact on defenseless receivers but fails to show both.
@@jasonboykin1114 The correct mechanic for the umpire on this type of play is to let himself be turned by the ball and help with subsequent action and catch/no catch rulings. The manual does not say to stay with action at the line. You state " If those 2 players get into something beyond or the player on the ground reacts to being "sat on", who is better positioned to handle that situation?" That's the job of the opposite flank. You are correct, in this situation the R cannot help.
Play 3 I'm not sure where you are getting these conditions you are quoting, it's certainly not the rule book. There is nothing in the rule book that states the player is no longer defenseless when he has the ability to focus on the defender or adjust his body position, you're making stuff up. It does give examples of a defenseless player and one is "A receiver attempting to catch a pass who has not had time to clearly become a runner; " In my opinion the receiver has not "clearly become a runner". That's also the opinion of the state rules interpreter. When in question the player is defenseless. It's a rule, not an opinion.
@@MarkAndrewsOCFOA Also, there is some confusion regarding the CFOA Mechanics Manual and the OCFOA Mechanics. Specifically in Section 15, II Umpire letter d. The language in the OCFOA Manual seems to match the CFOA Manual. Except in the CFOA Manual, it states "After observing play of linemen and their contact with up
blocking backs, pivot to assist on low trajectory and short passes over the center of the line.". Is the OCFOA doing a CFOA mechanic here or doing a SDCFOA mechanic, based on the deletion of "....over the center of the line" regarding pivoting and assisting on passes? If it is a SDCFOA mechanic, that should be italicized for clarity. I think officials would benefit from some clarity regarding this change / omission.
@@jasonboykin1114 OCFOA uses the OCFOA Mechanics Manual. CFOA is aware.