The Music City Bowl Does Not Mean We Need a 10-Second Runoff Rule
by T.H. on Dec 31, 2010 1:04 PM EST
in Football
Email
PrintThere's been a lot of pouring over of the rules in wake of the bizarre finish to the Music City Bowl last night. Tennessee fans are understandably upset, and they may have a point. I'm particularly sympathetic to the interpretation that too many men on the field is a pre-snap penalty, and thus T.J. Yates' spike never legally happened, and the clock shouldn't have been stopped. But only a small minority on the internet is saying that sort of thing; everyone else is pretty much echoing Derek Dooley:
"That's why they have a 10-second runoff rule in the NFL. We don't have it in college, and we probably should get it. It was chaos again. They ran a bunch of guys out on the field, and nobody stopped to allow a substitution. They snapped the ball and got a penalty.
"That allowed them to substitute their field goal unit and kick it. So, I don't know what else to say, other than I'm proud of the team for the effort.
Much of the postgame analysis was devoted to whether college football should have a 10-second runoff rule. ESPN seemed especially concerned that coaches would start intentionally committing penalties at the clock wound down to buy the time to get a kicking team on the field. This all seems predicated on the assumption that, as Matt Zemek put it, "the Tar Heels could be rewarded for committing a penalty." But that isn't at all what happened.
The penalty didn't in anyway stop the clock. T.J. Yates spiking the ball is what stopped the clock. That's why the play was reviewed, to see whether Yates got the ball to the ground before time expired. He did; the third down play was ruled as having happened and ending with an incomplete pass. That is what stopped the clock and gave the Heels time to get their kicking team on the field. Had UNC's kicking team not tried to take the field, the spike would have still happened and the Heels would still have 4th down with one second remaining. Had both teams, the fans, and the ghost of Elvis all stormed midfield and hung around the giant logo, the result would have been the same. UNC had no advantage from their screw-up; they were just moved five yards farther away from the goal line. if anything, it just added to the air of craziness that made Casey Barth's job that much harder.
Yes, had there been a 10-second runoff rule, UNC would have been out of time and Tennessee would have won the game. That would have violated the spirit of the rule – which exists to prevent intentionally drawing a penalty to conserve clock time – if not the letter. And sure, there are tons of penalties assessed every day for violations that brought no benefit to the offending team; rules are rules, after all. But there's no rule about this in college football, and UNC derived no benefit from what they did. Had they tried to stop the clock with seventeen men on the field, at most the refs would have paused the clock, marched off five yards, and immediately started it again. UNC would have no time to snap, no time to kick, and would have left Nashville with a loss. That they didn't was a testament to the heads-up play of Yates, the only guy on the field who seemed like he kept his head.
So add the runoff rule if you like. But its absence didn't help UNC, and you can't blame it for Tennessee's loss. Both teams made enough mistakes to do that, but the last nine seconds of regulation were just one of those crazy confluences of events; it wasn't cheating, even in a legal sense.
25 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I agree on that point
The two arguments I find most interesting from the other side (as a UNC alumnus, I’m happy with the win) are
1) because the field goal kicker & placeholder were lined up behind the quarterback just prior to the snap, it should be an “illegal participation” penalty. I don’t know the specific rule where this would come into play, but I saw plenty of Tennessee fans mentioning it, and 15 yards instead of 5 would have been a huge difference.
2) As much as I think Tim Brando can be over the top sometimes, he’s correct that the rulebook does state that as soon as the head official declares the game to be over, that’s it (there’s a link on his twitter feed). The booth is only allowed to intercede as long as the game is still ongoing. In this case, the official definitely screwed up, both in declaring the game over before checking with the field judges & calling upstairs, and then in allowing UNC to proceed with the field goal kick. By the rules, he’d ended the game. I appreciate that they wanted to get it right, though.
Given the numerous missed calls on both teams during the game (especially the numerous holds on the Tennessee O-line, including a blatant one in the end zone), I’m not surprised that a little chaos on UNC’s part ended up causing the referees to completely lose any sense of what was going on at the end of regulation.
You Can Make a Good Case for Illegal Participation
Barth and the holder were the only two additional players to make it into position, after all. But it was a clear spike attempt, and one that doesn’t involve the kicker at all, so you can also argue they were never in danger of participating.
UT was robbed and the NCAA rule book proves it
According to the NCAA rule book the University of Tennessee won the game in regulation.
I will begin with the final play where they were rushing players onto and off of the field.
Rule 3, Section 5e of the rule book states
While in the process of substitution or simulated substitution, Team A is
prohibited from rushing quickly to the line of scrimmage with the obvious
attempt of creating a defensive disadvantage. If the ball is ready for play, the
game officials will not permit the ball to be snapped until Team B has placed
substitutes in position and replaced players have left the field of play. Team
B must react promptly with its substitutes.
According to this rule the officials were supposed to not allow UNC to snap the ball until the substitution is complete and UT has had a chance to counter the substitution. Doing so would have run out the clock and the game would have ended.
The nail in the coffin is Rule 11, Section 1 of the rule book which states.
The officials’ jurisdiction begins 60 minutes before the scheduled kickoff
and ends when the referee declares the score final [S14].
After the play was over, the head umpire declard the game over, according to this rule the officials no longer have jurisdiction. Technically, per the rules, the game is over, and the refs no longer have any jurisdiction and cannot review the play.
The Problem There
… is the phrase “with the obvious attempt to create a defensive advantage.” UNC wasn’t trying to catch the Tennessee defense off-guard, they were trying to stop the clock.
Note also that none of the players being “replaced” had any intention of leaving the field.
The rule that the game is over when the guy on the field says so and can’t be un-ended gives UT a much stronger case. It’s a lousy way to win though, because the ref was wrong to declare the game over without checking upstairs.
Here's a logic twister for you
Since the new meme from UT fans is that the game was over because the official declared the game over, then in the event that the head official had a brainfart at the end of the first half and accidentally announced “end of game,” instead of “end of half,” without immediately correcting himself, would that be the end of the game? And since we all know the answer to that is “hell no,” then how is this situation any different?
by Reverend Joshua on Jan 1, 2011 1:19 AM EST up reply actions
RULE 3-2 / PERIODS, TIME FACTORS AND SUBSTITUTIONS
ARTICLE 1. The total playing time in a collegiate game shall be 60 minutes,
divided into four periods of 15 minutes each, with one-minute intermissions
between the first and second periods (first half) and between the third and
fourth periods (second half) (Exception: A one-minute intermission between
the first and second and the third and fourth periods may be extended for
radio and television timeouts).
a. No period shall end until the ball is dead and the referee declares the
period ended [S14].
- is a side note that means this rule as well as rule 11-1 are administrative rules and cannot be changed or interpreted.
Once the referee declares the final period ended the game is over. This rule was set in place to prevent the reviewing of the last play of a game 1 sec, 1 min, 1 hr, 1 day or 1 year later and changing a ruling or the outcome of a game.
by Any Volunteers on Jan 1, 2011 4:01 PM EST up reply actions
We won!
You Lost! /sadface/
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
I think you're missing the point
It’s not that anybody is clamoring that UNC was rewarded for committing a penalty (they are definitely wrong if they are); the main issue is that they were not penalized properly for their penalty.
The penalty didn’t in anyway stop the clock. T.J. Yates spiking the ball is what stopped the clock. That’s why the play was reviewed, to see whether Yates got the ball to the ground before time expired. He did; the third down play was ruled as having happened and ending with an incomplete pass."
If this is what happened, it is incorrect. If a penalty occurred on the offense, then the incomplete pass never happened. It would not go in the box score as an incomplete pass on third down. If the penalty is enforced (and they did march the 5 yards) the play goes down as a penalty on the offense and remains 3rd down. That’s how it works. There is no loss of down on a “too many men” penalty. It is similar to getting, say, a holding penalty on a lineman on an incomplete pass. The incomplete pass does not go on the record, they march back 10 yards, replay the same down, and start the clock as soon as the ball is placed by the umpire.
With a “too many men” penalty, the play is supposed to be blown dead immediately after the snap. You are right that it is not a pre-snap penalty, it occurs as soon as the ball is snapped with an illegal amount of players. The penalty occurred after snap and before spike. Thus, no incomplete pass.
Even if Yates clocked the ball with 0:01 on the clock, but there was a penalty on the play, the game clock should have started running as soon as the 5 yards were marched off. It is impossible to snap a ball with 0:01 on the clock because the players have to wait for the clock to start before snapping. The game is over.
Your argument seems to be the clock stopped because of the incomplete pass and the penalty is irrelevant. There is also mention that if the penalty would have been pre-snap, the incomplete pass wouldn’t have happened and Tennessee would have won. It doesn’t matter if the penalty is pre-snap or not. The incomplete pass never happened. The play is recorded as a penalty for too many men. Replay 3rd down. End of game.
by wildturkeysandwich on Dec 31, 2010 5:10 PM EST reply actions
A Lot of People Are Claiming UNC Was Rewarded
And it is silly. Like I said at the top of the post, the view that the play never went off because of the penalty, and thus the clock never stopped, is a much stronger one.
Another argument
Actually mentioned by Dooley, is that if the offense tries to substitute, the umpire must stand over the ball and prevent a snap for a reasonable amount of time to give the defense time to substitute. That would’ve straight up ended the game, and is probably the best argument.
I agree with you that UNC didn’t stop the clock by having too many men on the field, although I think illegal motion is a different story (see my comment below).
I do tip my hat to y’all for having a hell of a defense and good two-minute offense.
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 31, 2010 7:41 PM EST up reply actions
Here's an interesting point, Mr. Sports Attorney
Illegal Delay of the Game—ARTICLE 2
II. On a running play late in the half the Team A ball carrier is tackled inbounds. Team B players are deliberately slow to "unpile" in an obvious attempt to consume time and prevent the officials from making the ball ready for play. RULING: Team B foul for delay of game. Penalty—five yards at the succeeding spot. The game clock will start on the snap (Rule 3-4-3).
Officials call this properly against UT’s cheating defenders and the entire argument is moot.
by Reverend Joshua on Jan 1, 2011 1:02 AM EST up reply actions
I'm a little confused
By the part that that didn’t happen. Skip to the 6:42 part where you’ll see that the defenders were extremely quick to unpile (since there was never really a pile) and since the only player who hit late was clearly blocked into the runner by a UNC lineman.
by Incipient_Senescence on Jan 1, 2011 10:20 AM EST up reply actions
He's Talking About the Subsequent Run
Skip to around the 10:00 mark to see it in the replay; the tackler pins Draughn to the turf for a good three to four seconds. I can’t imagine the refs making that call, but when you were a UNC fan screaming at him to get up, you definitely noticed at the time that he wasn’t able to.
The only point that matters
There were many calls that were missed that could have been called, on both sides, (holdings, delay of games, late hit, etc..), but the fact is none of them were called. The call that was made was the “GAME OVER” call and it states twice in the rule book that when that call is made the game is final, file it in the record books.
by Any Volunteers on Jan 1, 2011 8:37 PM EST up reply actions
I understand the argument you're making
but rarely will the letter of the rulebook be enforced when it conflicts with the spirit of the rulebook.
Every game has numerous missed calls and other violations that the referees chose not to call, like the delay of game, that alter the outcome in some way. The rulebook is never followed to the exact letter, by choice and by accident, and the national official coordinator has already dismissed your line of argument because extenuating circumstances come into play that require a review regardless of the head official’s statement of “end of game.” Specifically, rule 12-5-1 states “the replay official and his crew shall review every play of a game” and that “the outcome of a review would have a direct, competitive impact on the game.”
Here we have two conflicting rules: the official has verbally announced the end of the game, but the rules require that the replay official review every play of the game. The rulebook is silent on how to resolve this, but the general philosophy behind having review is to get the calls right. The goal is to allow the outcome to be decided by the play on the field and not the snap judgment of officials in a hectic, fast paced game.
One of the hardest aspects of rule-writing is ensuring that every conceivable circumstance is provided for and that there are no contradictions between new language and old language. (This game and the UT-LSU game will give the rules committee some nice new examples to clarify for the next rulebook for 2011-12.) I find it doubtful that Rule 3-2-1 was changed to prevent review of the final play of the game after the declaration of the end of game. Reviews that would occur after the point when resuming the game would be inconvenient or virtually impossible (after the teams have completely returned to the locker rooms and begun preparing to depart, next day, etc.) have always been generally academic and most governing organizations have always been loathe to change the results after the fact, so there’s really no need to provide for those types of exclusions. Generally, if both teams are available to resume play immediately, there’s no reason not to make the correct ruling and continue from the point of error.
by Reverend Joshua on Jan 2, 2011 3:28 AM EST up reply actions
Also this is confusing
Had they tried to stop the clock with seventeen men on the field, at most the refs would have paused the clock, marched off five yards, and immediately started it again. UNC would have no time to snap, no time to kick, and would have left Nashville with a loss.
This is exactly what happened. UNC tried to stop the clock with seventeen men on the field. The refs should have paused the clock, marched off five yards, and immediately started it again. UNC shouldn’t have had time to snap, no time to kick, and should have left Nashville with a loss.
by wildturkeysandwich on Dec 31, 2010 5:35 PM EST reply actions
You're Right
It’s clearer if I say "Had they try to stop the clock by having seventeen men on the field…" The act if too many people being on the field was not how UNC was stopping the clock, and yet a lot people seem to think it was, or that other coaches will try to stop the clock in that manner. Which I find ridiculous, because it wouldn’t work.
I couldn't disagree more
UNC could not stop the clock without committing an offensive penalty. Even if the extra players had been able to get off the field in time, there’s no way that the line could’ve been in position for the requisite full second before the snap without time running out. So it’s illegal shift or game over. This is why the ten second runoff should be a rule.
If it isn’t a rule, this situation comes into play: complete a pass, have the receiver stand over the ball, snap it to the nearest guy, who spikes it. You get called for illegal formation or illegal shift, lose five yards, and get the clock stopped.
Of course, it isn’t a rule, so the call wasn’t wrong, but it does show the rule ought to be changed. Now I will say that two calls were wrong on that play: first, the clock should’ve restarted after the walkoff (as covered by wildturkeysandwich), and second, UNC should’ve been called for illegal participation, as 12 men were lined up for the play. Either one would’ve probably still allowed a field goal attempt (which your excellent kicker may well have made), but it would’ve made it more difficult.
by Incipient_Senescence on Dec 31, 2010 7:38 PM EST reply actions
Yates' Perspicacity Pays Dividends, We Just Pay for Butch
Why did all of our coaches go brain dead at the end of the game? Why do we keep such dolts as Davis and his coaching staff on our sidelines?
I want Butch gone.
Illegal participation = 15 yards; clock should have started at 25 seconds, not 26
There should not have been a second left to start with! When the ref was buzzed on the play that did not count; the clock went from a 25 second stopped clock down to 14 seconds…..(ref. ESPN3 replay). The ref put 26 seconds back on the clock….not 25; thus the game lasted 1 hour and 1 second….of running football clock. Just enough for UNC.
If the officials don’t blow the whistle when a huddle is broken or before a play….it’s illegal participation when you have more than 11 on the field and a 15 yard penalty. UNC had to run a play to stop the clock as Yate’s did….he “clocked” the ball…spiked it. It’s a 15 yard penalty…..or the game is over. No if’s, and’s or but’s!
If Volneck fans are so adamant they were jobbed ..
Why don’t they honor our series with them?
Oh that’s right, because their AD and Coach are gutless, spineless and scared of the beatdown in Kenan they were going to next year.
Go Heels.
Let;'s not forget ...
the refs didn’t call all the celebrations and throat slashes by the volnecks and the late hit on Dwight Jones toward the end of the game either.
So the refs missed way more calls DURING the game on Tennessee (many of which was called out by the national media) than the one play at the end on Carolina which was ruled legal after the fact.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
