THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

This reminded me of an incident that happened at my old high school a year or two ago.  Their football team (Team A) had qualified for the state semi-finals.  In a separate quarter-finals game between Teams B and C, there was a big on-field fight as time was running out.  Team B had won, but several of their star players (I think including starting QB and RB) were involved in the fight.  By rule, players involved in fighting are ineligible for their next game.  So naturally one would expect that those star players for B would be ineligible for the semis against A.

However, the star players were identified as having participated according to video evidence after the fact rather than on-field rulings.  Some of their families filed a lawsuit citing that such evidence should not be allowed to rule them ineligible.  Nobody contests that they were involved, but rather the method with which they were detected was contested.  A judge granted an injunction which allowed those star players to play in the semis against Team A.

The semis were played, and Team B won a very close game.  Team A’s board of education then filed a lawsuit citing that Team B won with ineligible players and thus should forfeit their semi-final victory.  Another injunction was granted, this one preventing the state finals from being played for another week.  This judge sided with Team A, and Team A (my alma mater) got to play for the state title instead of Team B.

The whole thing was pretty messy, and I’m not sure there were any real winners.  Yes Team A got to advance, but they did so knowing that they were beaten in the previous week.  However, it was a close game that relied on performances of players who shouldn’t have been allowed to play.

For the record, Team A lost in the finals.

Under high school rules in most states, the clock may or may not be restarted after a penalty. It depends on why the clock was stopped before the penalty was called.

"For the record, Team A lost in the finals.”

JUSTICE!

Under high school rules in most states, the clock may or may not be restarted after a penalty. It depends on why the clock was stopped before the penalty was called.

That sort of matters here and sort of doesn’t.  Under NFHS rules, if an accepted foul occurs during the last timed down of a period, the period must be extended by one untimed down.

Whether the clock starts on the ready for play or on the snap does depend on why the clock stopped during the previous down.  So if the previous play, during which the foul occurred, ended in a fashion that would normally keep the clock rolling, the officials were correct in starting the clock prior to the snap.  Where they erred is that if the clock expires prior to the offense snapping the ball, the offense become entitled to an untimed down, since the last timed down of the period involved an accepted foul.

Either way, the officials did make a mistake here.

To matskralc:
The last timed down in this game is the field goal attempt, not the previous down in which the foul occurred. I think maybe you’re getting “down” and “play” confused.

The last timed down in this game is the field goal attempt, not the previous down in which the foul occurred. I think maybe you’re getting “down” and “play” confused.

I’m not sure what you’re talking about. There was no field goal attempt in this game. That’s the whole problem.

A down does not begin until the ball is snapped (rule 2-7-1).  In this situation, the clock ran out before the ball could be snapped.  Therefore, another down never started.  Therefore, the last timed down of the game was one on which an accepted penalty occurred.  Therefore, the offense is entitled to an untimed down.

This situation that occurred in this game is the same as the NFHS case book situation 3-3-3-B:

Near the end of the third period, it is third and 4 for A from B’s 48-yard-line. A1 advances to B’s 45 and during the run there is holding by B1. The penalty is accepted. At the end of the down, there are three seconds remaining in the period. Because the penalty was the only reason the for the clock to be stopped, it is started with the ready-for-play signal and the period ends before A snaps the ball.

RULING: A is entitled to an untimed down because it accepted the penalty for a foul which occurred during the last timed down of the period. Therefore, the period must be extended with an untimed down in this situation even though time remained and A had a chance to snap the ball before it expired.

It’s obvious the officials erred.

Consider me corrected. Thanks.

When I was in high school, a team lost the state championship due to a player hotdogging.

The team winning by 3 points had the ball with 2 seconds left. The ball was snapped, but instead of kneeling down to seal the victory, the QB decided to hotdog it and ran around the back field with the ball held in the air with one hand, celebrating the victory because time had ran out.

One of the defensive players, understanding the play wasn’t over until the whistle blew, ran up the the QB, snatched the ball out of his hand, and ran it in for the championship-clinching score.

The parents of the team lost sued, claiming they should have won because the game was really over and the last score shouldn’t have happened ‘because it didn’t really count’. The game was over and what happened after the time ran out shouldn’t be allowed because of the celebration.

Happily, the losing coach realized his team blew it and told the parents to get over it.