EDSBS points out that Wisconsin's coach found a loop hole in the new clock rules. As you know the clock now starts at the game's kickoff...not when the ball is touched by the return team. Check out the Mack Truck sized loophole that Wisconsin found in the rules to end the 1st half vs. Penn State.
EDSBS has the video and the details. As Orson said, this is civil disobedience at its finest.
PWD
Georgia Sports Blog FanShop
- Georgia Bulldogs Women's Sideline Clutch
- Price: $84.99
13 comments:
This doesn't show off a loophose as much as it shows off the sheer stupidity of this officiating crew. If they didn't know they could dead ball this play and call unsportsmanlike conduct, they don't deserve to be in that game. That's the fundamental catch-all these refs have to combat against such behavior.
I don't think playing by the rules constitutes unsportsmanlike conduct. The officials are not courts of equity, and I only hope that this is done a couple more times and soon, so that the idiotic rules can be rescinded.
Yeah, I don't think this constitutes unsportsmanlike conduct any more than, say, using a fruity snap count or some other trick to draw the other team offsides.
What really needs to happen is for some team to score the go-ahead touchdown on their first drive of the second half and then use this trick to run out the clock for the remainder of the game. In fact, if by the grace of God Georgia somehow puts up a lead on Auburn in the second half of this weekend's game, I hope Mark Richt has the balls to try it.
I'm with doug this could be the solution to our 3rd quarter problems. Just technically never start the 3rd quarter and continually run the clock down. Of course with the kind of luck we've had Auburn would just run it back for a touch down on the second kick.
DOUG - DO NOT LET ANYONE AT BUTTS-MEHRE HEAR YOU SAY THAT!!!!!!
Dude -- you STILL have to cover the kickoff. We have no business kicking off to anyone. That's a great way for us to lose.
pwd
I'm sure the NCAA officiating
poo-bahs have already circulated a memo laying out their official position on this.
I'm imagining that the unofficial response will be something like what happened in the movie "V for Vendetta" when the Letterman-ish character thumbed his nose at the censors. It's all fun and games until Myles Brand storms your house with an AK-47 and night vision goggles.
"I don't think playing by the rules constitutes unsportsmanlike conduct."
But they're NOT playing by the rules. They are going offsides and they are doing it very intentionally. I would whip out the specific rules regarding the situation but someone over a EDSBS has already done that. Check the comments there.
The question is why the officiating crew could not figure out the Wisconsin motivation for intentionally going offsides and that boob in the TV booth, Paul Maguire, could.
Perhaps, the officials realize the rule is pretty stupid too and want to see it changed?
I went ahead and lifted this from the comments section
Here’s the text of the rule cited above for unfair game-clock tactics (Rule 3-4-3):
Unfair Game-Clock Tactics ARTICLE 3. The referee shall order the game clock started or stopped whenever either team conserves or consumes playing time by tactics obviously unfair. This includes starting the clock on the snap if the foul is by the team ahead in the score. The clock will start on the ready-for-play signal after an illegal forward or backward pass that conserves time for Team A
And here is the text of the rule for Unsportsman Like conduct (Rule 9-2):
There shall be no unsportsmanlike conduct or any act
that interferes with orderly game administration on the part of players, substitutes, coaches, authorized attendants or any other persons subject to
the rules, before the game, during the game or between periods.
Rule 9-2-3(c) contains a catch-all provision that would work here:
Unfair Acts
ARTICLE 3. The following are unfair acts:
a. If a team refuses to play within two minutes after ordered to do so by the
referee.
b. If a team repeatedly commits fouls that can be penalized only by halving
the distance to its goal line.
c. If an obviously unfair act not specifically covered by the rules occurs during the game.
——-
Here is the most interesting part, and probably what JoePa was asking for:
PENALTY—Dead-ball foul. 15 yards [S7, S27] from the succeeding spot. Flagrant offenders, if players or substitutes, shall be disqualified [S47]. If a player or an identified squad member in uniform commits two unsportsmanlike fouls in the same game, he shall be disqualified.
Was this flagrant? Like said above, I think it sure will be next time someone tries it.
——————–
I would recommend that referees call offsides on the first intentional kick off, and then declare that at the moment they threw the flag, they were also stopping the clock at the moment of the kick pursuant to 3-4-3 because Wisconsin was “consum[ing] playing time by tactics obviously unfair” Thus, the head ref would give one of those “please reset the game clock to such-and-such seconds” instructions. Wisconsin would thus have gained nothing and would have lost 5 yards.
Nobody would ever do it again because of the lack of advantage, and so we probably would not have to address the unsportsmanlike conduct issue.
I still thought it was one of the funniest things I have seen in a while.
While I would agree that "never starting the third quarter" and just running the clock out would be a "repeated" violation (how many times would you have to do it? 60, maybe?)what Wisconsin did is no worse than taking a delay of game penalty to get a better angle for a kicker, or wasting time outs to "ice" a kicker, or any number of similar ruses that get done every week, and no one complains. What makes this sweet is that in addition to helping your team win a game, it gigs the goofballs who make these rules in the first place to placate the almighty TV suits.
Could'nt the return team just decline the penalty and get the ball?
"ruteger said...
Could'nt the return team just decline the penalty and get the ball?"
I don't think so; it's like when the offense is called for false start/procedure - but if someone who's willing to look it up can show ortherwise, I wouldn't argue.
Interesting comments all around. The underlying issue is what's most important. Changing the rules on the clock simply to appease/accommodate the networks is what started all this and is wrong in the first place.
There was no hue and cry for a change to clock management. It wasn't like a rule designed to protect the quarterback (a rule I generally don't agree with, but which I understand).
OhioDawg
Post a Comment