PDA

View Full Version : NFL reportedly will adjust where umpire is stationed



Denver Native (Carol)
08-31-2010, 05:06 PM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81a27405/article/nfl-reportedly-will-adjust-where-umpire-is-stationed?module=HP_headlines

The NFL will inform teams Tuesday about tweaks to where the umpire will be stationed in the offensive backfield, The New York Times reported.

The adjustments are in response to a new rule that moved the umpire from the middle of the defense to 14 to 17 yards behind the offense for safety reasons. That was adjusted to 12 yards back after the Hall of Fame Game so the ball could be spotted quicker. Still, the rule drew criticism from Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning, whose team was penalized twice for snapping the ball before the umpire was in position during a preseason game Thursday.[

The latest tweaks, made after a conference call that included members of the league's competition committee, include requiring the umpire only to be standing behind the deepest member of the offense, and quarterbacks can look at officials near the sidelines to get the go-ahead to snap the ball, rather than turn around and look for a signal from the umpire.

BroncoWave
08-31-2010, 05:09 PM
I'm for this. It's not the least bit fair for a team like the Colts who succeed in a hurry up offense to have to completely change that style of play for what's a relatively minor rule change.

underrated29
08-31-2010, 05:11 PM
agreed. The offense should not have to wait for the ump...Good change NFL.

I like the ump in the backfield too. They will see more holding calls on doom this way......when he is back that is.

missingnumber7
09-01-2010, 09:11 AM
They will still have to wait for the Umpire from time to time and thats wrong. The umpire should be on the defensive side of the ball. I am interested to see how many more offensive holding calls occur because of this move. Also moving the umpire changes the reference point for illegal man downfield because that is the umpires call.

Lonestar
09-01-2010, 09:39 AM
There is no way because of liability laws they can move him back to behind the D. Once they acknowledged it WAS a problem and made the move.

While they will call more holding calls on Dooms opponent. They we also now be able to see our holding calls also.

That is what you call a two edged sword.

The lord giveth and taketh away.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Nomad
09-01-2010, 09:46 AM
Umpire is just going to have to be quicker getting to his spot!

rcsodak
09-01-2010, 12:32 PM
1st we have the Brady (tuck) rule....now we have the Manning rule.
Did they ever come up with an Elway rule? Lol
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

dogfish
09-01-2010, 01:43 PM
stupid NFL, forgot to clear their new rule with PAYton before putting it in place. . . :heh:


doubt they'll make that mistake again!

claymore
09-01-2010, 01:49 PM
I like it because it makes it harder on Manning.

Ravage!!!
09-01-2010, 01:49 PM
It was stupid on the NFL's part to begin with. YOU watched that game, and the Colts were just running their normal offense, and kept gtting called for 'snapping because the ref wasn't set"... REALLY? Thats not getting in the way of the game at all. It was ridiculous.

What REALLY sucks... is now when teams are rushing to get that last "snap and down" the ball... or rush to get the last second FG in.. they have to not only wait for the ref to run his old-white-slow ass across the field and place the ball (while the clock is ticking), but now they have to wait for him to run across the field, and then run behind the QB?

There is a "delay of game" call against the defense, where is the "delay of game" flag to throw at the ref?

The Glue Factory
09-01-2010, 01:55 PM
1st we have the Brady (tuck) rule....now we have the Manning rule.
Did they ever come up with an Elway rule? Lol
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Nope. Cuz we never complained about how many times he got sacked. Brady, Manning, et al are just freaking WIMPS! EVeryone else just needs to suck it up and accept that football is a CONTACT sport and deal with the violence inherint in the game. :rolleyes:

BroncoWave
09-01-2010, 01:59 PM
It was stupid on the NFL's part to begin with. YOU watched that game, and the Colts were just running their normal offense, and kept gtting called for 'snapping because the ref wasn't set"... REALLY? Thats not getting in the way of the game at all. It was ridiculous.

What REALLY sucks... is now when teams are rushing to get that last "snap and down" the ball... or rush to get the last second FG in.. they have to not only wait for the ref to run his old-white-slow ass across the field and place the ball (while the clock is ticking), but now they have to wait for him to run across the field, and then run behind the QB?

There is a "delay of game" call against the defense, where is the "delay of game" flag to throw at the ref?

That's not true. The umps move back to their old position in the last 2 minutes of each half. That was part of the rule when they first put it in last spring.

missingnumber7
09-01-2010, 03:10 PM
There is no way because of liability laws they can move him back to behind the D. Once they acknowledged it WAS a problem and made the move.

While they will call more holding calls on Dooms opponent. They we also now be able to see our holding calls also.

That is what you call a two edged sword.

The lord giveth and taketh away.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

If the bolded is true then they shouldn't even be there during the last 2 minutes.

Also, the NCAA rules committe looked at the same thing, as there have been several injuries to officials in recent years at that level as well, and they determined that 1, the number of snaps to the number of incents were so low that it didnt' warrant a change, and 2, it would change the way the game was officiated and that isn't the move they wanted.

As a HS Official I have umpired several games, and have gotten hit several times. As players get faster and bigger it is hard to be aware of where you are and where 22 players are at all times, but if you look at the worst injuries that the NFL has suffered in the recent past it is because the Umpire is out of position. As for the argument about using the Official as a Pick, it happens, but it isn't enough to change the game over. I think this was a knee jerk reaction, which is typical of the Goodell regime. And it wouldn't supprise me if it wasn't changed back for next season.

Bosco
09-01-2010, 04:08 PM
Smart revision. The entire rule change was done in haste without a whole lot of thought put into it.

LTC Pain
09-01-2010, 04:09 PM
Not to sound callous but I don't really care where this official is located as longf as it doesn't affect the game. It appears to me the change does affect the game and should be reversed.

spikerman
09-01-2010, 05:36 PM
They will still have to wait for the Umpire from time to time and thats wrong. The umpire should be on the defensive side of the ball. I am interested to see how many more offensive holding calls occur because of this move. Also moving the umpire changes the reference point for illegal man downfield because that is the umpires call.

Sometimes players just have to wait for officials. If they have to wait until the chains get set or for another official to get into position the umpire should be standing over the ball anyway preventing a snap. I'm with you - I don't like the change either. I'm not an umpire (I work the wings and Back Judge) and I think the move gives a lot of advantage to the defense. It's going to be very difficult for the umpire to call defensive holding on the line now. You're right about the umpire calling inelligibles downfield, but the wings can usually make that call too.

Lonestar
09-01-2010, 05:43 PM
Smart revision. The entire rule change was done in haste without a whole lot of thought put into it.


I'm sure they put a lot of thought into it just had to test the waters with it. Remember that IND is one of the biggest cry babies group in the NFL they are the whiners that set the do not touch a WR after 5 yard. because they were getting mugged in the playoffs to much finesse not enough foot BALLS

FanInAZ
09-01-2010, 09:39 PM
How about redesignating the Head Linesman to Umpire who would take over responsibility for setting the ball, play clock & game clock? The official that is currently the Umpire can be redesignated as someone else. That way, the Umpire would be be able to set the ball and then get to his new position quicker.

spikerman
09-02-2010, 06:11 AM
How about redesignating the Head Linesman to Umpire who would take over responsibility for setting the ball, play clock & game clock? The official that is currently the Umpire can be redesignated as someone else. That way, the Umpire would be be able to set the ball and then get to his new position quicker.

That would slow the game down much more because the Head Linesman has to make sure the chains get set after a first down and get the box (down indicator) moved between each down. I think the Umpire is probably still the best person to do it, but it's definitely slower now. I have a feeling that the U will eventually go back to his old position full time.

Dirk
09-02-2010, 06:19 AM
How about a ball boy. Like in tennis..instead of running across to pick up a ball, the ball boy could set the ball and run like hell to the side lines...:lol:

missingnumber7
09-02-2010, 09:28 AM
How about a ball boy. Like in tennis..instead of running across to pick up a ball, the ball boy could set the ball and run like hell to the side lines...:lol:

I would pay money to see a guy do that every down. That would be hilarious.

The end is the speed of the game, and if they are talking for the safety of the Umpire then why is he back there for the last 2 minutes anyway? They are contradicting themselves. I was at an officials workshop last night and a Big 10 official, who is an alternate for an NFL crew. He said that the NCAA won't change to this style, infact they have already reccomended that officials start wearing padding on their legs(he wears the under armor stuff) and looking at the possibility of a helmet and or shoulder protection as well. I know that when I know I'm umpiring a AAA game (highest level in ND) I will usually wear soccer shin guards to keep the leg whips that I will undoubtably get to a minimum. He also said that the push to move the U to the Offensive side came from the league not from a reccomendation of the umpires. They suggested moving the U back to the 10 to 12 yard range as teh BJ is at the 25 yard range.

Ravage!!!
09-02-2010, 04:34 PM
That's not true. The umps move back to their old position in the last 2 minutes of each half. That was part of the rule when they first put it in last spring.

If this is correct and true.. then that is absolutely stupid. They are saying that the ref is in danger during the rest of the game, but the danger is "worth it and ok" in the last two minutes of every half??

So, the ref isn't safe during most of the game, enough so that they change the rules and slow the game down because of it, but when both teams are rushing around to get down the field, he's "safe enough" to risk?

If this is true, it would seem that they are truly setting themselves up for a liability problem. They (as a corporation) have admitted that the dangers to this person's health is so much so that it has warranted a move that would decrease the chances and probability of collisions. HOWEVER, they are then putting that very same person BACK into danger (knowingly) in the last two minutes and the most "rushed" parts of the game, after just publicly telling everyone how unnecessarily dangerous it is? :confused:

That's just retarded.

LordTrychon
09-02-2010, 05:50 PM
Not necessarily.

I see your point... but it could be viewed as simply 'reducing' the amount of risk involved, rather than taking them away from risk entirely (which is not possible, btw) and then putting them back at risk.

Say my company decides that me standing on a high rise building that's under construction is a potential risk. It's necessary for certain parts of my job, and therefor I have to be up there at times... but they require that I limit how often I am up there unnecessarily.

It's not as if we just found out that standing there will cause cancer for these umps. There has always been a risk. It's not a new scientific discovery they are ignoring. The risk has always been a part of the job, and they are still at risk regardless.

BroncoWave
09-02-2010, 11:34 PM
If this is correct and true.. then that is absolutely stupid. They are saying that the ref is in danger during the rest of the game, but the danger is "worth it and ok" in the last two minutes of every half??

So, the ref isn't safe during most of the game, enough so that they change the rules and slow the game down because of it, but when both teams are rushing around to get down the field, he's "safe enough" to risk?

If this is true, it would seem that they are truly setting themselves up for a liability problem. They (as a corporation) have admitted that the dangers to this person's health is so much so that it has warranted a move that would decrease the chances and probability of collisions. HOWEVER, they are then putting that very same person BACK into danger (knowingly) in the last two minutes and the most "rushed" parts of the game, after just publicly telling everyone how unnecessarily dangerous it is? :confused:

That's just retarded.

I'm 100% sure that it's true. They've talked about it a bunch during the preseason. And I read that this week they experimented with making it the last 5 minutes instead of the last 2.

Ravage!!!
09-03-2010, 10:06 AM
I'm 100% sure that it's true. They've talked about it a bunch during the preseason. And I read that this week they experimented with making it the last 5 minutes instead of the last 2.

Well... for the sake of getting the ball down faster I hope that its right.

I personally have always been in favor of stopping the clock after the play has been called dead and whle the ref carries the ball to the spot.

I already find it pretty ridiculous that we have to wait for an old man to reach under a pile, get the ball.. RUN to the nearest hash marks (when in the NFL thats nearly the center of the field) place the ball, all while the clock is running. They say it takes an average of 13 seconds for a ref to get the ball from the sidelines and spot it. Know how long the average play lasts from snap to whistle? 6. So the ref's wobbling to the middle of the field to spot the ball takes 2 snaps of play away from any team.

So I'm in favor, in the last 2 minutes of the half only, to stop the clock long enough to spot the ball. Lets not let how fast a ref decides to run to the center to make a difference in the game.