Taunting and Excessive Celebration

[RodentRampage]

Since the thread on changes to tanunting rules has imploded in such a fashion as to render any actualy discussion there impossible, I decided to start a new thread so we can get back to discussing taunting and excessive celebrations because I think it is a worthwhile discussion to have.

I think that it would be a bad idea to have the taunting penalty marked off from the spot of the foul, negating the score. Taunting is far to subjective and unevenly called. It would open the door for corruption, because it would be so easy to call taunting on many scores.

I think the excessive celebration penalty is a problem. I do understand the need to have limits on end zone celebrations, but it's too often called just because someone is excitied about having made a big play. A couple years ago, Washington scored a TD at the end of the game, and the XP would have sent the game to OT. The Washington player was naturally excited, and tossed the ball into the air in celebration. There was a 15 yard penalty, and Washington missed the long XP. The rules say that tossing the ball "high into the air" is excessive celebration. But how high is "high"?

The choreographed celebrations that the NFL had for a time were excessive - I remember the whole Redskins OL would do an end zone dance. But there has to be some allowance for spontaneous emotion. There are some things I hate, like players who do flips into the end zone. That's not spontaneous, it shows a player who will screw over his own team to make a highlight reel. Coaches tolerate such actions so long as the players are getting scores, but this only encourages it. I'd like to see someone fumble while doing a flip into the end zone, that would make a good warning to players (and to the coaches who tolerate them). On the other hand, the really selfish player wouldn't care much.

You don't want taunting or celebration to get out of hand, but being too tight with it puts too much of the game into the hands of the refs, especially problematic given the subjectivity. Let's say that we are visiting Ohio State, and score the winning TD on the last play, but the Gopher player raised the ball in celebration at the 2 yard line, or say the same situation, but this time it's the Buckeye player who raises the ball in celebration at the 2. Which team is more likely to get penalized? I think they would be much more likely to throw the flag against us than they would against OSU. If the penalty could negate the score, that's too much power to place in the refs hands.

I think we need guidelines that avoid nitpicky penalties that ought not be called, and it needs to be clearly understood what will and what will not be called. Maybe players could be ejected for a quarter. But given the subjectivity of the call, even that's a problem. It's hard to control if the players don't care what the impact to the team is.

 

[dpodoll68]

Such a call is obviously always going to be subjective. But I think the line should be drawn between premeditated and spontaneous. Common sense can dictate pretty easily whether something was choreographed or not. It was obvious that Jake Locker throwing the ball into the air was spontaneous, and was not intended to draw attention to himself or provoke the other team. Something like TO pulling a sharpie out of his sock is clearly premeditated, and has no place in sports outside of fake sports like the WWE.

And yes, I think it should be marked from the spot. If it's in the endzone, negate the TD and place the ball 1st-and-10 at the 15.

 

[Ole]

Such a call is obviously always going to be subjective. But I think the line should be drawn between premeditated and spontaneous. Common sense can dictate pretty easily whether something was choreographed or not. It was obvious that Jake Locker throwing the ball into the air was spontaneous, and was not intended to draw attention to himself or provoke the other team. Something like TO pulling a sharpie out of his sock is clearly premeditated, and has no place in sports outside of fake sports like the WWE.

And yes, I think it should be marked from the spot. If it's in the endzone, negate the TD and place the ball 1st-and-10 at the 15.

Sorry no way you ever negate a TD for a celebration, and the fact that this is a subjective call by officials who just had a terrible NCAA season with blown calls in many big games is also very troubling.
Belotti stated that officials have handled these calls well in most cases, which they haven't(see Locker 08)
AND also how is this guy in charge of rules? Sorry but if any AD allows a player back to play after what happened in Boise this fall he should be removed from rules committees.

Choreographed stuff can be penalized on kickoffs, coaches will get on their kids because a 15 yard kickoff penalty is huge for field position. That's enough. Keep the hankies in the striped pants and let the players play and control the flow of the games themselves. Otherwise the "well handled" officiating at the Bank against MSU this Halloween will be commonplace.

 

[Bayfieldgopher]

The game has slowly evolved to something the NCAA does not like. Taunting, excessive shows of emotion and attention seeking is now common place. Now its difficult to rein things back in. IMO, steps need to be taken which may end up being unpopular and difficult to administer.

Just like holding, the use of hands and blocking in the back. Will there come a time when an attempt will be made to pull back?? There are certainly things about today's CFB that I am concerned about.

 

[RodentRampage]

It may be obvious to us that the Washington player was just exhibiting spontaneous excitement, but it wasn't obvious at all to the refs. That shows why we shouldn't put that much game-changing power in the hands of the refs. If it can negate a TD, than the effect of an extremely subjective call is greatly magnified. For celebrations in the end zone, I don't see how the TD could be negated in any case, as the score had already taken place. I'd like to see a focus on getting consistent officiating before handing more game-changing power to the refs. It's like the helmet-to-helmet contact rule, it needs to be enforced more consistently. It seems to get enforced for tickey-tack contact, but some blatant helmet to helmet contact goes uncalled.

 

[dpodoll68]

Sorry no way you ever negate a TD for a celebration

I agree that is a pretty big place to go to, but how else do you sink it into these kids' heads? They care little about a 15-yd penalty on the extra point, and even less so on the kickoff. After all, it's all about me, why do I care if I put my defense in a hole on the opposition's next drive?

Taking points away not only hits them where it hurts, but it forces coaches to deal with the situation. They will not take kindly to points coming off the scoreboard. These are supposed to be institutions of higher learning, and part of that education should be how to behave like a true sportsman, not a self-aggrandizing jackass. Coaches turn the other cheek, outside of token consideration, because they're willing to deal with what they perceive as marginal penalties in the interests of keeping a good player and his contributions on the field. I guarantee taking points away would nip it in the bud in a heartbeat. Not only because of the coaching staff addressing the behavior, but the peer pressure of teammates would cause players to think twice before behaving like idiots.

 

[Ole]

I agree that is a pretty big place to go to, but how else do you sink it into these kids' heads? They care little about a 15-yd penalty on the extra point, and even less so on the kickoff. After all, it's all about me, why do I care if I put my defense in a hole on the opposition's next drive?

Taking points away not only hits them where it hurts, but it forces coaches to deal with the situation. They will not take kindly to points coming off the scoreboard. These are supposed to be institutions of higher learning, and part of that education should be how to behave like a true sportsman, not a self-aggrandizing jackass. Coaches turn the other cheek, outside of token consideration, because they're willing to deal with what they perceive as marginal penalties in the interests of keeping a good player and his contributions on the field. I guarantee taking points away would nip it in the bud in a heartbeat. Not only because of the coaching staff addressing the behavior, but the peer pressure of teammates would cause players to think twice before behaving like idiots.

This would change the game of football permanently in a drastic way. Nobody wants emotionless football, regardless of what they say. I can think of several big TD's this year we scored that would have been negated, the Air force fumble with Tripplett holding the ball out as he crossed into the endzone, Decker's axe chop against wisky, Simmons' blocked FG return. It's just too far in my book, let them play. Penalize 15 yards on the kickoff and wait for the self inflicted field position to turn a big game late, it will happen.
Ex: Picture Florida getting a game winner against LSU, excessive celebration clearly choreographed, 15 yards on the kickoff, return to the 50 with 15 seconds left, 20 yard pass with 5 seconds left. FG. Game. That would do it, and it won't cause the game to change into something it's not and never has been.

 

[WAGopher]

This would change the game of football permanently in a drastic way. Nobody wants emotionless football, regardless of what they say. I can think of several big TD's this year we scored that would have been negated, the Air force fumble with Tripplett holding the ball out as he crossed into the endzone, Decker's axe chop against wisky, Simmons' blocked FG return. It's just too far in my book, let them play. Penalize 15 yards on the kickoff and wait for the self inflicted field position to turn a big game late, it will happen.
Ex: Picture Florida getting a game winner against LSU, excessive celebration clearly choreographed, 15 yards on the kickoff, return to the 50 with 15 seconds left, 20 yard pass with 5 seconds left. FG. Game. That would do it, and it won't cause the game to change into something it's not and never has been.

After a score, I like the idea of assessing a 15 yard penalty on the ensuing kickoff and let the extra point continue without penalty for taunting or celebrating.

To me, it's obvious that not all coaches will discipline their players for excessive taunting or celebrating. My off the wall suggestion would be to borrow the penalty box from hockey and remove the guilty player for a few minutes of playing time. The affected team can replace the guilty player so they won't play short handed. Maybe a player will respond more to not playing than anything else. Heck, there could even be minor and major penalties.

 

[RodentRampage]

After a score, I like the idea of assessing a 15 yard penalty on the ensuing kickoff and let the extra point continue without penalty for taunting or celebrating.

To me, it's obvious that not all coaches will discipline their players for excessive taunting or celebrating. My off the wall suggestion would be to borrow the penalty box from hockey and remove the guilty player for a few minutes of playing time. The affected team can replace the guilty player so they won't play short handed. Maybe a player will respond more to not playing than anything else. Heck, there could even be minor and major penalties.

It's not that off the wall. Suspending a player for a portion of a game is possible. It's less severe than suspending for the remainder of the game. But any major changes should come only after the officials have standardized enforcement.

 

[FarmGopher]

What if the penalty for excessive celebration removed the touchdown from the player's stats? That way it's a single player penalty for a single player infraction? Obviously, most people would still recognize the touchdown (in the real world and NFL drafting), but it would change the player's ability to win awards or set records. Maybe even remove players from all awards/first teams/bowl games for more than 1 excessive celebration penalty?

Either way, I agree on a normal plays, make the play and get back to the huddle. Show everybody you're pumped up by doing it again, even better.

 

[RodentRampage]

How about if ESPN blurred out the player's stunt when there's an excessive celebration, such as a flip into the end zone? That would remove the inventive of a stunt getting you highlighted on ESPN. They could show the score, but the player would be deprived of a reward. I'm not really serious, but "highlight reel" mentality is part of this problem. It also relates to another problem - how many times have we seen players give shoulder-only tackles only to have the runner escape for a big gain? Those big shoulder hits make great highlight reel footage, but aren't good for your team if you can't wrap them up.

 

[Ron Johnson Super Fan]

Theoretically I have no problem with a touchdown being taken away for a taunt that occurred prior to the touchdown being scored. However, I DO NOT want referees to be asked to make a judgment call of this sort. They struggle enough with the non-judgment calls.

 

[MaxyJR1]

There needs to be a separation of celebrating or taunting. If it is excessive celebration, it should be penalized as a dead-ball penalty. This would keep the 6 points on the board and the offended team should have the choice of taking the 15 yard penalty on extra point or kickoff.

I believe if it is deemed taunting, it should be from the spot of the foul. If on the five yard line, they would get the ball on the 20. If it is in the endzone, it would again be on on the extra point or kick off. You can't take the score off the board if it occurs in the endzone, since the ball becomes dead once the ball crosses the line.

There is no place for taunting.

 

[RodentRampage]

I just think it is too subjective and unevenly called. The "taunting" call against the Stoudemire (apologies for misspelling his name) for raising his hands to the Gopher fans was a joke. Was he somehow taunting the Gopher fans?

I think if a TD can be called back for taunting, the mafia is going to be slipping some money into refs pockets, because it would be so very easy to call a play back for taunting - it's all subjective. Is a high step into the end zone taunting? Or is a slow walk into the end zone taunting? (I do dislike that one though, sooner or later someone is going to get burned because they didn't see the defender coming while they do a slow walk to the end zone)

And I know they wouldn't dare take a game-winning TD away from OSU for taunting, but they would dare take one away from us.

 

[MaxyJR1]

I just think it is too subjective and unevenly called. The "taunting" call against the Stoudemire (apologies for misspelling his name) for raising his hands to the Gopher fans was a joke. Was he somehow taunting the Gopher fans?.

He was not called for taunting. He was called for excessive celebration for posing with the ball. He posed with the ball. 15 yards every time.

Taunting will be pretty easy to call. I believe if a player makes any action in which they turn to an opposing player and say or visibly make a gesture toward the opponent it is taunting. Walking, high stepping or diving into the endzone I believe should be a celebration penalty unless they turn to the opponent while doing so.

 

[maxwellsmart]

I'm concerned much more with taunting than celebration (though of course the thought process says that the excessive variety bleeds into taunting). It's not much of a judgment call or subjective when a player turns away from the goal line so he can deliberately wave the ball at a trailing opponent. If that happens outside the end zone, it makes sense to me to throw a flag at the point of the penalty. Everything from that spot on is dead ball, including the offender crossing the goal line. A rule written to reflect exactly what should not occur can be effective and fairly enforced. A rule like the "don't throw the ball too high" becomes subjective and is a poorly constructed regulation. In the case I cited, which has happened and been called at other levels of amateur football, the official must see at least TWO actions in sequence. Simply turning around is not waving the ball. Holding the ball aloft is not taunting an opponent. Further, there is little opportunity in this type of call for anticipation, which is the bane of all officials, because few people expect to see a ball carrier turn and wave the ball in his opponent's face. Inadvertent or misplaced flags shouldn't be a problem. I don't believe I've ever seen the type of play described above that could possibly have been anything but deliberate taunting. Again, decide what you want to eliminate (I would personally allow a good deal of team celebration or celebration directed toward the student section), write a properly constructed regulation and enforce it without thought given to the game situation. As I asked earlier, does the MSHSL not still have this type of rule on the books and enforce it in high school games? If so, have there been problems with its enforcement?

 

[monk10]

I don't know how the tauting call is enforced. I know I brought a rule book with me to directly show the wording of a rule to an official. I generally liked to describe two things to them. A) Do not blow the whistle unless you see the ball and my player is down. We run option and our QB's are trained to keep their arm / ball close to their body to help create the same position if they are carrying ball or not. (Of course lost a game 7-6 as our QB was streaking down field untouched when a ref blew the whistle because our rb was tackled). B) To show that it is okay to hit a QB if they continue to carry out an option fake. It was a way for us to force the player taking the QB to "take" the QB.

So just by gut reaction I'm guessing the wording of the rules and how they are enforced probably vary from game to game and official to official.

 

[RodentRampage]

I don't know how the tauting call is enforced. I know I brought a rule book with me to directly show the wording of a rule to an official. I generally liked to describe two things to them. A) Do not blow the whistle unless you see the ball and my player is down. We run option and our QB's are trained to keep their arm / ball close to their body to help create the same position if they are carrying ball or not. (Of course lost a game 7-6 as our QB was streaking down field untouched when a ref blew the whistle because our rb was tackled). B) To show that it is okay to hit a QB if they continue to carry out an option fake. It was a way for us to force the player taking the QB to "take" the QB.

So just by gut reaction I'm guessing the wording of the rules and how they are enforced probably vary from game to game and official to official.

Ah, the inadvertent whistle. No one likes to lose a game under any circumstances, of course, but to lose a game because of an inadvertent whistle, that's like having a win stolen.

 

[Sportsfan24]

Sorry no way you ever negate a TD for a celebration, and the fact that this is a subjective call by officials who just had a terrible NCAA season with blown calls in many big games is also very troubling.
Belotti stated that officials have handled these calls well in most cases, which they haven't(see Locker 08)
AND also how is this guy in charge of rules? Sorry but if any AD allows a player back to play after what happened in Boise this fall he should be removed from rules committees.

Choreographed stuff can be penalized on kickoffs, coaches will get on their kids because a 15 yard kickoff penalty is huge for field position. That's enough. Keep the hankies in the striped pants and let the players play and control the flow of the games themselves. Otherwise the "well handled" officiating at the Bank against MSU this Halloween will be commonplace.

I disagree completely on your take with the Oregon running punching the player from Boise. The Boise player sought the Oregon player out seconds after Oregon lost an emotional game, pulled on his arm, got in his face and taunted him. Suprise! He got punched, what did he think would happen? I had no issue with the Oregon player being suspended. I did think it was for too long, 2-5 games would have been about right in my opinion. The Boise player was not suspended at all and he was the one who caused the incident.

Full disclosure: The Oregon player had guaranteed a victory prior to the game.

 

[Ole]

I disagree completely on your take with the Oregon running punching the player from Boise. The Boise player sought the Oregon player out seconds after Oregon lost an emotional game, pulled on his arm, got in his face and taunted him. Suprise! He got punched, what did he think would happen? I had no issue with the Oregon player being suspended. I did think it was for too long, 2-5 games would have been about right in my opinion. The Boise player was not suspended at all and he was the one who caused the incident.

Full disclosure: The Oregon player had guaranteed a victory prior to the game.

I respect your opinion. In mine it was a much worse black eye to college football than a celebration after a score would be. I was more shocked Blount wasn't arrested on the field and taken to jail that night for assault. I get your thinking, the boise kid ran his mouth and got what was coming, but there's just no place for that ON the field, especially after Oregon got whooped, you don't want to hear trash talked, don't get beat like a rag doll. If I'm not mistaken the player that got punched was a defender, Blount could have done damage during gameplay and ran through the defense like his fist went through that guy's face. Maybe then they would have won.

I was more trying to point out a serious hypocrite in Belotti who claims to want to protect the sanctity of college football by penalizing celebrations in a way that would completely change the fabric of the game, then allows serious transgressions to occur in his own program. Now Masoli and James are in big trouble too and add in the Blount incident it just seems like a better candidate could be found for the chairman of the rules committee.

 

[Great Plains Gopher]

I always thought that something called "normal exuberance" should apply to celebrations. A last-second winning touchdown would demand more exuberance and officials should be elastic about that. Piling on can be dangerous and any choreographed stuff is childish, as in the pros. But normal emotional reaction should be tolerated - and probably generously.

 

[Sportsfan24]

I respect your opinion. In mine it was a much worse black eye to college football than a celebration after a score would be. I was more shocked Blount wasn't arrested on the field and taken to jail that night for assault. I get your thinking, the boise kid ran his mouth and got what was coming, but there's just no place for that ON the field, especially after Oregon got whooped, you don't want to hear trash talked, don't get beat like a rag doll. If I'm not mistaken the player that got punched was a defender, Blount could have done damage during gameplay and ran through the defense like his fist went through that guy's face. Maybe then they would have won.

I was more trying to point out a serious hypocrite in Belotti who claims to want to protect the sanctity of college football by penalizing celebrations in a way that would completely change the fabric of the game, then allows serious transgressions to occur in his own program. Now Masoli and James are in big trouble too and add in the Blount incident it just seems like a better candidate could be found for the chairman of the rules committee.

I agree there is no place for what Blount did in college football but that also applies the other player. It would have never happened if the other guy did not instigate it. They BOTH should have been suspended with Blount getting the longer suspension. It would have been way over the top for Blount to have been arrested, it wasn't that serious. Which goes to the reason why I have an issue with the taunting rule?

I don't see how the rule can be enforced equitably. A Ref will be more willing to call a penalty at the beginning of games than the end when the penalty has more of direct impact on the game. I don't think it unreasonable for a player NOT to throw the ball in the stands after a game winning TD but a fist pump, scream or some kind of other gesture isn't unreasonable.

Belloti is around Blount every day, he's been around him for the previous 3 years. He knows his character. They let murders out of jail early for good behavior, I have no problem with him doing the same thing for Blount.

 

[50PoundHead]

What Blount did was wrong, but I was disappointed that if he was going to bother throwing a punch that he didn't just KO the jack-ass from Boise State who got in his face. Why a college kid would make taunts in the press is ridiculous in the first place. John Wooden never let his players talk to the media outside of feature articles and I think more coaches should do that.

Rodent, in response to your initial post in the thread, why can't spontaneous celebration be a simple set of bro-hugs, high-fives, and handshakes be enough? The ultra-rehearsed Heisman poses and the like are so studied that they can't be spontaneous. I say let them spike the ball as hard as they want or throw it the air as high as they'd like, but anything beyond that draws a penalty.