Look....we all know it happens. The squad is driving ....lots of momentum....then....bang... someone hits the dirt like he was shot from the upper deck. I saw a coaches piece by ESPN and one of the suggestions was submitted by Mike Gundy who suggested " Any player ( offense or defense to make it fair) who leaves the field of play via an injury....should sit out until the next change of possession. What say you folks ?? Would that necessarily limit " fake injuries"?
FC: How to deal with fake injuries that attempt to stall drives.....
- Thread starter whart
- Start date
It’s an interesting idea. It does seem to be much more common now for these fake injuries to be occurring, some very blatant when replay is shown of players running around confused and then falling to the ground. I absolutely hate it.
There has to be a way to punish a team for it and end it before college football becomes like soccer. It’s clear coaches won’t police their own teams as they are often seen telling players to go down. The problem is distinguishing between a real injury and a fake one.
I’d be good with making them sit out the series. Any blatant acting jobs and I’d be ok with a targeting like penalty- 15 yards unsportsmanlike, out for the rest of the game.
Injury should be reviewed between games and team (and coach) should be penalized next game.
Regardless of where players and coaches are the next year they all get penalized (So long as in NCAA)
Johnny benchwarmer will be pretty unhappy when he's the starter next season and has to sit out a quarter.
LdN
I like the coach punishment idea. That may be the teeth to stop this practice. Suspend a coach for the next week- no recruiting, no practice, no contact with any other coaches or players, and miss the next game. That’ll end it quickly.
The only problem will be trying to distinguish the cases where the acting is better as to whether it was a real injury or not. It’ll be like the targeting controversies.
You interview the player when it is debatable. Explain to the player that if he lies, and they find out, his scholarship will be revoked.
LdN
Trying to decide which are real vs which are fake injuries.....sorry, that will N E V E R work.
Make it very simple:
If a game is stopped to help an injured player off the field, he’s gone until the next time his unit takes the field.
If it happens in the last 2 minutes of a game, he’s gone for the duration of the game including any/all overtime periods. Obviously happens to a player in overtime, he’s also gone for the game.
Make it very simple:
If a game is stopped to help an injured player off the field, he’s gone until the next time his unit takes the field.
If it happens in the last 2 minutes of a game, he’s gone for the duration of the game including any/all overtime periods. Obviously happens to a player in overtime, he’s also gone for the game.
I could only imagine the board if say, PSU’s star linebacker or defensive end had a legitimate cramp or twisted an ankle late in the Ohio St game, came out for a play, and by rule could not return for the rest of the game or overtime.
.The next complaint you’d be hearing from ESPN would be that rule forces players to play injured so they don’t get benched.
Last edited:
It doesn't even need to be keep them off for the entire possession. They should be able to come back in the next dead ball via incompletion out of bounds or time out just make then have a 5-second off when it happens. Same as false starts like they do in the NFL there's a runoff if the team chooses.
Teams could send a third-stringer or walk-on in for one play to fake an injury. Once the ringer's kicked out, the first-stringer could return.
I saw something similar in a high school basketball game years ago. Stu Jackson of Reading was killing Chester in a state semifinal, so Chester sent in a lowly sub to start a fight with Jackson during a rebound attempt. Jackson backed off to avoid fighting, but the ref threw both players out of the game.
I saw something similar in a high school basketball game years ago. Stu Jackson of Reading was killing Chester in a state semifinal, so Chester sent in a lowly sub to start a fight with Jackson during a rebound attempt. Jackson backed off to avoid fighting, but the ref threw both players out of the game.
Only if one were to enact such a stupid policy.
If one does NOT do something so stupid, it would nullify that possibility.
Obviously
Great. So let’s hear your rule change to address the issue that would not cause controversy.
If you are really hurt and come back you're not helping your team anyway, you're being selfish. I can think of 3 PSU qb's not mentioning names, who had to come back after one play and actually were detriments to the team, and futzed up drives. So if you get a cramp real or not sitting out a series or possession would not hurt the process. Come on guys get a cramp, and the next play you come in like a Jack Rabbit.
I don’t think it happens as often as fans think it does. I was watching a WVU-LSU game years ago and LSU had three players injured late in the game. WVU fans of course (to this day) think that they were faking to slow them down. But I did some research and one of those players missed the next two games, another missed the next game, and the third missed the rest of the game. The WVU fans booed like crazy and were convinced it was a ploy when it wasn’t. Now a player that forces play to stop should not get to come back in the next play, but should maybe sit out the next two plays. Like others have said here they do get cramps, or other pains that go away.
Easy, if it's a simple cramp or tweaked appentage, teammates (in the game or on the sidelines) can quickly help the "injured" player leave the field to prevent that player from missing additional time due to the injury.I could only imagine the board if say, PSU’s star linebacker or defensive end had a legitimate cramp or twisted an ankle late in the Ohio St game, came out for a play, and by rule could not return for the rest of the game or overtime.
The next complaint you’d be hearing from ESPN would be that rule forces players to play injured so they don’t get benched.
No
I don't care
(But Illinois' had a pretty good layout... IMO)
Ok. Thanks for playing.
Hopefully you got some of that argumentative urge out of your system today. You’re welcome.
Sorry but as someone who had to play both ways including specials in hs, 'simple cramps' are not something that my teammates could carry we off the field for. Granted I couldn't play for a few plays, but having teams need to carry guys off quickly is not a solution
No. That would be there phucking choice. If injured get the necessary
Attention. If phucking off... Reconsider. Or, don't you really give a shit about players that are actually injured. BTW Phuckwhst E-SECspin.
Why the hell it?
Attention. If phucking off... Reconsider. Or, don't you really give a shit about players that are actually injured. BTW Phuckwhst E-SECspin.
I could only imagine the board if say, PSU’s star linebacker or defensive end had a legitimate cramp or twisted an ankle late in the Ohio St game, came out for a play, and by rule could not return for the rest of the game or overtime.
Why the hell it?
No. That would be there phucking choice. If injured get the necessary
Attention. If phucking off... Reconsider. Or, don't you really give a shit about players that are actually injured. BTW Phuckwhst E-SECspin.
Why the hell it?
If your teammates can’t do it, and you can’t get off the field yourself, then you get some well needed rest time. Simple.
I think the point is to avoid blatant acting. How soon folks forget last season's ND game when a player ran up to his teammate and reminded him to fall to the ground to stop the clock. Coaches will do anything to win because their bonuses demand it. I think it's generally clear: contact injury- stop the clock. Non-contact- stop the clock and check the video. Legit flop= 10 yd penalty. Why penalize a player that needs 5 min after a contact situation?
I’m OK in theory with requiring the injured or “injured” player who is down on the field, forcing a stoppage of play, to remain out until the next change of possession.
But what do you do with the defender who gets a cramp or rolls an ankle and is doing his best to hobble off the field?
Should the offense be permitted to quick snap before he reaches the sideline and draw a “too many players” penalty?
Should the referee hold up the snap momentarily to allow the player to reach the sideline?
Or should the side judge ignore the infraction if the injured player is close to the sideline and not interfering with the play?
But what do you do with the defender who gets a cramp or rolls an ankle and is doing his best to hobble off the field?
Should the offense be permitted to quick snap before he reaches the sideline and draw a “too many players” penalty?
Should the referee hold up the snap momentarily to allow the player to reach the sideline?
Or should the side judge ignore the infraction if the injured player is close to the sideline and not interfering with the play?
I completely agree that identifying real vs. fake injuries in real time is a fool's errand. I think this is something that can better be done after the game ends with extensive use of video replays and what not, but even then it would be difficult. Where I disagree is keeping players out for a whole series simply because of the unintended consequences of such a rule. During critical points in a game players will be more likely to try to play through injuries, which could worsen whatever issue they have. Coaches might also encourage players to not go down when injured. This could then become a potential personal safety issue for the players and that should trump and concerns about sportsmanship and fair competition.
Last edited:
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Yes, some players & coaches may already do this but there naturally would be less motivation to do it when the minimum number of missed plays is known at all times, 1 play. Under a rule requiring sitting out a complete series the impact could be anything from 1 to ~15 plays. That's a big difference that could change a player's or coach's behaviors.
Agreed, but if those making the decision feel that the increased penalty can in any way jeopardize a player's health and safety in some capacity I think it's highly unlikely to be changed. My opinion, which carries no weight, is that extending the amount of time an injured player has to sit out has the potential to jeopardize player safety in some cases for the reasons mentioned above so I don't think they'll go down that road.Well, I think that was the goal that those proffering suggestions had in mind.... the goal of increasing the "penalty" (to some level) being done in order to dis-incentize the gamesmanship (cheating) and changing coach's/player's behavior
I believe the only strategy is the threat of a punishment so severe that anyone even considering pulling the stunt will think "it's not worth it". If they simply put in legislation that if they review film and they believe a school/player are faking injury, then they will conduct a full scale investigation.... this means interviewing of player involved, coaches on the staff, team trainers, and team physicians ... and if the investigation reveals that a player faked injury and the player was instructed to do so, then everyone involved from player to coaches to trainers to physician ... everyone involved will face either game suspension and/or monetary fines.
The threat and the potential punishment have to be so severe that people say "No way. I'm not doing it. It's not worth the punishment".
Kind of like paying taxes and the IRS. We all know that we can "fudge" taxes. Take phantom expenses, claim bogus receipts, claim some shady deductions..... but in the end the majority of us file our taxes honestly because the threat of an audit and the potential punishment just ain't worth it.
The threat and the potential punishment have to be so severe that people say "No way. I'm not doing it. It's not worth the punishment".
Kind of like paying taxes and the IRS. We all know that we can "fudge" taxes. Take phantom expenses, claim bogus receipts, claim some shady deductions..... but in the end the majority of us file our taxes honestly because the threat of an audit and the potential punishment just ain't worth it.
I think proving it real time, during game action is impossible and would actually serve the purpose of the team faking injury.
For example, let's say Penn St is driving and all of a sudden a Mich State player has a phantom injury. Looks suspicious. So the ref gets involved and tries to judge whether or not it is a real injury. Chances are this will involve a group of refs. So the refs now get together in a huddle to discuss whether or not the Mich State player was really hurt, or faking.... tik tok tik tok... the clock is stopped and the Mich State defense is resting, and the Penn State offense is standing around losing momentum.... finally the refs make a decision and it's a 50/50 chance they make the correct determination (and I'd bet they HAVE to error on the side of caution, almost being 100% certain it's a fake job). The refs break their huddle. Announce "no faking". But now a good 2-3 minutes expired and Mich State got what they wanted.
I agree that proving it real time is basically impossible, I had said as much in an earlier post. I think proving it between games is slightly less than impossible, but still extremely difficult. That's another reason I think the NCAA stays out of this issue and leaves things as is, it's simply too difficult to definitively identify faked injuries.
Yeah I think this is a great idea especially when you consider if it was a legitimate injury he wouldn’t be going back in the game any way.
And - if that be the case - who the F in their right mind (or even 1/2 right mind):
A) Knowing the severity of the penalty
and
B) Knowing that their is no way on God's Green Earth anyone could EVER prove such a thing
Would ever say.... "Yeah, I was just funnin' about that injury"
Not to mention that EVEN THEN, how would one ever "know or prove" that the one saying "I was just funnin'" let the other folks know that - at the time?
It'd be like taking a flamethrower to the house.... to try to get rid of a nest of rats out in a detached shed.
It's be the equivalent of:
Rather than establishing that "Holding" is a ten yard penalty.....
You'd have a knesset meeting after every play and go around and ask each guy:
"Were you holding on that play?...... How about you? .... And you, over there - were you lined up offsides?"
Just establish the rule and play the f-ing game.
Actually. Under my suggestion, I believe there would be a level of "self policing". Team doctors & trainers are not going to want to be put in a situation of answering an NCAA inquiry. The first year, the NCAA comes down hard. Every time they see film of a team they believe is using fake injuries to slow down the game, they send an investigator to question everyone involved: assistant coaches, players, trainers, team doctors.
Yes. I totally agree with you. No one is going to answer the NCAA investigator with "yea, you got us, we had him fake the injury". Of coarse not. But what I believe this would do is spread thru the ranks. These guys all talk with each other. Eventually "self policing" will take place and if a team doctor is suspicious that his own team is doing this crap, I believe he will go see the coaching staff, and tell the coaching staff to not take part in it because he does not want to be put in a situation of having to lie. Thru my career, many people ... most people ... HATE the idea of being placed in a situation of having to lie. Most people do everything possible to avoid being placed in a situation of having to lie.
Let the NCAA show the college football world they are taking this serious. Send just 2 or 3 investigators out during year #1 of this policy, and IMO the word would spread thru the ranks, and self-policing would almost eliminate the crap.
Players have injuries that don't keep them out for the rest of the game. Wind knocked out of them, cramps, dislocated finger, etc,etc.
Agree. But it's at suspicious times that's the issue.
> 1st and 10 from the 20, 1st down goes for 4 yards and now it's 2nd and 6 from the 24... player on D goes down with the wind knocked out = not suspicious at all.
> Team A is leading by 3 points and is on a nice drive late in the 3rd Qtr threatening to make it a 2-score game. 7 play drive mounting, Team A is now inside the 20 yard line, and has Team B on their heels. All of a sudden while walking back to the huddle a DT for Team B falls like he's been shot, and proceeds to lay on the ground looking injured for a good 2 minutes while medical staff and trainers hover around him. After a couple minutes he gets up and walks off the field.
There is a big & obvious difference between the 2 scenarios. Obviously in real time the officiating crew can not call the player in the second example a faker. The player really could be hurt. But the second example does have suspicious aspects. It goes to the old saying baseball loves to use... "integrity of the game".
