If passed, players who draw flags for taunting gestures on their way to a touchdown would have the penalty assessed from the spot of the foul, taking away the score. Penalties that occur in the end zone would continue to be assessed on the extra-point attempt, 2-point conversion try or ensuing kickoff.
The change would take effect in 2011 and on the NCAA’s web site, a release said the proposal received near-unanimous support.
Team Speed Kills and I think this is a bad idea. The A. J. Green penalty last year during the LSU game is a great example of why this rule shjould not happen. Bad calls associated with the rule will happen at the most critical times in close games because that is when players (and refs) are most emotional. There is no review of a bad flag.
cocknfire, however, deserves a flag for his assertion that the rule is the result of the committee chair’s age (over 50).
Also proposed is a rule that requires an injured player to be cleared by a doctor before returning to a game and:
Other topics discussed at the meeting include:
” Television monitors will be allowed in the press box coaches’ booths beginning in 2011. The home team has responsibility for insuring that coaches’ booths for both teams have identical television capability.
” Requiring players who wear “eye black” to use solid black with no words, logos, numbers or other symbols. That will be effective next season.
” Ending the requirement that players’ pants always cover the knees.
” Eliminating the intentional “wedge” on kickoffs and punts, a rule the NFL adopted last season.
” Recommending conferences that do not have a pregame warm-up policy use a 10-yard, no-player zone between the 45-yard lines beginning 60 minutes before kickoff.
While the eye-black rule is good (because it will continue to accelerate to other venues not conducive to college ball), I will bet that some idiot will have the message tattooed under the eyes and reveal it at certain moments by peeling the blank eye-black off and replacing it after it has drawn a foul or worse from the opposing player.
It would be fitting for the lawyer that draws up this taunting rule be required in complete legal descriptive terms to categorize each and every gesture that can be considered taunting in much the same way that the qb rule for arm-going-forward constituting what is a pass and a fumble. Also the taunting rule should be challengeable. Can’t you see the lawyers arguing in the booths with the head official monitoring the slomo replay? (“His middle finger was injured in practice and splinted in a way to keep it isolated with the other fingers taped down. He can wave his hand in celebration any time he wants!”). Heck, most of the readers can conjure up their own scenario that has a referee as the “contemptous- meaning police” of the college football world. We should have a contest to see how many different interpretations can be conjured up by a ref. Any rule is ludicrous that doesn’t serve the sport to enforceably regulate player behavior fairly from player to player and school to school, i.e., would BYU have a separate take on what is a taunting or offensive gesture on the playing field? The difference between passion of celebration and taunting gestures enters a no-man’s land of innuendo and judgement that can never be regulated. Bad rule made worse.