One of the most thought-provoking questions I’ve ever been asked came from a head coach who was upset that I declined to penalize his opponent for returning late from halftime. The NFHS Rules Book is clear that failing to be on the field following the conclusion of halftime is unsportsmanlike conduct, and the coach wanted the fifteen-yard penalty. When I declined to throw the flag, he looked at me and asked, “So you’re just going to pick and choose which rules you want to enforce?” It was a fair question, and one that deserves more than a quick response. In fact, I believe the answer lies at the heart of what I call the Art of Officiating.
At first glance, the coach’s argument appears difficult to refute. The rule is written in black and white. His opponent failed to comply with the rule. If officials are expected to enforce the rules exactly as written, then why wasn’t a flag thrown? Many officials instinctively answer that question with, “Because we have discretion.” While that’s true, I think we owe coaches, players, and ourselves a more thoughtful explanation. The issue is not whether officials have discretion. The issue is understanding why the rules require it.
The NFHS Rules Book is one of the finest technical documents you’ll ever read (although it does have some faults). It defines the game with remarkable precision, establishing exactly what constitutes a catch, a foul, a touchdown, a safety, a legal block, and countless other actions. Those definitions are intentionally written in precise language because football demands consistency. Without clearly defined rules, every game would be officiated differently, and the integrity of the sport would quickly erode.
Yet football is not played inside the pages of a rulebook. It is played by human beings moving at full speed, making split-second decisions in situations that rarely fit neatly into a single paragraph of the rules. The rulebook tells us what is legal and illegal, but it cannot possibly anticipate every circumstance an official will encounter. Consequently, applying the rules requires more than simply memorizing their language. It requires judgment.
That judgment should never be arbitrary. Officials do not wake up on Friday afternoon and decide which rules they intend to enforce and which ones they’ll ignore. Every decision we make should be guided by the purpose behind the rules themselves. High school football officials exist to protect player safety, preserve sportsmanship, and ensure that neither team gains an unfair or illegal advantage. Those objectives become the lens through which we evaluate the action in front of us.
Consider offensive holding. By rule, grasping an opponent is holding. If we interpreted the definition as rigidly as some coaches would like us to, nearly every offensive play would end with a penalty. Experienced officials understand, however, that the game has never been officiated that way. We evaluate whether the action resulted in demonstrated or material restriction. If it did, the restriction likely created an unfair advantage for the offense and a corresponding disadvantage for the defense. If it did not, we allow the play to continue because the technical act, while present, had no meaningful effect on competitive equity.
The same philosophy applies to game management. Imagine two players exchange a brief shove after the whistle. One official immediately reaches for the flag. Another quickly intervenes, separates the players, delivers a firm warning, and the behavior never occurs again. Has the second official failed to enforce the rules? I don’t believe so. The objective is not to maximize the number of fouls we call. The objective is to administer a safe, fair, and sportsmanlike football game. If communication accomplishes that objective without unnecessarily penalizing a team, then communication has served the game well.
This is one reason I’ve never been particularly fond of the expression, “What you permit, you promote.” While the phrase sounds persuasive, it oversimplifies officiating. If a player receives a stern warning for behavior that never reaches the level of a foul, have we promoted poor sportsmanship? If a blocker briefly grabs a jersey without creating material restriction, have we promoted holding? I don’t think either conclusion is accurate. Officials are not promoting illegal acts simply because they decline to penalize every technical violation. Rather, they are exercising the judgment the game demands.
Let’s return to the halftime example. The visiting team was late returning to the field because the locker rooms were several minutes away from the playing surface. Before the game, I informed both head coaches that halftime would be extended to twenty minutes to account for the lengthy walk, and I specifically reminded the visiting coach to leave the locker room with enough time to return before the intermission expired. Despite that reminder, his team arrived a little late.
Could I have thrown the flag? Absolutely. The rule supports it.
Should I have thrown the flag? I don’t believe so.
The late arrival did not create an unfair competitive advantage. It was not an attempt to manipulate the game, frustrate the opponent, or gain additional coaching time. It was simply a team that underestimated how long it would take to return from distant locker rooms. Penalizing that team would certainly have been defensible from a literal reading of the rule, but I don’t believe it would have improved the administration of the game or served the purpose behind the rule.
This is where officiating moves beyond simply knowing the rules. The rulebook establishes the framework of the game, but experience teaches us how to apply that framework wisely. Every official has, at one time or another, faced situations where the technically correct answer was not necessarily the best answer for the game. That doesn’t mean we ignore the rules. It means we understand what the rules are trying to accomplish and apply them in a manner consistent with their intent.
No two experienced officials will exercise judgment in exactly the same way, and that’s perfectly acceptable. Judgment improves with experience, study, mentorship, and honest self-evaluation. It is one of the reasons officiating remains both challenging and rewarding after many years on the field. Knowing the rules is essential, but knowing how and when to apply them is what separates competent officials from exceptional ones.
So, how would I answer that coach today?
“Coach, I’m not picking and choosing which rules to enforce. I’m applying the rules in a way that preserves fairness, protects the integrity of the game, and fulfills the purpose for which those rules were written.”
To me, that’s the difference between enforcing a rulebook and officiating a football game.
That’s the Art of Officiating.
Quiz
Read the quiz stem and then choose the best answer. (Choose all that apply.)
4/10 from the R-47. K33 contacts R28 at the R-15, preventing him from catching the ball in flight. K17 bats the grounded ball toward his own goal line at the R-5. R45 then muffs the ball at the R-8 into his end zone. K88 falls on the ball in the end zone.
- The result of the play is a safety
- The result of the play is a touchback
- The result of the play is a touchdown
- Enforce the penalty for K33’s kick catching interference from the R-47
- Enforce the penalty for K33’s kick catching interference from the goal line
- Enforce the penalty for K33’s kick catching interference from the R-5
- Enforce the penalty for K33’s kick catching interference from the R-15
- Enforce the penalty for K33’s kick catching interference from the R-20
Review Rules 2-13-4a, 4-2-2d(2), 6-2-5, 6-3-1, 6-5-6, 8-5-3a(2), and 9-7-2 Exception