Welcome to FearlessFriday.com! Today is Saturday, June 23rd, 2018.
New 2018 Football Schedules are out
FearlessFriday
Order your 2018 Basketball Finals DVD today
Spring Football coming up

Poll

Who do you think wins and who do you want to win?

Think Warren/ Want Warren
38 (38.4%)
Warren/Ark
21 (21.2%)
Ark/Warren
3 (3%)
Ark/Ark
37 (37.4%)

Total Members Voted: 99

Voting closed: December 08, 2017, 05:42:42 pm

Author Topic: Warren Lumberjacks vs Arkadelphia badgers. 2017 state championship. Letís get it started!!!!  (Read 23815 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Romeo

  • Fearless Friday Elite
  • Head Coach
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,623
  • Karma: +237/-179
  • Gender: Male
  • Tall pines, pink tomatoes and wide receivers.
I really think Burkes had a few physical repercussions as a result of that tackle.  He was complaining with his back later in the game.  When you hit someone that hard you take some punishment too!

It might have affected his ability to score in the final minute. The right side of the field was wide open and didn't make it. 9 times out 10, he usually makes that play with ease. #25 for Arkadelphia was the real MVP in that game.

Offline BP74

  • Water Boy
  • *
  • Posts: 48
  • Karma: +2/-3
  • Fearless Friday--The Online Home of Arkansas High School Sports!
It might have affected his ability to score in the final minute. The right side of the field was wide open and didn't make it. 9 times out 10, he usually makes that play with ease. #25 for Arkadelphia was the real MVP in that game.

Very physically demanding game for both teams. I think second half pass rush by Arkadelphia showed that Warren's big guys started to wear down and Burks was slow to get up a few times at the end. Tempo by Arkadelphia has worn teams down all year and I think it was the difference Saturday as well. If Warren were a little deeper at some spots and didn't play as many both ways, I think they win the game.

Online STUNNA

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,889
  • Karma: +39/-264
  • Gender: Male
Warren shot itself in the foot to many times... not many times you outgain a team by a big margin and still lose the game. And defensively i would guess that was the least amount of yards they have gained all season besides the Robinson game. Whenís the last time Hatley or the qb didnít go over 100 yards rushing? I said this since week one... if you want to beat warren you have to be able to pass the ball or have an elite athlete playing qb... they were able to pass the ball and pass it effectively.

Offline hogfan10

  • 2nd String
  • ***
  • Posts: 586
  • Karma: +18/-38
  • Fearless Friday--The Online Home of Arkansas High School Sports!
Warren shot itself in the foot to many times... not many times you outgain a team by a big margin and still lose the game. And defensively i would guess that was the least amount of yards they have gained all season besides the Robinson game. Whenís the last time Hatley or the qb didnít go over 100 yards rushing? I said this since week one... if you want to beat warren you have to be able to pass the ball or have an elite athlete playing qb... they were able to pass the ball and pass it effectively.

I think Warren's plan was to spy Hatley with Burks, which neutralized Hatley, but opened up the middle for the passing game.

Offline 03Badger

  • Bench Warmer
  • **
  • Posts: 187
  • Karma: +7/-65
  • Great Day to be a BADGER!
 ::)im just sayin....  see for yourself.

https://youtu.be/JYg7FxjoNOs
« Last Edit: December 11, 2017, 12:12:19 pm by 03Badger »

Offline N2DEEP

  • Bench Warmer
  • **
  • Posts: 172
  • Karma: +5/-12
  • Gender: Male
  • Go Panthers! PPRD
Targeting can be anytime player leads with helmet. But I don't think that play is worthy of it. Great play by a great player

Tell me how that tackle is NOT targeting.

Targeting is 100% a rule in the AAA and the NFHS.

Targeting is not based upon height/ weight difference; nor is it based upon tackling angle. It also is not based upon whether the player got up or not.

It is solely based upon the use of the helmet, specifically the crown, to the shoulder/ head area. I can't see how any of you would think that was a great tackle, it looked vicious at first but when you look at it, it was horrible technique and could have severely injured both players.

The runner was moving to Burks' right so he should have placed his helmet to the right side of the runner and hit the runner with his left shoulder.

Online STUNNA

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,889
  • Karma: +39/-264
  • Gender: Male
Tell me how that tackle is NOT targeting.

Targeting is 100% a rule in the AAA and the NFHS.

Targeting is not based upon height/ weight difference; nor is it based upon tackling angle. It also is not based upon whether the player got up or not.

It is solely based upon the use of the helmet, specifically the crown, to the shoulder/ head area. I can't see how any of you would think that was a great tackle, it looked vicious at first but when you look at it, it was horrible technique and could have severely injured both players.

The runner was moving to Burks' right so he should have placed his helmet to the right side of the runner and hit the runner with his left shoulder.

Good lord... let it go...he hit the kid just like you said he should.. smh... was it your son? Lol

Offline BP74

  • Water Boy
  • *
  • Posts: 48
  • Karma: +2/-3
  • Fearless Friday--The Online Home of Arkansas High School Sports!
Tell me how that tackle is NOT targeting.

Targeting is 100% a rule in the AAA and the NFHS.

Targeting is not based upon height/ weight difference; nor is it based upon tackling angle. It also is not based upon whether the player got up or not.

It is solely based upon the use of the helmet, specifically the crown, to the shoulder/ head area. I can't see how any of you would think that was a great tackle, it looked vicious at first but when you look at it, it was horrible technique and could have severely injured both players.

The runner was moving to Burks' right so he should have placed his helmet to the right side of the runner and hit the runner with his left shoulder.

Lol. I know the rule, we see it different. I'm an Arkadelphia supporter and I don't see it on the play. Yes he does lower his head but it was a reaction and he was trying to get his head across to make a tackle. You can tell Burks is somewhat surprised after he sheds the blocker that the return man is right on top of him at that point. Also, very hard to justify targeting in a game of this magnitude unless its clear he's trying to injure someone. Burks seemed like a very classy player. He plays very aggressive, but he also helped multiple Arkadelphia players back to their feet after he tackled them.

And you didn't see me reference anything about Height/weight/players getting up, etc???
« Last Edit: December 11, 2017, 11:28:31 am by BP74 »

Offline OLDSCHOOL82

  • Assistant Coach
  • *
  • Posts: 3,640
  • Karma: +763/-383
  • Gender: Male
  • Carpe Diem !
Tell me how that tackle is NOT targeting.

Targeting is 100% a rule in the AAA and the NFHS.

Targeting is not based upon height/ weight difference; nor is it based upon tackling angle. It also is not based upon whether the player got up or not.

It is solely based upon the use of the helmet, specifically the crown, to the shoulder/ head area. I can't see how any of you would think that was a great tackle, it looked vicious at first but when you look at it, it was horrible technique and could have severely injured both players.

The runner was moving to Burks' right so he should have placed his helmet to the right side of the runner and hit the runner with his left shoulder.

His helmet was across.  Which actually isn't how they teach heads up tackling.  And its below the shoulder line.  As the ball carrier is falling burks comes up and looks out of position as u state.  Its called...getting stroked legally. And that's after getting held in a double team.

Offline Romeo

  • Fearless Friday Elite
  • Head Coach
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,623
  • Karma: +237/-179
  • Gender: Male
  • Tall pines, pink tomatoes and wide receivers.
Coach Hembree confirmed in an interview that Burks had back spasms.

Offline LAfootball fan

  • Bench Warmer
  • **
  • Posts: 305
  • Karma: +21/-14
  • Gender: Male
This has been rehashed several times on the other threads.  What did Warren intend to do. We can only guess until and if the Coach tells us.  But it did not look as if Burkes was going to spike it, which would have resulted in a penalty anyway. It looked to me as if he was going to run the same play as before, probably feeling he could beat Scott the next time one-on-one. If so, he may have scored which would have ended the game in Warren`s favor, or he may have been stopped again, probably with additional help this time. He received the snap at three seconds so that was going to be the last play no matter what. Clock stopped at 3 seconds, which was in Warrens favor, because they had no time outs left. Since the clock was stopped Warren now had time to formulate a plan.  They could try a field goal into the wind (this is after the 15 yards had been added) which wouldnt be smart. Or they could run at least 2 plays from the 24.  As successful as they had been all day, a 15 yard penalty and Warrens having two plays to score , was probably a bad thing for the Badgers.  Then a good thing happened for the Badgers, Warren didnt target Burke, and they threw a pic. So, it cant be said they would try a field goal to win , since that was not the plan.  They had 2 chances from the 24, we know what happened then.  So, it boils down to two bad refs opinions and actions.  Giving the fumble back to Warren 2 plays earlier , game over, or, penalizing Warren for the intruder.  Both were bad, who knows if the outcome would be different?

If Burks was going to spike the ball, he would have as soon as the ball hit his hands.  The ball was snapped with 5 seconds on the clock.  I went back and rewatched the sequence on the dvr.  Burks turned to his left and was going to probably throw the ball to McKnight who had one on one coverage out wide.  Burks had more than enough time to have spiked the ball if that was the play call.   The refs signaled time out with 4 seconds on the clock and the clock ran another second before it was stopped with 3 seconds left.

Arkadelphia's defense was scrambling and running the called play was more beneficial at that point than after the timeout.  People want to say Warren had an advantage in calling a play but Arkadelphia had just as much of an advantage in the defense having a chance to get set and for Arkadelphia to settle their players down and the defensive coaches to make sure they had the right defense called. 

Burks could have thrown the ball at the running backs feet also to stop the clock and that would not have been a penalty.  He just couldn't throw the ball straight down from the shotgun position.  Doesn't matter now.  The penalty was just a stupid decision from the refs.  Like others have said, you put the ball back at the line of scrimmage, line up the offense and start the clock on the signal of the ref.  I agree that Warren should have had to have the offense on the field on the restart and not be able to put the field goal unit out there.   That was the fair thing to do and the right thing to do and nobody would be having this discussion today. 

As far as the fumble not being called, their were others calls thoughout the game that went Arkadelphia's way so that dog don't hunt.  Two first downs that were given to Arkadelphia that were close enough they should have been measured, especially the one on 4th down that went Arkadelphia's way.   The non call on Burks where it was obvious he was being held but no call but they throw the flag on Warren's wide receiver that negated a key first down. BOTH plays there was holding going on so I am not saying the call shouldn't have been made, just pointing out the fact that Arkadelphia had things go their way during the game too.   The officials missed calls both ways all game long but there is no way you can excuse them for the 15 yard penalty on the fan issue.   

Warren deserved a chance to run their last play from the 7 yard line, which is where the ball was when play was stopped.  Both teams had the same amount of  time for coaching staffs to get their teams set up for the final play.  Neither team would have had an advantage.  The players would have decided the game and that would have been the end of it.  Neither team was responsible for that student making a stupid decision to go out on the field.  Stop play, get the fan off the field, and then restart the play at the point the game was interrupted.  Really not that hard to figure out. 

Anyway, congrats to Arkadelphia.  That play was not the only determining factor in Arkadelphia winning the game.  Arkadelphia played a heck of a game and deserved the win.  If Warren had gotten the play off from the 7 and scored, they would have been just as deserving.  It is a shame that the situation happened in a game that was hard fought, saw momentum swing back and forth, and players from both teams stepping up and playing their tails off.  Both teams showed why they were there in the title game.  Not going to comment anymore on the incident.  It is over, the outcome is forever in the books, and before you know it, both these teams will be back on the field representing their communities and themselves for another exciting year of high school football.  Two great programs that will probably be seeing each other in the playoffs again.  Wishing everyone from Arkadelphia a Merry Christmas and want to congratulate your players for a great season.

Offline Romeo

  • Fearless Friday Elite
  • Head Coach
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,623
  • Karma: +237/-179
  • Gender: Male
  • Tall pines, pink tomatoes and wide receivers.
Coach Hembree just had an interview with Wess Moore. He confirmed that he wasn't going to spike the ball on the last play. Burks was dealing with cramps and back spasms late in the game and was hurting bad but kept fighting through. He said coaches on all three levels have reached out to him. Nobody has ever heard of a team being penalized due to a fan running on the field. Also mentioned the kid running on the field saying he shouldn't be held at fault or criticized, noting that he's a kid that made a mistake.

Offline hogfan10

  • 2nd String
  • ***
  • Posts: 586
  • Karma: +18/-38
  • Fearless Friday--The Online Home of Arkansas High School Sports!
If Burks was going to spike the ball, he would have as soon as the ball hit his hands.  The ball was snapped with 5 seconds on the clock.  I went back and rewatched the sequence on the dvr.  Burks turned to his left and was going to probably throw the ball to McKnight who had one on one coverage out wide.  Burks had more than enough time to have spiked the ball if that was the play call.   The refs signaled time out with 4 seconds on the clock and the clock ran another second before it was stopped with 3 seconds left.

Arkadelphia's defense was scrambling and running the called play was more beneficial at that point than after the timeout.  People want to say Warren had an advantage in calling a play but Arkadelphia had just as much of an advantage in the defense having a chance to get set and for Arkadelphia to settle their players down and the defensive coaches to make sure they had the right defense called. 

Burks could have thrown the ball at the running backs feet also to stop the clock and that would not have been a penalty.  He just couldn't throw the ball straight down from the shotgun position.  Doesn't matter now.  The penalty was just a stupid decision from the refs.  Like others have said, you put the ball back at the line of scrimmage, line up the offense and start the clock on the signal of the ref.  I agree that Warren should have had to have the offense on the field on the restart and not be able to put the field goal unit out there.   That was the fair thing to do and the right thing to do and nobody would be having this discussion today. 

As far as the fumble not being called, their were others calls thoughout the game that went Arkadelphia's way so that dog don't hunt.  Two first downs that were given to Arkadelphia that were close enough they should have been measured, especially the one on 4th down that went Arkadelphia's way.   The non call on Burks where it was obvious he was being held but no call but they throw the flag on Warren's wide receiver that negated a key first down. BOTH plays there was holding going on so I am not saying the call shouldn't have been made, just pointing out the fact that Arkadelphia had things go their way during the game too.   The officials missed calls both ways all game long but there is no way you can excuse them for the 15 yard penalty on the fan issue.   

Warren deserved a chance to run their last play from the 7 yard line, which is where the ball was when play was stopped.  Both teams had the same amount of  time for coaching staffs to get their teams set up for the final play.  Neither team would have had an advantage.  The players would have decided the game and that would have been the end of it.  Neither team was responsible for that student making a stupid decision to go out on the field.  Stop play, get the fan off the field, and then restart the play at the point the game was interrupted.  Really not that hard to figure out. 

Anyway, congrats to Arkadelphia.  That play was not the only determining factor in Arkadelphia winning the game.  Arkadelphia played a heck of a game and deserved the win.  If Warren had gotten the play off from the 7 and scored, they would have been just as deserving.  It is a shame that the situation happened in a game that was hard fought, saw momentum swing back and forth, and players from both teams stepping up and playing their tails off.  Both teams showed why they were there in the title game.  Not going to comment anymore on the incident.  It is over, the outcome is forever in the books, and before you know it, both these teams will be back on the field representing their communities and themselves for another exciting year of high school football.  Two great programs that will probably be seeing each other in the playoffs again.  Wishing everyone from Arkadelphia a Merry Christmas and want to congratulate your players for a great season.
Ball hit Burksí hands at 3 sec, snap was to his left and high. If as Hembre says, and he was going to throw it at the feet of his fullback on a flare route to the left to kill the clock; itís debatable as to whether there would have been any time remaining to kick a FG. I thought that the refs in their discretion (by rule apparently) came to the fairest decision. Fact is both teams lost an advantage (from their perspective) and gained an advantage. In the end the game was decided by the players on the field and not by a non player running onto the field.

There was a lot of whine on the radio by hembre on Wes Mooreís show today. He tried to stay above it but just couldnít, but in his defense Moore (who obviously wanted warren to win) was egging it on.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2017, 12:47:30 pm by hogfan10 »

Offline KASH dba The Lumberjack

  • 2nd String
  • ***
  • Posts: 807
  • Karma: +16/-52
  • Gender: Male
  • Love bleeding Orange and Black
Odds heavily favored Arky in that situation before the kid ran onto the field. Seems Burks was gassed and to me, seemed our 10th grade kicker was scared he was going to let his team down.  My gut tells me we weren't going to score. Hate to say that. Mills had just tackled Burks single handed and the defense was stoked.

The refs should have never taken those last seconds from any of those young men, regardless to a missed fumble, missed holding calls, missed block in the backs, missed targeting...the list could and probably should go on.
Honestly, what transcribed takes more away from the Badger victory than it adds to a Jack loss.

Some people are saying it wasn't the officials fault. Also said if you think you could do better then sign up. Well I say they get paid to provide a service and I think they waned in the last few minutes of the game providing the service they were paid for. Whether it was the fumble or the fan, the refs clouded what was one of the best Championships I've seen played.

Offline Radiotalker

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,857
  • Karma: +337/-211
  • 2009 & 2012 Pickems Champion, 2010 Runner-up
I haven't seen anyone mention it, but what a great open field tackle by number #25 in essence save the game for Arkadelphia.

Offline Lionheart88

  • Assistant Coach
  • *
  • Posts: 4,443
  • Karma: +163/-98
NFHS rule book: 
CLICK HERE


I didn't watch the entire game.  Did Warren have sideline infractions earlier in the game?
Rule 9, Section 10, Article 1 (p.190) seems to cover the situation.  I canít copy from that link for some reason and the site wonít let me attach a screenshot, but it basically says that no one (including people not normally covered by the rules) can hinder play by an unfair act not covered in the rules, and that if they do the refs can give any penalty they like.

Offline SUGARTOWN

  • Head Coach
  • **
  • Posts: 6,931
  • Karma: +302/-1925
  • Gender: Male
  • FF SUPER ELITE
Rule 9, Section 10, Article 1 (p.190) seems to cover the situation.  I canít copy from that link for some reason and the site wonít let me attach a screenshot, but it basically says that no one (including people not normally covered by the rules) can hinder play by an unfair act not covered in the rules, and that if they do the refs can give any penalty they like.

Yes, that's my interpretation as well. Granted, I wasn't aware of the rule prior to Saturday.

Offline Jack1990

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,408
  • Karma: +451/-127
  • Gender: Male
It's a grey area for sure.  The only place where it says persons.  Other areas in the rule book specifies players or non-players with non-players defined as coaches, substitutes, athletic trainers or other team attendants.  And the phrasing "any penalty he/she considers equitable, including the award of a score" gives way too much leeway.  Although in baseball I can award bases as I believe the runner would have reached in certain situations so I guess it's plausible. 

Offline Lionheart88

  • Assistant Coach
  • *
  • Posts: 4,443
  • Karma: +163/-98
It's a grey area for sure.  The only place where it says persons.  Other areas in the rule book specifies players or non-players with non-players defined as coaches, substitutes, athletic trainers or other team attendants.  And the phrasing "any penalty he/she considers equitable, including the award of a score" gives way too much leeway.  Although in baseball I can award bases as I believe the runner would have reached in certain situations so I guess it's plausible.
I that no that clause is meant to handle a situation where someone comes off the bench (or, indeed, out of the stands) and tackles a player who was clearly past the defenders and headed for an easy TD.  Iíve heard of one or two cases of that happening where the refs awarded the score.

Offline Chief_Osceolaô

  • Hall of Famer
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,751
  • Karma: +983/-1127
  • Gender: Male
  • 'Nets & 'Noles
If the rule is written that vaguely, then that's a pretty slippery slope. 

 

Fox 16 Arkansas Fox 24 Arkansas