INDIANAPOLIS---The NCAA Football Rules Committee has recommended an experimental rule that would allow the use of video replay to review officials' calls in games played at Big Ten Conference stadiums in 2004.

The committee's recommendation will be forwarded to the Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet, which will act on the recommendation at a date to be determined.

"The committee appreciates the Big Ten's efforts in preparing the proposal," said committee chair Herb Deromedi, athletics director at Central Michigan University. "The conference conducted a pilot program last year to assess the feasibility of its system and submitted a proposal that the committee determined was acceptable."

All games between Big Ten institutions will be played with the experimental rule. Non-conference opponents who play televised games in Big Ten stadiums will have the option to play with the experimental rule.

The proposed system will involve using only the replays provided by the Big Ten's television partners. The technical advisor assigned to each game by the conference's officiating department will be the sole person able to trigger the use of video replay and render a decision on the reviewed plays.

The technical advisor will have the ability to replay the televising network's video feed, but the advisor will not communicate with network personnel to request replays of specific plays or to request shots from specific camera angles.

The committee's other rules recommendations will be forwarded to the NCAA governance structure for implementation in 2005, if approved.

One of those recommendations will require the referee, if he is equipped with a microphone, to announce the number of the player committing a foul. "This is consistent with what is done in several sports and will also provide coaches with the information in a much more timely fashion," Deromedi said.

Another recommendation is to stop play immediately if the offensive team has made substitutions and then rushes quickly to the line of scrimmage with the obvious attempt of creating a defensive disadvantage. The first time this occurs in a game, the offending team will be issued a substitution warning.

A second substitution violation of this type by the same team will continue to result in an unsportsmanlike conduct foul.

Currently, the offending team is penalized five yards for a substitution infraction on the first occurrence, but play is not stopped until the ball is snapped.

"A team on defense that may be having difficulty making its desired substitutions based on those made by the offense cannot be sure that a foul will be called until after the snap," Deromedi said. "Consequently, the defense often chooses to call a timeout, rather than risk being unprepared to play the down or being penalized for having too many players on the field."

The committee identified providing defenses with an opportunity to react to offensive-team substitutions, increased awareness and penalty enforcement of unsportsmanlike acts, protection of punt and kickoff returners, sideline control and reducing unnecessary hits against players in defenseless positions, as points of emphasis for 2004.

Charles Broyles, athletics director and head football coach at Pittsburg State University, was recommended to be the chair of the committee following the expiration of Deromedi's term, effective September 1, 2004.

Among the other proposals recommended by the committee are:

• allowing the head coach to request a charged team timeout. Previously, only players could request a team timeout. This allowance cannot be designated to an assistant coach or to head coaches who are not on the field.

• giving the receiving team on free kicks the option of enforcing an encroachment foul (five yards) on the kicking team either from the end of the receiving team's return or from the previous spot with another free kick.

• charging a foul on a defensive player who runs forward and leaps, and then enters or crosses the neutral zone, in an obvious attempt to block a field goal or try attempt.

• deleting the possibility of defensive pass interference when the potential kicker simulates a scrimmage kick by throwing the ball high and deep.

• exempting a defensive player who is blocked into the passer from being penalized for roughing the passer. The defensive player is not exempted from other personal fouls such as spearing, piling on after the ball is dead, using his helmet to butt or ram the passer, or striking the passer's helmet.

KH:mel

-30-