Dead Ball Penalties?

[BetweenTheLines]

1st and 10 from the 50-yard line. A snaps the ball A12 drops back for a pass. Prior to the pass, someone on A's coaching staff is flagged for being in the restricted zone (no contact A's second violation a 5 yarder). B intercepts the pass and during the return out of excitement, someone on B's coaching staff is flagged for being in the restricted zone (no contact B's second violation a 5 yarder). B scores during his runback. The Zeebs get together after the score and decide to administer these dead ball penalties separate and in order of their occurrence. The Ref asks B where they would like to enforce the penalty first and then asks A where they would like to enforce theirs. The Zeebs have ruled correctly. True or False?

[NVFOA_Ump]

False I believe.  Doesn't Rule 10.2.5.b. say that the yardage will offset since these are both DB non-contact fouls?  The restricted zone violations count (2nd against each team) but the yardage will offset.

[sczeebra]

I think it's true. The procedure for offsetting dead ball penalties are for 15 yarders only.

[HLinNC]

There are no 15 yarders to wash out here.
Can't go with 8-2-3 as its non-player foul on a scoring play with change of possession.  This puts us in 10-2-5b territory.   Since 8-2-3 isn't going to apply, we have to enforce from the succeeding spot, which is the try.  Enforce A's foul half the distance to the 1 1/2, then back B's foul up to 6 1/2.

True

[BetweenTheLines]

What about 8-2-4 territory? Both teams have options as to where they will have the penalty enforced.

[HLinNC]

8-2-4 states "either" not "each".

[BetweenTheLines]

Neither 8-2-4 or 8-2-5 state "each" in the description. With that in mind I think we might have to go to the intent of rule 10-2-5b while not in fact stating equal offsetting 5 yarders, the heartbeat of the rule is to offset actions that happen while the ball is dead or enforced as dead ball fouls. Therefore we probably should offset equal 5 yarders if this should ever happen. 

[HLinNC]

10-2-5 b clearly states that only an equal number 15 yarders offset.   " Any remaining penalties will be enforced separately and in the order of occurrence. "

  Since there is succeeding spot enforcement, which will be the try, there will not be an "effective" offset as the foul committed by A will be half the distance.

[Ralph Damren]

PAT @16 1/2

[NVFOA_Ump]

Previously while working as an Umpire in several NFHS games over the last 3 years, one of the R's always instructed us in our pregame conferences that the clear spirit of the rules is to make sure that the result is equitable and keeping with the intent of the rules.  When we have identical DB fouls enforcing them so the result favors one team over the other then that's not equitable.  No matter how you read the rules in this instance you have a clear lack of direction that potentially result in an inequitable enforcement.  Unless of course we are outside the ten yard lines when the ball is dead, then we have the equally absurd result of marching off 5 yards in one direction, then immediately marching off 5 yards in the other direction.  The yardage enforcement effectively is cancelled but we march it off anyway?

If we're beyond the "grace period" and these are both 15 yards, then by rule the yardage cancels?  That means the enforcement of a more serious infraction results in a fairer result??? That result borders on the absurd.  My 2 cents worth.

[HLinNC]

How so the 16 1/2 Ralph?

[GA Umpire]

How so the 16 1/2 Ralph?

I agree with HL.

I did not notice a reference to a 15 yd penalty in the OP.

[Ralph Damren]

I agree with HL.

I did not notice a reference to a 15 yd penalty in the OP.

I also agree with GA who agrees with HL. A's foul came first. The choices would be :

PAT @ 1 1/2; back to 6 1/2
PAT @ 1 1/2; free kick @ 35
PAT @ 8; free kick @ 45
both on free kick = @40

Let's hope it's not requested in metric  !

I understand the complexity of this and, as co-author , wish we had  included this in the rule change  . If this occurred, one could argue that where 5 vs 5 isn't covered in the rule, it could be applied under 1-1-6 as "BOTH PENALTIES WERE FIVE YARD DEAD BALL FOULS, THEY CANCEL AND THE TRY WILL REMAIN AT THE THREE." IMHO, this would be both fair and simple. The rationale of "..only 15 yarders cancel" was that the false start or encroachment by A shouldn't give B a free shot at a DBPF that would cancel. Hope this all makes sense.

[Grant - AR]

I also agree with GA who agrees with HL.

This is the first thing I thought of when I read this.