Author Topic: Play Situations (Read 132882 times)

Legacy Zebra · « **Reply #225 on:** February 09, 2016, 06:58:20 PM »

It's true that this situation probably isn't about conserving time, so the "spike" rule doesn't apply, but it doesn't really matter. There's no eligible receiver in the area. And Redding clarified this year that the tackle box exemption only applies to a passer who never loses the ball between controlling the snap and ground in the ball. Since A1 lost the ball and then got it back before passing, he must throw the ball into an area with an eligible receiver.

ajv · « **Reply #226 on:** February 09, 2016, 07:20:51 PM »

The 2015 Interpretations Bulletin #2 - Play 5 is a flea-flicker and the the justification for the ruling is "the spirit and intent of the rule is that he does not give up the ball until he throws the forward pass".

Is fumbling "giving up the ball"? Are we entitled to extend the Bulletin to say that if the QB fumbles and then catches/recovers his own fumble he can't throw the ball away if he gets out of the tackle box?

Legacy Zebra · « **Reply #227 on:** February 09, 2016, 08:10:33 PM »

It would seem to me that the spirit of the rule mentioned in the bulletin is that the passer only gets the exception if he maintains possession of the ball throughout the down. In my opinion (which obviously isn't worth a whole lot), it doesn't matter whether he passes, hands, fumbles, or even kicks the ball. If he loses possession of the ball, he doesn't get the exception.

ajv · « **Reply #228 on:** February 10, 2016, 09:29:05 PM »

I was thinking about this last night. It's reasonably easy to imagine a trivial fumble: e.g.

As QB A1 is scrambling to his right, the defensive end hits his elbow. A1 momentarily looses control of the ball and it pops up in front of his face but he regains control and continues scrambling and after getting out of the tackle box throws the ball away out of bounds across the NZ (extended).

In this case I would suggest (not that my opinion is worth much!) that he would get the exception.

I guess it comes down to does "give up the ball" include fumbling? The list of other actions (that you mentioned) from the fumble definition (2-11-1): "passing", "kicking" or "successful handing" all seem to me to be actively giving up the ball. I'm not so sure about "fumbling".

BlindZebra · « **Reply #229 on:** February 11, 2016, 05:01:09 PM »

A 4/12 at the A-49. Team A’s punt is untouched beyond the neutral zone when A32 reaches across the goal line and bats the ball back into the field of play where it goes out of bounds at the B4. During the kick, B64 blocks A21 in the back at the B-6. After the play, A21 takes off his helmet and yells at the calling official unaware that the foul was called. Ruling?

#92 · « **Reply #230 on:** February 11, 2016, 05:50:35 PM »

B: 1/10 B-17 (snap-25) & USC for A21.

No illegal touching (which would spot the ball at B-20) because of the foul.
PSK enforcement, which makes the succeeding spot B-2 (half the distance) + dead ball foul: 15 yards.
Snap and 25 because of the kick.

Legacy Zebra · « **Reply #231 on:** February 11, 2016, 06:03:48 PM »

Quote

I was thinking about this last night. It's reasonably easy to imagine a trivial fumble: e.g.

As QB A1 is scrambling to his right, the defensive end hits his elbow. A1 momentarily looses control of the ball and it pops up in front of his face but he regains control and continues scrambling and after getting out of the tackle box throws the ball away out of bounds across the NZ (extended).

In this case I would suggest (not that my opinion is worth much!) that he would get the exception.

I guess it comes down to does "give up the ball" include fumbling? The list of other actions (that you mentioned) from the fumble definition (2-11-1): "passing", "kicking" or "successful handing" all seem to me to be actively giving up the ball. I'm not so sure about "fumbling".

That's a fair point. And I would agree that the spirit of the rule would suggest he still get the exception in your case.

Quote

PSK enforcement, which makes the succeeding spot B-2 (half the distance)

It is PSK, but not from the B-4. Whenever you have batting by A in Team B's end zone on a scrimmage kick, the PSK spot is the B-20. (Rule 2-25-11 Special Case 2) Since the spot of the foul (b-6) is behind the basic spot, you would go half the distance to the B-3 and then out to the B-18 for A's UNS.

Kalle · « **Reply #232 on:** February 12, 2016, 12:11:31 AM »

Quote from: Legacy Zebra on February 11, 2016, 06:03:48 PM

It is PSK, but not from the B-4. Whenever you have batting by A in Team B's end zone on a scrimmage kick, the PSK spot is the B-20. (Rule 2-25-11 Special Case 2) Since the spot of the foul (b-6) is behind the basic spot, you would go half the distance to the B-3 and then out to the B-18 for A's UNS.

A.R. 6-3-11-IV is more or less this exact play.

#92 · « **Reply #233 on:** February 12, 2016, 03:34:08 AM »

Ok, but Rule Rule 2-25-11 refers to Rule 6-3-11, which refers to Rule 6-3-2. And Rule 6-2-2-b reads: "This privilege is canceled if there is an accepted penalty for a live-ball foul by either team."
Of course, in retrospect, if we need a PSK spot, there's always a foul, so it would be logical to assume the exception doesn't apply.

Could have been written more clearly in Rule 6-3-11, in my opinion.

Legacy Zebra · « **Reply #234 on:** February 12, 2016, 08:52:29 AM »

If you're going to say that the 6-3-11 doesn't apply anymore because there's another foul, then you have to have another flag down for illegal batting the ball in the end zone. That's what 6-3-11 does, protects A from illegal batting fouls when a scrimmage kick is behind Team B's goal line. Obviously that's not what's going to happen, though. It's not a matter of whether or not the illegal touching still applies, 2-25-11 just specifies the PSK spot. 6-3-11 is still in effect, not because we still have illegal touching, but because we still have a special case of batting in the end zone. Like Kalle said, AR 6-3-11-IV is almost exactly this play. The difference is the foul occurs beyond the basic spot so it is penalized from the PSK spot instead of the spot of the foul.

BlindZebra · « **Reply #235 on:** February 12, 2016, 08:56:20 AM »

Quote from: #92 on February 12, 2016, 03:34:08 AM

Ok, but Rule Rule 2-25-11 refers to Rule 6-3-11, which refers to Rule 6-3-2. And Rule 6-2-2-b reads: "This privilege is canceled if there is an accepted penalty for a live-ball foul by either team."
Of course, in retrospect, if we need a PSK spot, there's always a foul, so it would be logical to assume the exception doesn't apply.

Could have been written more clearly in Rule 6-3-11, in my opinion.

Agree. Very confusing, but this is the only case I can think of where the illegal touch can still be applied to a foul that is accepted. But to see the converse of it, look at it this way (AR 6-3-11-V):

A 4/12 at the A-49. Team A’s punt is untouched beyond the neutral zone when A32 reaches across the goal line and bats the ball back into the field of play where it goes out of bounds at the B4. During the kick, A71 clips B35 at the B40. Ruling?

#92 · « **Reply #236 on:** February 12, 2016, 09:18:59 AM »

So there the privillege is cancelled...

I understand Rule 2-25-11-b-2 is not really about the privillege, but a rule on its own. But I fail to see the logic.

Kalle · « **Reply #237 on:** February 12, 2016, 11:06:58 AM »

Quote from: #92 on February 12, 2016, 09:18:59 AM

But I fail to see the logic.

There often isn't any...

Legacy Zebra · « **Reply #238 on:** February 12, 2016, 12:26:30 PM »

The logic I see in it is that if it wasn't this way, A would benefit by breaking the rules. If the PSK spot was where the ball went out of bounds, A just gained 16 yards by illegally touching the kick and making it go out of bounds at the B-4 instead of into the end zone for a touchback that would come out to the B-20.

To me, the lack of logic is when it's a foul against A. Since fouls by A are enforced from where the dead ball belongs to Team B instead of the PSK spot, A can gain an advantage by batting the ball. If A fouls during a punt and the ball result is a touch back, the foul will be enforced from the 20. If A fouls and then breaks the rules again by illegally touching the kick and bats it out of the end zone and it goes out of bounds at the B-2, the penalty would be enforced from the B-2 if accepted. Realistically, B will decline the penalty and take the illegal touching and get the ball at the B-20. Either way, by breaking the rules a second time A has gained an advantage by either moving the enforcement spot or forcing B to decline the penalty.

BlindZebra · « **Reply #239 on:** February 22, 2016, 02:26:35 PM »

2. A 3/5 at the B-18. QB A15 throws a pass toward team B's EZ. B38 jumps in the air and secures firm control of the pass near the goal-line. B38 lands inside the B-1 and in one motion falls to the ground in the EZ. Just after QB A15 releases the pass, B99 who is rushing unabated, hits A15 who has both feet on the ground, forcibly in the knees without wrapping him up. A15 is injured on the play. Clock?

Legacy Zebra · « **Reply #240 on:** February 22, 2016, 03:53:15 PM »

Momentum applies to the interception since it happened at the B-1 and B38 fell into the end zone (i.e. not on his own power). Since there is a change of possession, RPS will be enforced half the distance from the previous spot to the B-9 where A will have 1st and goal. Injuries are not the same as helmets coming off, so A15 still has to leave the game and cannot be bought back with a timeout. No major clock stoppers here, so clock will be on the ready. Penalty enforcement as well as injury to A puts the play clock at 25.

BlindZebra · « **Reply #241 on:** February 23, 2016, 03:49:53 PM »

Quote from: Legacy Zebra on February 22, 2016, 03:53:15 PM

Momentum applies to the interception since it happened at the B-1 and B38 fell into the end zone (i.e. not on his own power). Since there is a change of possession, RPS will be enforced half the distance from the previous spot to the B-9 where A will have 1st and goal. Injuries are not the same as helmets coming off, so A15 still has to leave the game and cannot be bought back with a timeout. No major clock stoppers here, so clock will be on the ready. Penalty enforcement as well as injury to A puts the play clock at 25.

Agree on the literal sense. What about philosophy? How do we work this and what is the ruling when looking at it philosophy wise since that's the way we work it on the field?

Legacy Zebra · « **Reply #242 on:** February 23, 2016, 05:03:49 PM »

I'm not sure what you mean. The only thing that could be debated in my mind would be the philosophy of momentum vs touchback, but it doesn't matter in this play since we had RPS. If there wasn't a foul, I'm giving the interceptor a bit of leeway. If it's close or there's any doubt, I'm putting it in the end zone for a touchback rather than at or inside the 1. And Ray Charles up in the last row of the third deck better be able to tell that momentum didn't take the interceptor into the ends one for me to have a safety here.

jg-me · « **Reply #243 on:** February 24, 2016, 07:29:04 AM »

My question would be that if you are going to give the defender leeway if there was no foul, why would you do differently if there is a foul? In this particular play the only thing that would change is the clock status. Calling the result of the play a TB would start the clock on the snap rather than the ready. Team A will obviously be accepting the penalty no matter what is called regarding momentum. In reality, on the field, the official ruling on the momentum will probably have no idea a foul has been called. He will have to rule based on what he sees without regard to any possible result of penalty administration. Personally I think, as described, the play should be ruled a TB anyway as the defender did not complete all the elements of a catch until he fell into the end zone and maintained control of the ball.

BlindZebra · « **Reply #244 on:** February 24, 2016, 09:51:58 AM »

Quote from: jg-me on February 24, 2016, 07:29:04 AM

My question would be that if you are going to give the defender leeway if there was no foul, why would you do differently if there is a foul? In this particular play the only thing that would change is the clock status. Calling the result of the play a TB would start the clock on the snap rather than the ready. Team A will obviously be accepting the penalty no matter what is called regarding momentum. In reality, on the field, the official ruling on the momentum will probably have no idea a foul has been called. He will have to rule based on what he sees without regard to any possible result of penalty administration. Personally I think, as described, the play should be ruled a TB anyway as the defender did not complete all the elements of a catch until he fell into the end zone and maintained control of the ball.

Which is what I was getting at. On page 28 of the CCA manual, it talks about momentum similar to this play. Per the manual, this should be ruled a touchback which makes the clock start on the snap. Like I said earlier, I agree to the literal rule that the ball should go back to the spot of possession by B, but by philosophy this is a touchback. This can become critical if this is late in the game (e.g. :03 or less on the clock) and A needs to score to tie.

Morningrise · « **Reply #245 on:** February 24, 2016, 11:09:33 AM »

Quote from: jg-me on February 24, 2016, 07:29:04 AM

Personally I think, as described, the play should be ruled a TB anyway as the defender did not complete all the elements of a catch until he fell into the end zone and maintained control of the ball.

When-and-where a catch happens is not always the same as when-and-where we finally determine that a catch has happened.

In most action scenarios, we know this already. Suppose a player jumps for a ball in the end zone, grabs it, touches one foot inbounds, brings the foot back into the air, and crashes to the ground out of bounds next to the photographer. The field judge observes that he keeps control of the ball as he lands next to a zoom lens. That is where the player Completes The Process. That is the point in time at which the field judge rules that a catch has occurred. However, the catch did not occur there, out of bounds. It occurred earlier, and inbounds, because that's where the player's foot touched down. We don't wave off the touchdown just because he Completed The Process out of bounds.

Likewise, just because the intercepting player in our momentum scenario doesn't Complete The Process until the end zone, that doesn't mean the spot of the catch was there. It's back in the field of play, where the ball was when his first foot touched down.

EDIT: I know the manual says to make it a touchback when it's close. Just keep in mind it's not always close. The same kind of catch could happen at, say, the B-4.

Kalle · « **Reply #246 on:** February 24, 2016, 03:33:39 PM »

Quote from: Morningrise on February 24, 2016, 11:09:33 AM

Likewise, just because the intercepting player in our momentum scenario doesn't Complete The Process until the end zone, that doesn't mean the spot of the catch was there. It's back in the field of play, where the ball was when his first foot touched down.

Does forward progress apply to a player not held by an opponent?

BlindZebra · « **Reply #247 on:** March 02, 2016, 01:57:14 PM »

A 2/20 at the A-40. QB A1 is under pressure in the pocket and attempts to throw a pass toward eligible A80, who is being held by B3 at the B-35. During his pass attempt, A4 is hit by B99 and the ball comes loose. The Referee rules fumble and the ball is recovered by Team A at the B-45. After the play the Referee turns on his microphone and announces "there is no foul for intentional grounding because the ball was fumbled and recovered by the offense". Ruling? Reviewable? Clock status?

TxSkyBolt · « **Reply #248 on:** March 02, 2016, 02:31:07 PM »

Defensive Holding, A 2/10 at the 50.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Legacy Zebra · « **Reply #249 on:** March 02, 2016, 02:55:24 PM »

If replay overturns the call on the field and says that it was in fact a pass, replay can "add" the foul for IG. Offsetting fouls, replay 2nd and 20 at the A-40. Game clock on the snap, play clock at 25. The Referee's announcement is key to letting replay add the foul though. If there's no announcement, replay can't touch the grounding aspect.

If replay confirms or lets stand the call of fumble, then defensive holding, 2nd and 10 at the 50. Game clock on the RFP, play clock at 25.