First Touching

[sczeebra]

K punts and they commit first touching of the ball down field, then R scoops up the ball runs a few yards then fumbles and K recovers.  During the kick an official flags R's coach for being outside of the team box (9-8-3). It doesn't seem correct that R would lose the right of first touching with this type of foul. Am I missing something?

[ncwingman]

Since this is a non player foul, it is enforced as a dead ball foul -- from the succeeding spot. As such, I would contend that such fouls would not qualify as a foul "during the down" since it is not enforced as a live ball foul and R's right to take the ball at the spot of first touching remains.

However, I'm not 100% convinced since I'm wondering what I would do if a player commits a USC foul instead.

[HLinNC]

Enforcement procedure would have nothing to do with the ball status.  The foul occurred "during the down".  What if we had a 3-7-6 violation where we had a substitute enter but not participate?  The rule states "during a down...."  It is a nonplayer foul also.

[CalhounLJ]

K punts and they commit first touching of the ball down field, then R scoops up the ball runs a few yards then fumbles and K recovers.  During the kick an official flags R's coach for being outside of the team box (9-8-3). It doesn't seem correct that R would lose the right of first touching with this type of foul. Am I missing something?

It may not seem right, but it's reality. It's still a live ball foul, even though it's enforced from the succeeding spot.
**K's ball after enforcement at succeeding spot.

Sorry, read the OP wrong. Was thinking the foul was on K instead of R.

[zebraken]

If the foul on R was committed after they touched the ball wouldn?t they lose the right to retain the ball at the first touching spot whether K accepts the penalty or not?

[ncwingman]

There is a tantalizing scenario option about if R fouls *before* touching the ball due to the wording of the rule, but it's immediately cancelled out by the follow up that R cannot take a spot of first touching if *any penalty is accepted* during the down. I think the goal of this is that a spot of first touching cannot be a basic or enforcement spot for a foul -- the basic spot must be the previous spot, end of the kick or end of the run.

Secondly, R cannot use the first touching spot as a Get Out Of Jail Free card to nullify their own foul. R can take the spot of first touching if they decline a foul on K, but not if they accept one.

Finally, unlike the last group of threads, I think this is a case where "succeeding spot" actually works in a technical sense. "First touching" is a violation of the rules by K. They're not allowed to do that, but the "penalty" is giving R the ball at that spot. Ergo, if we're considering the spot where the ball would be put in play next *had the violation not occurred*, we must disregard a spot of first touching when identifying the succeeding spot.

To that end, I get the argument I made previously that you could make a subcategory of fouls that wouldn't apply in this scenario, but then we've got exceptions so it's "better" to go global and have a couple fringe cases where the ruling is "Yeah, that seems harsh, but maybe follow the rules next time?"

Fun fact -- At least in the NFL, but probably other codes, first touching used to be an actual "foul" by the rules. This means that if K downs a punt as the last play in a period, the period would be extended by an untimed down since there was an "accepted foul" on the play. This has, obviously, since been changed. There was an NFL films clip I remember from the... early 90's?... where they highlighted this as a "weird play" and asked a bunch of players/coaches if they knew the rule.

[CalhounLJ]

There is a tantalizing scenario option about if R fouls *before* touching the ball due to the wording of the rule, but it's immediately cancelled out by the follow up that R cannot take a spot of first touching if *any penalty is accepted* during the down. I think the goal of this is that a spot of first touching cannot be a basic or enforcement spot for a foul -- the basic spot must be the previous spot, end of the kick or end of the run.

Secondly, R cannot use the first touching spot as a Get Out Of Jail Free card to nullify their own foul. R can take the spot of first touching if they decline a foul on K, but not if they accept one.

Finally, unlike the last group of threads, I think this is a case where "succeeding spot" actually works in a technical sense. "First touching" is a violation of the rules by K. They're not allowed to do that, but the "penalty" is giving R the ball at that spot. Ergo, if we're considering the spot where the ball would be put in play next *had the violation not occurred*, we must disregard a spot of first touching when identifying the succeeding spot.

To that end, I get the argument I made previously that you could make a subcategory of fouls that wouldn't apply in this scenario, but then we've got exceptions so it's "better" to go global and have a couple fringe cases where the ruling is "Yeah, that seems harsh, but maybe follow the rules next time?"

Fun fact -- At least in the NFL, but probably other codes, first touching used to be an actual "foul" by the rules. This means that if K downs a punt as the last play in a period, the period would be extended by an untimed down since there was an "accepted foul" on the play. This has, obviously, since been changed. There was an NFL films clip I remember from the... early 90's?... where they highlighted this as a "weird play" and asked a bunch of players/coaches if they knew the rule.

Using "succeeding spot" properly according to the definition in the rule book is important. As this sitution clearly points out...

[mhez141]

It may not seem right, but it's reality. It's still a live ball foul, even though it's enforced from the succeeding spot. If R wants to keep the ball, they must decline the penalty and take the spot of first touching.

The foul is on R they can either accept or decline the foul on themselves.  Is the penalty enforcement still from the FT Spot with either a Sideline Warning or Sideline Interference marked off from the Spot of FT?

[VALJ]

The foul is on R they can either accept or decline the foul on themselves.  Is the penalty enforcement still from the FT Spot with either a Sideline Warning or Sideline Interference marked off from the Spot of FT?

 
R can decline a foul that R commits? Or am I misunderstanding where you?re going with this?

The first touching spot is not a spot of enforcement for any foul. 

[mhez141]

That was supposed to Neither.
If I am reading the scenario correct the foul happened during the "kick" so I am assuming the ball was still in kick status.  So R did not gain possession with "clean hands".  The enforcement spot would be the previous spot with replay of the down.
Maybe this is what everyone has been saying and I have not read your responses correct.

[VALJ]

That was supposed to Neither.
If I am reading the scenario correct the foul happened during the "kick" so I am assuming the ball was still in kick status.  So R did not gain possession with "clean hands".  The enforcement spot would be the previous spot with replay of the down.
Maybe this is what everyone has been saying and I have not read your responses correct.

That?s what I have as well.  K can decline the foul and take the result of the play, of course.  If they accept the foul, because it is a live ball foul happening during the loose ball play portion, the only enforcement spot is the previous spot.

It seems a bit harsh that a nonplayer foul would have that effect, but?. Stay in the team box, and R doesn?t have to worry about it.

Edited after ncwingman ?s post below.

[mhez141]

Thanks ValJ for the response.  Been reading the discussions for many years and decided to join.  Enjoy all the officials that post on this board.  22nd year calling in Oklahoma and have learned much ready the posts.  Ready to start the season with the first scrimmage tomorrow night trying to help a few new officials.  Lord knows we need them desperately!   

[ncwingman]

That?s what I have as well.  K can decline the foul and take the result of the play, of course.  If they accept the foul, because it is a live ball foul happening during the loose ball play portion, the only enforcement spot is the previous spot.

It seems a bit harsh that a nonplayer foul would have that effect, but?. Stay in the team box, and R doesn?t have to worry about it.

Assuming we didn't change the play while I wasn't looking, the proposed foul is a non-player foul which is enforced from the succeeding spot. Previous spot enforcement and re-kick is not an option in this case.

K recovered the fumble with clean hands and the foul on R eliminates the possibility of returning to the first touching spot. It'll be K's ball at the dead ball spot (unspecified in the original post) assuming it was a "no yards" sideline warning.

[VALJ]

Assuming we didn't change the play while I wasn't looking, the proposed foul is a non-player foul which is enforced from the succeeding spot. Previous spot enforcement and re-kick is not an option in this case.

K recovered the fumble with clean hands and the foul on R eliminates the possibility of returning to the first touching spot. It'll be K's ball at the dead ball spot (unspecified in the original post) assuming it was a "no yards" sideline warning.

That?s a great point. Can we carry the nonplayer foul through when it happened during the loose ball portion of the play?

Thinking it through, though, I think you?ve got the right of it.  If the R coach had implied inappropriate relations between the official and the official?s mother, we?d surely tack that on.  Good catch.

[NVFOA_Ump]

So this thread is IMHO lost at sea.  There is no clear time lines to the actual events here and the "penalty" if a first offense sideline interference is not clearly identified in time as BEFORE the first touching.  I'm lost as to what the H**L is going on here.  The OP IMHO is fatally flawed.

[ncwingman]

So this thread is IMHO lost at sea.  There is no clear time lines to the actual events here and the "penalty" if a first offense sideline interference is not clearly identified in time as BEFORE the first touching.  I'm lost as to what the H**L is going on here.  The OP IMHO is fatally flawed.

Since we're looking at a live ball foul that's enforced as a dead ball foul, the order of events is irrelevant. The play goes on until the ball is dead and then we enforce the penalty from that spot.

Furthermore, the right for R to take the spot of first touching is cancelled if any penalty is accepted during the down. This is not a "clean hands" consideration. If R commits any foul at any time during the down, the ball cannot be awarded to R and returned to a first touching spot. We could go back to a spot that's the "end of the (related) run", but not a spot of first touching.

There do exist technical possibilities for K to decline a pre-"touching by R" foul and give the ball back to R at a first touching spot, but it would never be at their advantage to do so -- similar to B committing DPI then intercepting the pass. A *could* decline the foul and give B the ball, but they never would.

[mhez141]

OK now I m confused again.  Been texting with a couple of guys in my association and they are convinced that since it is a live ball foul administered as a dead ball foul it is still R's ball at the spot of first touching.  I use 6-2-5 where it says R touches the kick and thereafter during the down commits a foul or if the penalty is accepted for ANY foul committed during the down the spot of first touching is cancelled.  Once and for all am I correct or are they? 

[ncwingman]

While the non-player or USC fouls are live-ball-enforced-as-dead-ball fouls, they are still live ball fouls that occur during the down.
 
6-1-7 and 6-2-5 state that the right to the first touching spot is cancelled if the penalty is accepted for "any foul committed during the down" which is the definition of a live-ball foul in 2-16-2d. Similarly, 2-16-2f specifies that noncontact or unsportsmanlike fouls can occur during a dead ball period OR during the down.

There is no caveat or exception in 6-1-7/6-2-5 for succeeding spot enforcement, only the status of the ball as "live" when the foul occurred.

[CalhounLJ]

I've been thinking K's coach is the one who was flagged. I'll see myself out...

[sczeebra]

From the time that I first began this passion I had always been told that non-player and unsportsmanlike penalties are enforced as dead ball fouls. I posted this play as to question that principal. The only time that I find the word treated in the rule book is in the coaches code of ethics page 103. We should stay away from misnomers like this because the fact is, it's not true as you can all see.

[bama_stripes]

I don?t know why there?s any confusion on this play.  R fouled during the down, which cancels their right to take the ball at the FT spot.  The foul is a non-player foul, which is penalized from the succeeding spot.

[CalhounLJ]

From the time that I first began this passion I had always been told that non-player and unsportsmanlike penalties are enforced as dead ball fouls. I posted this play as to question that principal. The only time that I find the word treated in the rule book is in the coaches code of ethics page 103. We should stay away from misnomers like this because the fact is, it's not true as you can all see.

I think you've actually supported the principle. This is a live-ball foul, so that takes away spot of first touching. However, it's enforced as dead-ball, which means succeeding spot at the end of down.

*Here's the bigger question: If K had also fouled during the down, would we mark both off? Or would they cancel, and we replay the down?

[mhez141]

So still trying to get enough to tell my officials the correct ruling on this scenario.
What is your ruling.  Rule 6-2-5 states first touching is cancelled at the time R touches the ball.  Everyone is saying succeeding spot but not clear on who is next to snap the football.
K's ball 1st and ten or goal after penalty enforcement?
I need clear clarification for my defense on this to prove why they are wrong!
Many Thanks

[CalhounLJ]

K punts and they commit first touching of the ball down field, then R scoops up the ball runs a few yards then fumbles and K recovers.  During the kick an official flags R's coach for being outside of the team box (9-8-3). It doesn't seem correct that R would lose the right of first touching with this type of foul. Am I missing something?

1. We have a scrimmage kick. R fouls during the scrimmage kick by being in the restricted area. This is a succeeding spot foul.
2. K first touches the kick, but because R fouled, and we assume K accepts the foul, First touching goes away.
3. The penalty is enforced from the succeeding spot, where K's run ended. So, First and 10 for K after enforcement of the penalty.

Does this help?

[mhez141]

Very much! I still do not think I can convince my guys this is the correct call but will try.  May send the play to our state rules expert and see how he rules on the scenario. 
Again Many Thanks and have a great Saturday.  Going to be 109 here today and 100 at the start of the scrimmage.  It's Football time!!!