Illegal Substitution on Scrimmage Kick..

[new_official_11]

If during a scrimmage kick play, A has 4th and 20 from it's own 20 yard line. B's 12th player runs on to the field after the snap but does not participate. This would qualify as illegal substitution. Would this be previous spot or end of the kick? As this doesn't qualify as a PSK foul? 

[HLinNC]

Rule 3-7-6, non-player foul so succeeding spot enforcement.  See 2-16-2h for your PSK definition and your answer.

[Ralph Damren]

Welcome,  New Official, to our forum. I hope you'll find it both interesting and informative. Rationale for succeeding spot enforcement is the foul had no baring on the outcome of the play.

[CalhounLJ]

Welcome,  New Official, to our forum. I hope you'll find it both interesting and informative. Rationale for succeeding spot enforcement is the foul had no baring on the outcome of the play.

Plus, the foul was AFTER the snap, not AT the snap, making it a live ball nonplayer foul which is treated as a dead ball foul, as opposed to a foul simultaneous with the snap. That’s how we get to succeeding spot enforcement.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Curious]

Also, to turn this around, if the R player runs onto the field - but does not participate - were a K(A) player, and the kick is legal, wouldn't the offended team (R) have the option of previous spot enforcement - if K's foul was NOT KCI and turned out to be to their (R's) advantage? (10-4-2 Exc). 

[CalhounLJ]

Also, to turn this around, if the R player runs onto the field - but does not participate - were a K(A) player, and the kick is legal, wouldn't the offended team (R) have the option of previous spot enforcement - if K's foul was NOT KCI and turned out to be to their (R's) advantage? (10-4-2 Exc). 

I'm a little confused. Set me straight if i am wrong. I think what you are saying is a K player runs on the field after the snap and doesn't participate in the play? If that's the case, the penalty is the same. No, R does not have the opportunity to elect previous spot enforcement. It's still a nonplayer foul, treated as dead ball. The enforcement spot is the succeeding spot. While 10-4-2 exception technically does apply, the enforcement spot is the same.

[Curious]

This is why I posted this the way I did.  It seems that the two rules are at "odds" with each other:

10-4-2 EXC provides team R the enforcement choice (previous or succeeding spot) for fouls by K. The only restrictions I see are that K's foul is not KCI and that K is not next to put the ball in play.  Additionally, it does not specify ANY status (live or live ball treated as a dead ball) of the ball when the foul is committed.  This play is the latter and carries succeeding spot enforcement (3-7-6).  Nevertheless, it seems to me that this live ball foul treated as a dead ball foul should still give R an option of either enforcement spot...

Now, just for the "fun" of it: can a foul actually be committed against a player who is in the game illegally (as above)?  B1 enters during the down but is not near the "action". A1 then "buries" B1.  Foul?

[dammitbobby]

I can't speak to the first part, but for your 'fun of it' question - think of it this way - how does your scenario differ from an onfield player intentionally burying a kid standing on the sideline?  It's a personal foul either way, possibly flagrant depending on the judgement of the officials.

[CalhounLJ]

This is why I posted this the way I did.  It seems that the two rules are at "odds" with each other:

10-4-2 EXC provides team R the enforcement choice (previous or succeeding spot) for fouls by K. The only restrictions I see are that K's foul is not KCI and that K is not next to put the ball in play.  Additionally, it does not specify ANY status (live or live ball treated as a dead ball) of the ball when the foul is committed.  This play is the latter and carries succeeding spot enforcement (3-7-6).  Nevertheless, it seems to me that this live ball foul treated as a dead ball foul should still give R an option of either enforcement spot...

Now, just for the "fun" of it: can a foul actually be committed against a player who is in the game illegally (as above)?  B1 enters during the down but is not near the "action". A1 then "buries" B1.  Foul?

If he draws a block or a hit, then he has participated in the play, whether he meant to or not.

As far as the first part is concerned, R still doesn’t have a previous spot option because the foul committed by K doesn’t have previous spot enforcement. If K had been in an illegal formation at the snap, then R would have had the previous spot option or the succeeding spot option because of 10-4-2 exception. Or, if they had 12 and the 12th was trying to get off but didn’t make it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Curious]

If he draws a block or a hit, then he has participated in the play, whether he meant to or not.

As far as the first part is concerned, R still doesn’t have a previous spot option because the foul committed by K doesn’t have previous spot enforcement. If K had been in an illegal formation at the snap, then R would have had the previous spot option or the succeeding spot option because of 10-4-2 exception. Or, if they had 12 and the 12th was trying to get off but didn’t make it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

As much as it "pains" me , you are correct about the enforcement spot.  I checked with George Demetriou and he agrees that, since the foul has a designated enforcement spot, no option would apply.  While he didn't specifically mention it, upon review, the Reddings Guide on dictates that ALL "dead ball" fouls (which this foul is defined) are enforced from the succeeding spot (which I completely forgot).

As for the foul against a 12th player who is simply come onto the field, and is nowhere near the play, can we really justify "drawing a hit"?  If he were the 11th player, and was nowhere near the play, wouldn't we penalize THAT hit?

[CalhounLJ]

As much as it "pains" me , you are correct about the enforcement spot.  I checked with George Demetriou and he agrees that, since the foul has a designated enforcement spot, no option would apply.  While he didn't specifically mention it, upon review, the Reddings Guide on dictates that ALL "dead ball" fouls (which this foul is defined) are enforced from the succeeding spot (which I completely forgot).

As for the foul against a 12th player who is simply come onto the field, and is nowhere near the play, can we really justify "drawing a hit"?  If he were the 11th player, and was nowhere near the play, wouldn't we penalize THAT hit?

Case by case. If we deemed the hit unnecessary then yes.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk