Choice of lateral spot following Team B foul

[Morningrise]

Here's a fine wrinkle in the rules that I would not have gotten correct on a test before now. I thought all of these cases would be treated the same, but it turns out they're not.

Team A has just...

a) ...scored a touchdown. Try down at the B-3.

b) ...been awarded a touchback at the A-20.

c) ...been awarded the ball at the A-20 following a missed, untouched field goal attempt by the opponent from the 8 yard line.

d) ...taken the field to begin their extra period possession series at the B-25.

e) ...been awarded the ball at the A-20 following illegal touching of the opponent's scrimmage kick in the end zone.

f) ...been awarded the ball at the A-10 following illegal touching of the opponent's scrimmage kick in the end zone, and following enforcement of a PSK holding penalty at the 22 yard line.

Team A has elected to place the ball in the middle position. After the RFP signal, Team B jumps offside and makes contact with the snapper. Team A accepts the penalty and also requests that the ball be moved to the right hash mark. Do the officials grant the request?


Rulings:

a) Yes. 8-3-2-c

b) No. 8-6-2-Exception

c) No. 8-4-2-b-1-b

d) No. 3-1-3-d (and see 2017 editorial change adding the word "only", which is what called my attention to this)

e) No, I think. To my knowledge, the rulebook does not explicitly state that the team has its choice of lateral position. But presumably this case is to be treated exactly like a touchback (b). That is, Team A can choose the lateral position but cannot choose again due to a Team B foul.

f) No, I think. I presume that Team A can still choose the lateral location of the ball despite having fouled on fourth down. I presume this is the same as e). PS: In this play situation, if Team A calls timeout, can they choose a new lateral location, or does their PSK foul count as having "locked them in"?

[ChicagoZebra]

Wow - good find. I thought it was a consistent "no" to your question in all instances. Situation A should be change to be consistent with the rest IMO.

BTW - I disagree with E and F. By rule, these are not touchbacks! Officials should not signal TB here. It is an important distinction for penalty enforcement. The ball should be placed at the lateral spot of the IT or the nearest hash.

While we are talking about this small part of the rulebook, here is a question I have. Let's say the ball is set on a hash after a touchback and we have the RFP. A commits a false start. At the next RFP, B commits encroachment. A then takes a timeout and asks to set the ball on the other hash. This timeout was preceded by an A foul, although not directly. Do we deny the request?

[ChicagoZebra]

And what about free kick placement?

[Kalle]

Interesting find, and I concur with you and CZ. Note that for the IT in team B's end zone, the rule is very explicit: "it is a violation for illegal touching (Rule 6-3-2). The spot of the violation is Team B’s 20-yard line."

[ChicagoZebra]

Timely discussion - check out Play 24 in RR's most recent Game Video Review 3 (October 13).

Illegal touch in the end zone is the final ruling on the field, but RR improperly says that a touchback was awarded.* The ball should be placed on the right hash, but it instead ends up near the left hash.

*Unless they ultimately changed the ruling to say that the team A player possessed the ball in B's end zone.

[mccormicw]

Timely discussion - check out Play 24 in RR's most recent Game Video Review 3 (October 13).

Illegal touch in the end zone is the final ruling on the field, but RR improperly says that a touchback was awarded.* The ball should be placed on the right hash, but it instead ends up near the left hash.

*Unless they ultimately changed the ruling to say that the team A player possessed the ball in B's end zone.

I think RR was stating that the deep wing ruled possession in EZ on that play.